BOSTON – A bishop said the Roman Colosseum is illuminated every time the death penalty is repealed somewhere in the world.

A Catholic whose daughter died in the Oklahoma City bombing called executions staged political events and later talked about the man scheduled to be executed for the crime.

Another man said he came to Boston to better his life and ended up in prison for a crime he didn’t commit.

And a few legislators said the death penalty would be beneficial.

These were among the things people told the joint legislative Committee on Criminal Justice Tuesday at the public hearing on death penalty bills at the Statehouse.

The vast majority of those testifying at the hearing spoke against reinstating the death penalty in Massachusetts. Among them were a couple of the 19 people who went on a bus from Worcester.  This year Bishop Reilly was the spokesman for the four Roman Catholic bishops of Massachusetts and the Massachusetts Catholic Conference.

He read the bishops’ just-released joint statement against the reinstatement of the death penalty. Referring to the lighting of the Colosseum, it said Pope John Paul II has said that campaign provided "an excellent opportunity to promote...ever more mature forms of respect for the life and dignity of every person" and he urged "all leaders to reach an international consensus on the abolition of the death penalty." The statement said that Massachusetts legislators have the opportunity to advance this cause.

"In the two years since the Massachusetts General Court last addressed the death penalty issue, much has happened to change the climate," it said. It mentioned studies and reports of error, forgiveness, appeals for a moratorium and changing public opinion about "the idea that killing is somehow an appropriate response to killing."

The statement repeated part of the bishops’ 1999 statement: "The death penalty is simply wrong...It is true that no person and no family should feel unprotected..."

The religious panel Bishop Reilly led included a Catholic nun, an Episcopal bishop, representatives of the Massachusetts Council of Churches, a Quaker, and rabbis.

Sister Joan Duffy, president of the Sisters of St. Joseph of Boston, noted how her community refused to come to the Statehouse for a recognition of their anniversary a few years ago because the House had voted the previous night to reinstate the death penalty.

Bishop Barbara Harris, Suffragan Bishop of the Episcopal Diocese of Massachusetts, said her church supports restorative justice with reparation for victims, and rehabilitation for offenders, and, when possible, their reintegration into the community. She said the death penalty denies offenders a chance make amends and society a chance to break the cycle of violence with forgiveness.

Rabbis said the Old Testament "eye for an eye" was a limit on vengeance and that later requirements nearly ruled out the death penalty.

Jane Perlov, state secretary of public safety, said the bill filed by the governor, whom she was representing, calls for the death penalty for the most atrocious cases and has safeguards to ensure the innocent are not executed.

She said as a police officer in New York she saw smug, mocking criminals before the state reinstated the death penalty, but a change in their attitude and number of homicides afterwards.

Sen. Brian Lees, who frequently submits bills to reinstate the death penalty, said he was there for a murder victim and his parents. Anna Schiavina used to call for the death penalty at these hearings after her police-officer son was murdered, but she and her husband both died recently, he said.

Renny Cushing, executive director of Murder Victims Families for Reconciliation and son of a murder victim, said the group members oppose the idea that people honor their loved ones by engaging in ritual killing, replicating the violence that brought them pain.

Bud Welch, a Catholic member of that panel whose daughter Julie was killed in the Oklahoma City bombing, said executions are staged political events - people know when they will happen, and are given press releases explaining why they have to happen.

Asked afterwards about Timothy McVeigh, who was convicted of the bombing, asking to be executed, he replied that he has always thought Mr. McVeigh is somewhat suicidal. He said he has sent Mr. McVeigh messages through the prisoner’s father, for whom he has shown support as another father hurt by the bombing.

He said he has not talked to President George Bush about sparing Mr. McVeigh from the federal execution set for him May 16 and does not plan to. He said he tried to talk to the president when he was governor of Texas, but the governor would not talk to him.

Bill Babbitt, another MVFR panel member, said his brother was executed in California, after he turned him in and was promised Manuel would not get the gas chamber. Manuel had been released from Bridgewater State Hospital in Massachusetts against doctors’ urging, he said. He said at his brother’s execution no politicians promised closure to his family.

After his testimony he showed The Catholic Free Press his brother’s death certificate. The immediate cause of death is listed as lethal injection, which the certificate says was due to judicial execution. In the "coroner’s use only" section the "homicide" box is checked for "manner of death." Above it is squeezed in the typed word, "justifiable."

Mr. Babbitt said that while Manuel was in prison Mother Teresa gave him holy items and he also received the Purple Heart medal for his service in the Vietnam War. Catholic churches in California and Massachusetts saw to his funeral and burial, he said.

Tom Lowenstein urged Criminal Justice committee members to do their own research on the death penalty for his father, a public servant who was murdered, and for all victims’ families. He asked them to use money for more police, drug and violence prevention and anger management training instead of the death penalty.

Tina Chery, whose son was murdered, said she opposes the death penalty because victims are victimized by the system that is supposed to protect them. According to a Florida estimate, the money spent on executing one person could keep six in prison for life, and protect victims’ families from having to go back to court continually, she said. If life sentences are really for life, that will restore faith in the system, she said.

"I came to Boston to better my life" – at age 18, despite a basketball scholarship elsewhere – said Bobby Joe Leaster. Instead, he spent years in prison for a crime he didn’t commit. Pointing to the committee, he said he could have been sitting up there. The audience applauded.

"Anybody in this house – their son, nephew, could be mistakenly convicted of murder," said Neil Miller. He said he was imprisoned for rape because of misidentification, would still be there if DNA testing was not allowed and would probably be serving life if the victim died.

Paris Carriger said he was sentenced to death in Arizona because someone else got immunity for testifying against him. He said the prosecution has unlimited funds, but the defense gets very limited money. His attorney kept the money, spent a few hours on the case, and the state said he did not have ineffective assistance of counsel, he said. He said witnesses sometimes lie, that potential jurors who oppose the death penalty are disqualified and that he could demonstrate how to manufacture fingerprints with a child’s toy.

Sean Kealy, the committee's legal counsel, said Thursdau tht he velieved the committee would give an unfavorable recommendation to the death penalty bills, saying they ought not to pass. In that case, the governor's bill would go to the House and the Senate bills woiuld go the the Senate to be voted on by their respective bodies. He said bills which are passed then go to the other body. But if the House defeats its bills, the House does not have to take up the death penalty again until January 2003, although it can, he said.