An innocent oversight, I'm sure.
Relevant comment: two weeks ago, a jury in this state freed a man convicted of murder one, sentenced to life. Based on dodgy, 40-year-old testimony, his charge was reduced to manslaughter or some such. He was armed with handgun and knife, shot three people in the course of a robbery, the third of whom he also knifed in the throat. She alone died. This killing resulted in his life sentence (how he escaped the death penalty I can't imagine). A model prisoner, his cause for parole became popular with liberal reformers. With his charge reduced last week, he was released for time served.
Now here's my point. I do not like the death penalty, and have tried hard to hear the Church's pleas that in this day it's no longer necessary because society has the means to ensure human life-long incarceration for heinous offenders. With the release of Wilbert Rideau, this whole argument is blown away. Though the liberal great and good got their pet convict freed, they have greatly increased the chances that future juries will pass over the option (now evidently fraudulent) to call for "life in prison", instead going straight to death.
I do not favor capital punishment to the extent that it is supported by revenge or blood lust, though I readily admit that revenge is often my gut reaction to certain crimes, especially those involving children. I support it precisely because I agree that, contrary to the Church's premise, modern society cannot guarantee life sentences.