The authors (DeLisi and Munoz) acknowledge the validity of two identified methodological errors that could render the statistical finding spurious. One methodological flaw was the use of historical data that were not limited to the inmate's current incarceration as mistakenly assumed by DeLisi and Munoz. The second mistake was the oversight that the dependent variable included more offenses than the eight claimed in the study report. The critique of the study also offered additional comments about flaws in its methodology; however, the critique, including the acknowledged validity of two of the criticisms, is not sufficient to advance the substantive issue regarding the future dangerousness of capital offenders. Attempting to estimate the in-prison conduct of death row inmates if they had instead been sentenced to life and housed in the general inmate population is not a critical analysis upon which advocacy for or opposition to capital punishment depends. 3 notes and 9 references