Capital punishment critics urge Ohio lawmakers to abandon death penalty
Every year, Ohio Attorney General Dave Yost releases a report detailing the state of Ohio’s capital punishment system. This year, as with last year, it depicts an expensive and inefficient program. Yost argues serious reform is needed to drag it out of the ditch, but opponents contend the attorney general is misreading the facts in front of him.
They argue it’s time to scrap the death penalty in Ohio, not grasp for an end-run to restart executions.
Yost’s perspective
In the 2024 Capital Crimes report, Yost notes the average time death row inmates spend waiting for execution has grown to 22 years. At this point they’re more likely to die by suicide or natural causes than state corrections officials carrying out the sentence.
Throughout, Yost heaps scorn on Ohio’s approach to the death penalty. He describes it as a “ponderous machine” that is “essentially paralyzed” capable of producing “churn, waste and endless lawsuits — and little else.”
“This system satisfies nobody,” Yost argues. “Those who oppose the death penalty want it abolished altogether. Those who support the death penalty want it to be fair, timely and effective. Neither side is getting what it wants.”
The report takes swipes at the way exonerations are discussed and the role of pharmaceutical companies. Defendants acquitted at retrial for lack of evidence or a prosecutor’s dismissal haven’t been proven innocent, Yost insists. “To state it plainly, guilty people sometimes beat the rap.” And pharmaceutical companies refusing to sell the state drugs used in lethal injection are “imped(ing) the laws of our nation,” according to Yost.
Yost’s solution for this self-described “stalemate” is to work with the U.S. Department of Justice to secure the necessary drugs or for state lawmakers to approve legislation allowing execution with nitrogen gas.
“There are two paths available to Ohio to enforce the laws on our books,” Yost states. “Pick one.”
Opponents’ view
Yost’s description of the capital punishment system’s shortcomings was so strong that Ohioans to Stop Executions quoted him to begin their own report.
Capital punishment “burns enormous amounts of effort, time and money, all to no purpose,” Yost stated. “It is a system that fails to deliver on the promise of justice for victims and their families, while wasting millions of taxpayer dollars.”
With that in mind, the organization contends, it’s time for Ohio to cut its losses and find a better solution.
“It’s time for Ohio to stop spending millions of dollars to prop up this broken system,” Ohioans to Stop Executions Executive Director Kevin Werner argued. “Repealing the death penalty is not just fiscally responsible, it is a moral and practical necessity.”
Alongside Werner, two people whose loved ones were murdered argued the death penalty is the wrong consequence. Sister Joanne Gross of the Ursuline Sisters of Cleveland described how a member of her order, Sister Joanne Marie Mascha, was raped and murdered 30 years ago.
“Despite our public opposition to the death penalty, the prosecutors were not deterred and pursued death anyway,” she explained. “Only a jury’s mistake on the verdict forms resulted in the young man not facing the death penalty at sentencing, which was an answer to our prayers.”
Late last year the man convicted of murdering Mascha sent the sisters a letter, Gross said, “taking responsibility for his actions and seeking forgiveness.”
Rev. Jack Sullivan explained in 1997 he learned that his 21-year-old sister had been shot and killed in her home. He argued his family is one of many with “absolutely no confidence in the death penalty.”
“As we know, executions possess no life-restoring powers,” he said, “and offer no life honoring properties.”
Sullivan added, “Executions cannot mend broken heart(s) but only create more. They cannot heal grieving souls but only create more. And they cannot provide ever-elusive closure.”
Werner argued the state is at an impasse, and finding a new source for drugs or allowing executions with nitrogen gas won’t solve the system’s underlying problems. Those changes won’t make the legal process faster or cheaper, address wrongful convictions or provide support to victims’ families.
“It doesn’t fix a single problem,” Werner argued. “It feels a little bit more like a like a political thing, than it does good public policy that has outcomes that are both desired and needed.”