Whether or not you happen to oppose the death penalty, I think most of us with a shred of decency could agree on this one. If a death penalty conviction was obtained with the help of prosecutorial misconduct, the case deserves to be revisited. It does seem odd that Delma Banks Jr. has been on death row for 22 years, but can't we take the time to be certain that he had every opportunity to mount an effective defense?
AUSTIN -- The evidence that Delma Banks Jr. was guilty of murder was limited from the start: no fingerprints, no witnesses to the crime and little apparent motive. Nonetheless, in a one-day trial in 1980, an all-white Texas jury convicted Banks, a young black man, of killing a white teenager, and the next day he was sentenced to death.
Now, 23 years, 15 death warrants and a half-dozen appeals after the crime, Banks is scheduled to be executed by lethal injection on Wednesday, even though the key witness against him has recanted parts of his testimony and evidence of prosecutorial misconduct has emerged.
The case has attracted the attention of former FBI director William S. Sessions who, joined by two retired federal appeals court judges and a top former federal prosecutor, has asked the Supreme Court to stay Banks's execution....
Although none of them is a blanket opponent of the death penalty, they argued that a reprieve should be granted in Banks's case because Texas prosecutors wrongfully suppressed evidence at his trial. The evidence, a transcript of police and prosecutors coaching the key prosecution witness, finally emerged in 1999, and defense lawyers said it could have been used to knock holes in the prosecution's case.
Sessions's brief also contends that Banks's defense lawyer botched his trial, failing to attack the state's "weak, circumstantial case" and arriving unprepared at the next day's sentencing hearing to plead for Banks's life. Although Banks had no prior convictions, the defense offered little testimony to contradict the state's contention that Banks posed a future danger to society -- a necessary precondition for the death penalty in Texas.
I do not know if Banks is innocent. I have no particular stake in that aspect of this controversy. My concern is that the state of Texas should not be in the business of executing those who may not have been granted every opportunity to mount an effective defense. What is so wrong with taking the time to be certain that Banks has been allowed his day in court- and with effective representation?
Yes, 22+ years on Death Row would seem to be more than enough, and these issues should have been dealt with long before now. The reality, though, is that they haven't been. That should not be taken to mean that Banks no longer has the right to a fair trial.
This is not the ideal solution to what clearly was a terrible crime. However, society, in order to retain any claim to humanity, must be certain that sentences are carried out in accordance with both the letter and the spirit of the law.
There is no right way to do the wrong thing.
