Senator Eliot Shapleigh - El Paso, Texas

Death chamber at Huntsville, Texas. AP Photo.

I have read, with fascination, news coverage about the case of Ruben Cantu, the San Antonio man executed in 1993.

Most executions in this state warrant little more than a short news item from Huntsville because they are so commonplace. That's unfortunate, but it is the criminal justice climate in which we live.

Cantu's case is different. His case is noteworthy not necessarily for what he did, but for what he may not have done.

Cantu was convicted in 1985 of the robbery and murder of Pedro Gomez. The witness who testified, Juan Moreno, was with Gomez at the time and was shot several times.

Moreno, who speaks no English, did not identify Cantu as the shooter until the third time he was shown Cantu's photo by police. Moreno now claims Cantu was not the shooter.

One could argue, as some of the prosecutors involved have, that Moreno has been pressured or paid into recanting by investigators seeking to clear Cantu's name or anti-death penalty advocates with an agenda.

Let's assume for the moment that's true. There still would have been other incriminating evidence — a murder weapon, perhaps. Or fingerprints. Even other witnesses.

But there was none of that in this case. The state relied only on Moreno's identification that, it could be argued, was coerced through repeated presentations of Cantu's picture.

If the state is going to put someone to death, there should be more evidence than the eyewitness testimony of one person, reliable or not. This is a poster case for the wrongful application of the death penalty.

The death penalty is falling out of favor, or at least being scrutinized, in several other states. The lethal injection method has been legally challenged as "cruel and unusual" punishment, and in many states, there is a moratorium on the practice.

Texas is not one to follow other states, of course. Rather, the Legislature will soon have before it a bill that would expand the list of capital crimes to include repeat child molesters.

One of several proposals modeled on Jessica's Law, the bill would make repeat child molestation punishable by death.

There are other bills pending that stop short of the death penalty but call for mandatory minimum sentences and lifetime monitoring programs. Some proposals would lengthen the statute of limitations on such claims from 10 years to 20 years.

Rather than burnishing Texas' reputation for state-sanctioned killing — 389 inmates are awaiting the needle — legislators should consider the non-death penalty alternatives.

This state took a step in the right direction in 2005 when it began offering life without parole as an option for jurors.

Those who rape, molest and abuse children are unquestionably despicable. They prey on the most vulnerable in our society and scar victims and their families forever, physically, emotionally and psychologically.

But the death penalty isn't the right way to go. Even some child advocacy groups oppose the death penalty as an option in cases of child sexual abuse. Because abuse is so often committed by someone within the family circle, the practice could deter family members from reporting abuse and could prompt predators to kill their victims to avoid punishment, they argue.

In a broader context, there is growing concern over the number of DNA-exonerated criminals released from death row, charges of inadequate legal representation and alleged disparities in the way the penalty is sought and applied.

"At a time when the death penalty is showing signs of stress, both nationally and in Texas, any expansion in light of those circumstances is unwise," said Edwin Colfax, director of state reform campaigns for The Justice Project, a nonpartisan organization that addresses inequalities and unfairness in the American criminal justice system.

Colfax added that there could be a constitutional problem. The Eighth Amendment does not allow the death penalty in cases of the rape of an adult woman. Courts could extend that to children.