Ohio AG-elect Marc Dann statement on need for a death penalty study in Ohio

Marc Dann: That's fine, because I've already offered an Amendment to have a
study of the application of the death penalty in Ohio. I believe it's
something we need to study and we need to study right away, and that the
Attorney General should be an advocate, and here's why. The Attorney General
is the representative of law enforcement at the top level in state
government, and the Attorney General's Office should. In order for the fair
administration of the death penalty to take place, it needs to take place in
an environment where the public and juries are confident that it's being
fairly administered. And so true proponents of the death penalty. And by the
way, I am not a proponent of the death penalty on a policy basis, but as
Attorney General, I'm absolutely committed to enforcing the death penalty,
as it exists in Ohio, and improving it, and improving the administration of
it, as it exists in Ohio, because that is the job of the Attorney General,
to carry out the law. And I've got to tell you something, and it caused me.
Before I decided to run for this office, that caused me a few sleepless
nights before I was ready to be able to commit to do this, because I believe
there is a significant distinction between the two, and it's an important
distinction. But those who want the death penalty to be administered in Ohio
ought to want there to be a truth and fairness approach to how we do it, and
honesty, and bad cases to be tossed out and good cases to provide and to
move forward. And I think it's in the interest of all sides to get to the
truth about the application of the death penalty in the State, and so as
Attorney General I would advocate for that. The Attorney General opposed
that when I offered that Amendment to the bill.

Tim Russo: Advocate for a review, or advocate for a moratorium, if the
review shows that it's unfair?

Marc Dann: Well that would be the next step, and if there's an unfair
application of anything going on in Ohio, I think just like we did with
landfills in the bill that I pursued, I introduced a bill to have a
moratorium on new construction landfills, until we figured out what to do
next. So at the moment, at that time, with that information, I think we have
to kind of look at that issue and what it yielded, and of course sometimes
that's in the eye of the beholder, too, so I don't want to commit to a
moratorium unless the data supports what needs to go on, but we ought to be
collecting the data and we ought to be doing it now.

The full transcript of the debate, which took place at Talkie's coffeehouse
in Cleveland on April 3, is here.
http://www.meetthebloggers.net/chandra-dann-debate-transcript/

Discuss this article on the forums. (0 posts)