Death Penalty And Justice
Looking out for the state of the public's
satisfaction in the scheme of capital
sentencing does not Constitute serving
justice. Today's system of capital
punishment is fought with inequalities and
Injustices. The commonly offered
arguments for the death penalty are filled
with holes. It was a Deterrent. It
removed killers. It was the ultimate
punishment. It is biblical. It satisfied
the public's need For retribution.
It relieved the anguish of the victim's
family. (Grisham 120) Realistically,
imposing the Death penalty is expensive and
time consuming. Retroactively, it
has yet to be proven as a deterrent. Morally,
it is a continuation of the
cycle of violence and ô...degrades all who are
involved in its Enforcement,
as well as its victim. (Stewart 1) Perhaps the most
frequent argument for
capital punishment is that of deterrence. The prevailing
Thought is that
imposition of the death penalty will act to dissuade other
criminals from
committing Violent acts. Numerous studies have been created
attempting to
prove this belief; however, to the Evidence taken together makes
it hard to
be confident that capital punishment deters more than long Prison
terms do.
(Cavanagh 4) Going ever farther, Bryan Stevenson, the executive
director of
the Montgomery based Equal Justice Initiative, has stated that
people are
increasingly realizing that the More we resort to killing as a
legitimate
response to our frustration and anger with violence, the more Violent
our
society becomes. We could execute all three thousand people on death row,
and
most People would not feel any safer tomorrow. (Frame 51) In addition,
with
the growing humanitarianism Of modern society, the number of inmates
actually
put to death is substantially lower than 50 years Ago. This decline
creates a
situation in which the death penalty ceases to be a deterrent when
the Populace
begins to think that one can get away with a crime and go
unpunished. Also, the
less that the Death sentence is used; the more it
becomes unusual, thus coming
in conflict with the eighth Amendment. This is
essentially a paradox, in which
the less the death penalty is used, the less
society Can legally use it. The end
result is a punishment that ceases to
deter any crime at all. The key part of
the death penalty is that it involves
death-something, which is rather permanent
for Humans, due to the concept of
mortality. This creates a major problem when
there continue to be Many
instances of innocent people being sentenced to death.
(Tabak 38) In our
legal system, there Exist numerous ways in which justice might
be poorly
served for a recipient of the death sentence. Foremost is in the
handling of
his own defense counsel. In the event that a defendant is
without
Counsel, a lawyer will be provided. Attorney's appointed to
represent indigent
capital defendants Frequently lack the qualities necessary
to provide a
competent defense and sometimes have exhibited Such poor
character that they
have subsequently been disbarred. (Tabak 37). With
payment caps or Court
determined sums of, for example, $5 an hour; there is
not much incentive for a
lawyer to spend A great deal of time was
representing a capital defendant. When
you compare this to the prosecution,
Aided by the police, other law enforcement
agencies, crime labs, state mental
hospitals, various Other scientific
resources, prosecutors experienced in
successfully handling capital cases,
Compulsory process, and grand juries
(Tabak 37), the defense that the court
appointed counsel can Offer is puny.
If, in fact, a defendant has a valid case
to offer, what chance has he to
offer it and have It properly recognized.
Furthermore, why should he be
punished for a misjustice that was created by? The
court itself when it
appointed the incapable lawyer. Even if a defendant has
proper legal counsel,
There is still the matter of impartiality of judges. The
Supreme Court
has steadily reduced the Availability of habeas corpus review of
capital
convictions, placing its confidence in the notion that State judges, who
take
the same oath of office as federal judges to uphold the Constitution, can
be
Trusted to enforce it. (Bright 768) This makes for the biased trying of
a
defendant's appeals, given The overwhelming pressure on elected state
judges to
heed, and perhaps even lead to, the popular cries For the death of
criminal
defendants. (Bright 769) Thirty two of the states that impose the
death Penalty
also employ the popular election of judges, and several of
these even have
judges run with Party affiliations. This creates a deeply
political justice
system-the words alone are a paradox. Can Society simply
brush off mistaken
execution as an incidental cost in the greater scheme of
putting a Criminal to
death? Revenge is an unworthy motive for our society to
pursue. (Whittier 1) In
our Society, there is a great expectation placed on
the family of a victim to
pursue vengeance to the highest Degree-the death
penalty. Pat Bane, executive
director of the Murder Victims Families for
Reconciliation (MVFR), stated, One
parent told me that people made her feel
like she was betraying Her son because
she did not want to kill the person
who murdered him. (Frame 50) This creates a
Dilemma of morality. If
anything, by forcing families to seek the death penalty,
their own
consciences Will be burdened by the death of the killer. Furthermore,
killing
him will not bring back your Son [s]. (Grisham 402). At some point, man
must
stop the violence. Seeking temporary gratification is Not a logical basis
for
whether the death penalty should be imposed. Granted, revenge is
easily
Confused with retribution, and most would agree that the
punishment should fit
the crime, but can Society really justifies murdering
someone else simply on the
basis that they deserved it? Government Has the
right and duty to protect the
greater good against people who jeopardize the
welfare of Society, but a killer
can be sentenced to life without chance of
parole, and society will be just as
safe As if he had been executed. A vast
misconception concerning the death
penalty is that it saves society the costs
of keeping Inmates imprisoned for
long periods. In the act of preserving due
process of justice, the court appeals
Involved with the death penalty
becomes a long, drawn-out and very expensive
process. The average Time
between sentencing and execution for the 31 prisoners
put on death row in
1992 was 114 Months, or nine and a half years. (Stewart 50)
Criminal
justice process expenses, trial court costs, Appellate and
post-conviction
costs, and prison costs perhaps including years served on death
row Awaiting
execution... all told, the extra costs per death penalty imposed in
over a
quarter million Dollars, and per execution exceeds $2 million.
(Cavanagh
4) When you compare this to the average Costs for a twenty-year
prison term for
first-degree murder (roughly $330 thousand), the cost of
Putting someone away
for life is a deal. Is it really worth the hassle and
money to kill a criminal,
when? We can put them away for life for less money
with a great deal more ease?
In earlier times-where Capital punishment
was common, the value of life was
less, and societies were more
barbaric-capital Punishment was probably quite
acceptable. However, in
today's society, which is becoming ever More
increasingly humanitarian and
individual rights and due process of justice are
held in high Accord, the
death penalty is becoming an unrealistic form of
punishment. Also, with the
ever present Possibility of mistaken execution, there
will remain the
question of innocence of those put to death. Finally, man is not
a divine
being. He does not have the right to inflict mortal punishment in the
name Of
society's welfare, when there are suitable substitutes that requires
fewer
resources. I ask society, ...Why don't we stop the killing? (Grisham
404)
Bibliography
Grisham, John. The Chamber. New York: Island
Books, 1994. Stewart, David O.
Dealing with Death. American Bar
Association Journal 80.11 (1994): 50 Tabak,
Ronald J. Report: Ineffective
Assistance of Counsel and Lack of Due Process in
Death Penalty Cases.
Human Rights 22.Winter (1995): 36 Whittier, Charles H.
Moral Arguments
For and Against Capital Punishment. CRS Report for Congress
(1996):