Durham court to hear 1st death penalty case since 1999

For the first time in nearly six years, a handful of Durham citizens will decide the fate of one man's life.

Lawyers have already begun selecting jurors for the first-degree murder trial of Dennis Lamonte Hargrove.

The defendant faces the death penalty if convicted of his alleged crimes-killing a woman, shooting out a toddler's eye and wounding two other individuals.

First-degree murder is the only crime in North Carolina for which jurors, instead of judges, decide the punishment.

It is also the only crime in the state punishable by death.

Before the Hargrove trial, no first-degree murder case tried in Durham included the death penalty as a potential consequence of conviction since 1999.

Hargrove's June 2003 alleged crime, which occurred off Markham Avenue, was reportedly committed to scare the victim's roommate into repaying a drug debt.

Prosecutor Tracey Cline and defense attorneys have been interviewing prospective jurors for more than a week, but because of the serious nature of the trial, only a handful have been chosen thus far.

He was the coordinator for graduate recruitment and minority programs at Duke before his death.

Within weeks, police apprehended Durham resident Thomas Anthony Pitt who ultimately confessed to the crime.

Although robbery appeared to be a motive, attorneys for both the prosecution and defense have suggested that there was some prior link between victim and defendant.

In April, District Attorney David Saacks voiced the state's plans to pursue the death penalty in the Pitt trial, although legal officials have said it may take more than a year and a half for the case to be heard in court.

Amid such high-profile cases, the death penalty has continued to be a contentious issue throughout the state.

Several organizations and activists support campaigns to halt the death penalty, citing the need to investigate the efficacy of the system.

"The problem with the death penalty is that there's no way to administer it fairly," said James Coleman, senior associate dean for academic affairs at the School of Law.

Coleman said this uncertainty of fairness applies to the Hargrove case.

"This is a gruesome case," he acknowledged, but he added that its specific nature makes applying the death penalty difficult.

Brian Keith Hargrove, a relative of Dennis Lamonte Hargrove, is also being accused of first-degree murder based on related crimes in the case.

He will be tried later-but there is a dispute between the two defendants over what happened the night of the murder.

This conflict of testimony, Coleman said, could result in the wrong person being sentenced to death.

Wrongful sentencing is one problem that many death penalty critics believe could be addressed through a moratorium on executions.

North Carolina Coalition for a Moratorium spokesperson David Neal explained that a moratorium bill would halt all state executions for two years, although death penalty trials would be able to continue.

"We've found there's consistent support among regular people for taking the time out while we're making sure we're doing things fairly and not putting innocent people on death row," Neal said.

"I think it's just a matter of good public policy and common sense for them to do so," he added.

Philip Cook, ITT/Terry Sanford distinguished professor of public policy studies, explained that beyond moral considerations, research he has conducted shows that the death penalty makes poor economic sense.

"What we have to do is to see the death penalty as something that we might favor or not, depending on our sense of justice," he said.

"But if we're trying to talk about it in terms of utilitarian concerns... I think the case is very weak," Cook added.

Despite these criticisms about the death penalty, the moratorium campaign has yet to make significant ground.

In 2003, the state senate passed a moratorium bill. But the bill ultimately failed in the N.C. House of Representatives when the co-speaker of the house refused to call a vote.