Letters to the Editor

The multimillion-dollar settlement in Delaware County on behalf of Nick Yarris, Pennsylvania's latest death-row exoneree, points up virtually everything that is wrong with the death penalty: proneness to error; prosecutorial misconduct; and the eventual cost, human and financial, to the entire community ("DNA to the rescue," Jan. 13).

Yarris fought for 15 years to prove his innocence through DNA evidence that was "mislaid" and partially destroyed; his exoneration was based on the last remaining strands of testable material. But for that he would still be on death row.

DNA evidence has exonerated more than 120 prisoners across the country, yet it is frequently not gathered or preserved, and is only available in about 10 percent of capital cases. What if there have been not 120 cases of erroneous conviction, but 1,200? Not six in Pennsylvania, but 60?

And what punishment do supporters of the death penalty think appropriate for prosecutors who deliberately falsify, withhold or destroy evidence in capital trials? Aren't they guilty of attempted - and sometimes successful - murder? Should we trust such awful power in any human hands?

Robert Zaller

Bala Cynwyd

Yesterday's lead editorial, "Clinton and Obama: Get over it" (Inquirer, Jan. 15), advised that "what we have here is a political campaign. It would be a mistake to take it too seriously."

On Nov. 4, you are probably going to encourage me to go out and vote. If not on the campaigns, on what would you suggest that I base this vote?

Campaigns, as I understand them, are the primary way that candidates inform the voters of who they are, what they stand for, and what their ideas for their tenure in office would be. I suspect that when it comes time for The Inquirer to endorse one or more of the candidates, your endorsement will be based largely on the campaigns that they will have run. Will this be taking the campaigns "too seriously"?

As for yesterday's editorial, there are two candidates who seem to think I will base my vote at least partially on race. In evaluating the personalities of these candidates, you'd better believe that I'm going to take this misconception very seriously.

Louis Starr

Plymouth Meeting