Reacting to capital punishment as a legislator and as a judge
Frye offers a specific example of how the transition from legislator to judge impacted his reaction to certain issues. Focusing on his beliefs regarding capital punishment, Frye describes his general opposition and his efforts to challenge the law while he was a legislator in contrast to his duty to uphold laws as a judge.
Citing this Excerpt
Oral History Interview with Henry Ell Frye, February 18 and 26, 1992. Interview C-0091. Southern Oral History Program Collection (#4007) in the Southern Oral History Program Collection, Southern Historical Collection, Wilson Library, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill.
Full Text of the Excerpt
- AMY E. BOENING:
-
Back in the early 70's when you were in the Legislature you
supported a bill to abolish the death penalty.
- HENRY ELL FRYE:
-
Yes.
- AMY E. BOENING:
-
Do you find that your personal feelings affect your outlook on some of
these death cases?
- HENRY ELL FRYE:
-
Well, that's an interesting question. Let's talk
about that a little bit. I did introduce several bills at different
times to abolish the death penalty in North Carolina. And my two basic
arguments were, number one, that the statistics and the studies and all
of those things have not shown that the homicide rate was really any
different in those states which had the death penalty and those which
didn't. The other thing was, the studies showed the death
penalty was effectuated most often on the disadvantaged, whether that
was because of color, race, that type of thing, or whether it was just
poor and people who were outcasts and things of that nature. In other
words, it was not administered in a fair way. Any rate, added to that
the thing that death was final. And if you made a mistake, as has been
done in history, there was no way of correcting it. But that failed
continuously through the entire time that I was in the legislature. When
the question first came up about my coming on the court, I had to think
about the question of how I would deal with that. I concluded that as
long as the death penalty is a part of the law, then it is my duty to
uphold the law. So that's the approach I have taken to it. I
have voted and gone along with opinions which have upheld the death
penalty in North Carolina and will continue to do that where I feel they
have been tried in accordance with the law and the law has been
followed. So that's been my approach to it and as far as I
know will continue to be it. I think the question as to whether it
should be a part of the law is a policy question which is for the
legislature. And the legislature has made it fairly clear, not fairly
clear, it has made it clear in North Carolina as in some other states,
that that is a part of our law. So any rate, the key now seems to be, to
have it administered so that only those who commit
the worst crimes get the death penalty. Without going into details,
that's why we have the findings of aggravating, and
mitigating circumstances, and the aggravating outweigh the mitigating
and so forth. And it's about as good a system as you could
get, if you're going to have the death penalty as part of the
law in North Carolina.