[Congressional Record Volume 141, Number 49 (Thursday, March 16, 1995)]
[Extensions of Remarks]
[Page E617]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]


 BRONX DISTRICT ATTORNEY ROBERT JOHNSON'S BRAVE STAND AGAINST THE DEATH 
                                PENALTY

                                 ______


                          HON. JOSE E. SERRANO

                              of new york

                    in the house of representatives

                        Wednesday, March 15, 1995
  Mr. SERRANO. Mr. Speaker, when New York State reinstated capital 
punishment on March 7 of this year, the highest ranking law enforcement 
official in my community, the Bronx, issued the following statement, 
which I commend to my colleagues' attention.
                  Statement of Bronx District Attorney

       While the law enacted today reinstates the death penalty in 
     New York, far more significant is its feature that permits a 
     sentence of life without parole for the first time in our 
     state's history. Since this law confers upon me the 
     discretion to seek either sentence, I wish to make my policy 
     clear regarding the exercise of that discretion.
       I was raised by loving parents who instilled in me an 
     intense respect for the value and sanctity of human life. As 
     a result, I have devoted my life to the criminal justice 
     system. During more than 20 years in that system, I have seen 
     the devastation inflicted by those guilty of horrible crimes. 
     I have felt the rage and thirst for vengeance which all but 
     consumed the victims and their families. I understand the 
     desire of many of them to ``throw the switch'' themselves. 
     But I have also personally witnessed the devastation of those 
     wrongfully accused. As an assistant district attorney, I 
     convicted a defendant of intentional murder. He was released 
     after his brother later plead guilty to committing the crime. 
     Would even a brother come forward to save an innocent man if 
     the consequence was death? and if he didn't, who would have 
     been able to ``throw the switch'' back?
       Those familiar with the criminal justice system know that 
     the surest deterrents to crime are the probability of 
     conviction and the certainty of punishment. However, under 
     our system of justice the death penalty neither can nor 
     should be mandatory. Consequently, it is highly uncertain 
     that the penalty actually will be imposed by a jury in a 
     given case, that its application will be fair, that the 
     sentence will be upheld on appeal, that the defendant will be 
     executed and that others will be deterred. Moreover, the 
     price of this uncertainty is enormous given the cost in time 
     and resources of trials and appeals in death penalty cases. 
     Clearly, this money could be better spent on providing more 
     judges and courtrooms so that more defendants could be 
     brought to trail more quickly. The money could also be better 
     spent on valuable and broadly-based crime-fighting and crime 
     prevention programs, including reducing the flow of illegal 
     guns, incarcerating more violent criminals and providing more 
     assistance for crime victims. While these programs may not 
     provide the visceral gratification of the death penalty, they 
     will do a lot more to improve the quality of our lives.
       For all of these reasons, while I will exercise my 
     discretion to aggressively pursue life without parole in 
     every appropriate case, it is my present intention not to 
     utilize the death penalty provisions of the statute.
     

                          ____________________