An ineffectual solution:

The killing of Death Row inmate Darrell Grayson by the state of Alabama has generated many letters to this newspaper by some citizens saying his killing was justified, and each opinion has some degree of logic. The view that if you kill another human being you should die for your transgression is a long-held belief. The question for us is: Who should kill the killer?

The Bible gives us the Christian response. The story is of men who, in an attempt to discredit Jesus, brought a woman charged with adultery before him and challenged him to judge the woman, reminding him her transgression was punishable by death. The Bible says Jesus told the men that only those who have never sinned should be qualified to be the executioner.

In the Bible, there are many other illustrations of Christ’s teachings of achieving justice through nonviolent actions, but this tenet of faith is not limited to Christianity. Every major religion teaches that reacting to violence with more violence is a sin and an ineffectual solution for lasting peace and justice.

It is strange, then, that support for the death penalty exists so strongly in the area we so proudly call the Bible Belt.

John Alexander

Grayson Valley

Grayson’s role the lingering question:

Darrell Grayson’s execution illustrates that it is time to ban the death penalty or, at minimum, declare a moratorium on its application while the faulty systems that allow us to put people to death are examined and reformed.

Gov. Bob Riley said in his statement that he was surprised at how little “consideration” had been given to the victim. All of us who were opposed to this execution are aware that what lies at the bottom of this case is a horrific crime perpetrated on an entirely innocent and vulnerable victim. Before Grayson’s execution, one man had already been executed and Grayson was confined to prison, facing the death penalty, in the 27 years since the crime.

In crimes this dreadful, it is hard to ever feel society has responded adequately. But I wonder if it is fair to label, as Riley did, two men being given the death sentence a “lack of consideration for the victim.”

The lingering question was the role Grayson played in the crime. Recent letter writers who believe the guilty verdict of the jury eliminates that question ignore the fact more than 200 people who were found guilty by juries have been exonerated by DNA analysis, evidence to which a condemned man clearly ought to be entitled. They also ignore the well-documented and broadly criticized problems with inadequate legal defense in countless capital cases in Alabama.

Those who, understandably, believed Grayson’s confessions made it clear he was guilty are ignoring the fact many of those exonerated by DNA had confessed, and it has become increasingly clear in recent years that false confessions, mysterious as they can be, do occur.

Dale Wisely

Vestavia Hills

see these at the Birmingham News online