[media-credit name=’PAT STATZBOYER/Herald photo’ align=’alignnone’ width=’648′][/media-credit]In a panel discussion opposing the death-penalty advisory referendum appearing on the November ballot, several speakers criticized the death penalty for being cruel and ignoring the possibility of error.

The discussion, held in the Wisconsin State Historical Society auditorium, featured Juan Melendez, who was exonerated from a death sentence and released from prison after serving more than 17 years. Melendez was freed after the discovery of a taped confession by the real murderer in January 2002.

Melendez spoke of the suffering he experienced in those 17 years, noting the death penalty is a "cruel" punishment.

"The problem with the death penalty is that people don't have all the details," he said. "We got rid of segregation, we got rid of slavery, we can get rid of this madness."

Vikki Panetti, the sister of a man on death row in Texas, objected to the death penalty on different grounds.

"[My brother had] a lengthy history of 14 commitments for mental illness … [and] was allowed to represent himself as a lawyer in a court in a capital murder case," she said.

Panetti said the mentally ill should not be executed, adding that allowing people with histories of mental illness to represent themselves in court "makes a mockery of our whole criminal justice system."

Robbie Lowery, a law officer with 32 years of experience in law enforcement, acknowledged that there is potential for error during the judicial process. Under public pressure in high profile cases, he said officers are often made to feel that they must "get [the case] solved now."

"We go where the evidence leads us, but sometimes we make mistakes, and mistakes should not cost someone their life," he said.

Cynthia Hirsch, a Wisconsin assistant attorney general, also said that in the pressurized environment that can surround a death-penalty case, officials sometimes "forget to perhaps examine the other side of an issue."

Hirsch also noted two studies that found a prevalence of racism in death-penalty sentences.

According to the studies, she said, "the odds of receiving the death penalty are more than three times greater if the victim of the crime is white."

State Sen. Alan Lasee, R-De Pere, the author of the advisory referendum, said in an interview with The Badger Herald that the reason he authored the resolution was to get an idea of Wisconsin citizens' stance on the death penalty.

"What's wrong with asking Wisconsin citizens what they feel on this subject?" he asked, noting that only if the non-binding advisory referendum passed with a "sizable margin" would the state Legislature pursue legislation to actually enact capital punishment.

In response to the increased cost of the death penalty compared to incarceration for life, Lasee cited a bill he introduced in the past that would limit the lengthy and expensive appeals process to five years.

"The costs [of the death penalty] are always associated with the lengthy appeals — five, 10, 15 years and more."

He noted that the death penalty would only be used in the "most violent" of crimes.

"There are truly evil people in the world. … I think we do society a favor by putting them out of their misery," Lasee said.

According to Hirsch, however, the death penalty "is not justice; it's vengeance."