Opinion

Death penalty debate shakes Connecticut

It’s a three-year-old crime so vicious, random and inexplicable that the overwhelming majority of Connecticut residents want the accused to get the death penalty. Yet the statute may be on its way to repeal.

In May 2009, 16 months before Steven Hayes went on trial for the rape and murder of Jennifer Hawke-Petit and her two daughters in a Chesire, Conn., home invasion, the Democratic-controlled state legislature passed a bill to repeal the death penalty.

At the same time, Dr. William Petit — the lone survivor, beaten nearly to death — was publicly pleading for the state-sanctioned execution of Hayes and his co-defendant, Joshua Komisarjevsky. (Who faces a separate trial, slated to begin Feb. 22.)

In the wake of the repeal’s passing, Petit wrote a lengthy letter to the Cheshire Herald. “In summary, all I can say is that it is a very sad day to be a citizen of the state of Connecticut, as we are represented by people who do not have the courage to stand up for what is right and what is justice,” he wrote. “They, in fact, do not take the time to ask their constituents what they want and believe.”

Then-Gov. Jodi Rell, a Republican, vetoed the bill, which would not have applied to this case — only to those charged with a felony after the bill’s signing. Incoming Democratic Gov. Dan Malloy, however, has said he will sign a repeal — a possibility, as both houses of the state legislature are also controlled by Democrats.

“I was surprised [by his stance],” says Tom Foley, Malloy’s pro-death-penalty Republican opponent. “Support for the death penalty bumped up over the Cheshire murders. I thought it was unusual.”

As unusual: It wasn’t even an issue in the election, though Hayes’ trial was taking place in the run-up to Nov. 2.

The death penalty has long been popular in Connecticut, one of the wealthiest and bluest states in the nation. (It’s the only state in New England to have the death penalty, but it also has the region’s highest murder rate.) Somehow, in the wake of the most horrific crime ever committed in the state, the death penalty has become a contentious issue.

“It wasn’t until I had spent some time with Bill Petit that I became a supporter of the death penalty,” says state Sen. Michael McLachlan, a Republican. “The crime is so clear in everyone’s minds; it’s the center of discussion. Certainly the legislature is disconnected from the citizens.”

This past October, weeks before a jury sentenced Hayes to death, public support for the death penalty in Connecticut polled at 65%, the highest in 10 years. (Nationally, support is at the same rate.) When asked whether Hayes and Komisarjevsky should be put to death, more than 75% said yes.

“That was much higher than I expected,” says Bill Dunlap, professor of criminal and constitutional law at Connecticut’s Quinnipiac University. As with every poll, he says, the answers are influenced by the way the question is phrased. “When you ask people if they would favor life without parole as an alternative, the number of people who say they support the death penalty drops considerably.”

In his letter to the editor, Petit pointed out that both Hayes and Komisarjevsky are desperate to avoid the death penalty, and argued that their desire to spend life in prison proves it a fate better, not worse, than death.

Ironically, in Connecticut, a death sentence is commensurate with life without parole — the sole difference being that the victims’ survivors must go through the lengthy and repeated appeals process, which can and does last decades.

“It really is a terrible system,” Dunlap says. “After a conviction, Connecticut has more processes in place than any other state — to the point where it’s impossible to actually execute someone unless they give up and say, ‘OK, execute me.’ ” Serial killer Michael Ross did that in 2005; he was the first to be executed in the state since 1960.

“The process is so lengthy and elongated as compared to other states,” says McLachlan, who admits that the state’s approach is fundamentally schizophrenic, allowing for death penalty’s nominal existence while effectively denying its application.

“It’s a much more liberal process,” he says. “In Connecticut, there is no end to the game.”