A new poll from Quinnipiac University finds that most voters in Connecticut support the death penalty just as Gov. Dannel P. Malloy signed legislation on Wednesday ending it.
Voters support capital punishment 62 percent to 30 percent, according to the poll. The majority think the decision to get rid of the death penalty in Connecticut is a “bad idea.”
"The death penalty is a complex issue for voters, and for pollsters," said Quinnipiac University Poll Director Douglas Schwartz, PhD, in a press release. "Connecticut voters want to keep the death penalty, perhaps as an option for the most heinous crimes, such as the Cheshire murders."
Get great local stories like this delivered right to your inbox or smartphone everyday with our free newsletter. Simple, fast sign-up here.
"While they want to keep the death penalty on the books, voters are divided on whether they prefer to sentence convicted murderers to death or life without parole. In fact, 74 percent say a life or death sentence depends on the circumstances of the case," Schwartz added.
Gov. Dannel P. Malloy's office issued a statement in response to the poll.
"We have tried to be consistent in not saying much about polls because ... what's there to say?" said Roy Occhiogrosso, senior advisor to the governor. "Polls come and go, numbers go up and down. The Governor always does what he thinks is best for the state and the right thing to do."
Quinnipiac University surveyed 1,745 registered voters with a margin of error of 2.4 percentage points from April 18-23.
After signing the bill to repeal capital punishment on Wednesday, Malloy issued a lengthy statement about the state joining 16 others in taking that action:
“Many of us who have advocated for this position over the years have said there is a moral component to our opposition to the death penalty. For me, that is certainly the case. But that does not mean – nor should it mean – that we question the morality of those who favor capital punishment. I certainly don’t. I know many people whom I deeply respect, including friends and family, that believe the death penalty is just. In fact, the issue knows no boundaries: not political party, not gender, age, race, or any other demographic. It is, at once, one of the most compelling and vexing issues of our time.
“My position on the appropriateness of the death penalty in our criminal justice system evolved over a long period of time. As a young man, I was a death penalty supporter. Then I spent years as a prosecutor and pursued dangerous felons in court, including murderers. In the trenches of a criminal courtroom, I learned firsthand that our system of justice is very imperfect. While it’s a good system designed with the highest ideals of our democratic society in mind, like most of human experience, it is subject to the fallibility of those who participate in it. I saw people who were poorly served by their counsel. I saw people wrongly accused or mistakenly identified. I saw discrimination. In bearing witness to those things, I came to believe that doing away with the death penalty was the only way to ensure it would not be unfairly imposed.
“Another factor that led me to today is the ‘unworkability’ of Connecticut’s death penalty law. In the last 52 years, only 2 people have been put to death in Connecticut – and both of them volunteered for it. Instead, the people of this state pay for appeal after appeal, and then watch time and again as defendants are marched in front of the cameras, giving them a platform of public attention they don’t deserve. It is sordid attention that rips open never-quite-healed wounds. The 11 men currently on death row in Connecticut are far more likely to die of old age than they are to be put to death.
“As in past years, the campaign to abolish the death penalty in Connecticut has been led by dozens of family members of murder victims, and some of them were present as I signed this legislation today. In the words of one such survivor: ‘Now is the time to start the process of healing, a process that could have been started decades earlier with the finality of a life sentence. We cannot afford to put on hold the lives of these secondary victims. We need to allow them to find a way as early as possible to begin to live again.’ Perhaps that is the most compelling message of all.
“As our state moves beyond this divisive debate, I hope we can all redouble our efforts and common work to improve the fairness and integrity of our criminal justice system, and to minimize its fallibility.”