302 Blues: Government Confesses FBI Fallibility
Blogs Prevent Historical Revision

DNA and Death

The Chicago Tribune, in a recent editorial, makes a familiar argument:

[I]n light of evidence in recent years of scores of cases in which government has wrongfully convicted defendants and sentenced them to death ... it is necessary to curb the government's power.  It is time to abolish the death penalty.

The problem with the argument that innocent men (proven innocent by DNA) have been convicted, therefore the death penalty should be abolished is that DNA testing is widely available.  Juries also expect to see DNA evidence in cases where the death penalty is on the table.  The CSI Effect.

Most (if not all) of the wrongfully convicted were cleared due to DNA evidence exonerating them.  DNA testing was not widely available at the time of their convictions.  In light of the availability of DNA testing, is this a persuasive rationale for abolishing the death penalty when DNA supports guilt?

Would death-penalty opponents change their minds if it the death penalty was availably only when DNA evidence supported guilt?  In the Jessica Lunsford case, for example, there was substantial DNA evidence establishing guilt.  Was John Couey therefore properly sentenced to death?