Casey Barton
I believe that we should keep the death penalty, but with reasonable reforms. I will say that our criminal justice system is far from perfect, yet remains the best system in the world. In most places, a person charged is guilty and must prove innocence. The opposite is true here.
According to CNN, capital punishments are currently legal in more than half the states; 29 to be exact. The death penalty was halted for a number of years, based on a Georgia case (Furman v. Georgia). It was then reinstated by the United States Supreme Court in 1976; also a Georgia case (Gregg v. Georgia). According to the Innocence Project, they have exonerated 367 people through DNA testing; CNN states that there have been 166 exonerations of death row inmates. Another 290 people on death row have been granted clemency since the reinstatement in 1976. Since its reinstatement, around 1,512 people have been executed; currently there are more than 2,600 people on death row.
To be eligible for the death penalty, a life must have been taken. While states can be more restrictive than this, they cannot be more lenient. The Supreme Court has heard many cases, making necessary changes over the years. States cannot go against federal mandates or against case law, but they can be more restrictive. In fact, many states outright ban capital punishment.
Now, why do I support it? Capital punishment is, and should be, reserved for the most heinous crimes; the absolute worst of the worst. There are evil people in this world that should be punished. For example, federal death row inmate Lisa Montgomery. She is currently on death row for a murder/kidnapping case she committed in December of 2004. She tricked and killed a pregnant woman and then cut out the woman’s unborn baby, kidnapping the baby girl. A pregnant mother that did not deserve to die, a husband that lost his wife and a baby that never gets to be held by her mother.
How about another death row inmate, Keith D. Nelson? According to reports, he was about to go back to prison on unrelated charges, but he told a friend that he wanted to go back for something big. First, he attempted to kidnap a woman at knife point at her apartment complex, but she managed to escape with her life. He then kidnapped, raped and murdered a 10 year old little girl, strangling her with a wire. He plead guilty to the crimes and then was sentenced to death. When I think of cases like these, it makes me support the death penalty. People like this have proven that life means nothing to them.
Many others including Dylan Roof, the guy who killed 9 church goers in South Carolina; the Aurora Movie Theatre killer; the Boston Marathon Bombers; and the list can go on. I believe that those that kill children, kill law enforcement, or commit acts of terrorism, should be capital offense/capital punishment cases. I do not believe that people like this can be rehabilitated.
The need for reform:
I will say it again, our system is far from perfect. In order to correct constitutional concerns, the U.S. Supreme Court has heard many cases that have led to new case law and capital punishment reform. For example, in 2005, Roper v. Simmons case was decided where juvenile offenders could not be sentenced to death. In 1986, another case stated that it was unconstitutional to execute legally insane and in 2002, those deemed mentally retarded could not be executed either.
Costs are a big factor in death penalty cases and there will be several people in this class that list that as a reason to ban capital punishment cases. Death row inmates are more expensive than typical inmates just because of staffing requirements. These offenders are the worst of the worst; they require much more staff, highly trained staff, because of the inherent dangers associated with it versus running a minimum security prison. Trials cost more as well because of automatic appeals and the entire process is more in depth, as it should be if we are deciding whether a person should live or die. There must be more background given versus just saying that capital cases are more expensive. They also have higher community costs than typical offenders, as in the loss of life. It’s really comparing apples and oranges.
Another reason death row cases are more expensive is because it can take decades to execute someone. For example, in Georgia, Virgil Presnell Jr. was sentenced to death in 1976 for kidnapping, raping, and murdering 2 girls in Cobb County, aged 8 and 10. He has been on death row for close to 45 years. In Georgia alone, there are 23 people on death row that were sentenced to death before the year 2000. And in California, there are 740 death row inmates, the most of any state in the U.S.; there have only been 13 executions in California since 1976. I am not saying that executions should be quick and careless, but it should not take 30-50 years to execute someone that was sentenced by a jury of their peers, represented by counsel, and overseen by a judge to ensure a fair trial.
Some will say that counsel is in effective because most are required to use public defenders. To that, I will say that price doesn’t always equate to quality. There are plenty of over-paid and equally worthless attorneys out there. There are also some of the best attorneys that provide pro-bono cases or do work as public defenders. The Innocence Project, for example, they do pro-bono work. In some states, capital cases require that attorneys have a certain number of years of experience to ensure competent counsel.
Other areas of reform that I believe are important include mandatory testing of DNA if it is available in a case. This same rule could apply to those sentenced to life in prison without parole. Maybe assign an independent review board, possibly appointed by the U.S. Supreme Court or a bi-partisan legislative body. Years on death row with mounting costs are impossible to get around, but having a specified time frame to get through the appeals process. For example, a 10-year appeals process; if nothing changes in 10 years, then execute the person. These cases must have an absolute identification of the offender(s); if not, then another sentence would be more appropriate.
less
Reply,
Hi Casey,
I agree with you the current approach to the death penalty requires to be reformed. For instance, the Innocence Project, they have exonerated 367 people through DNA testing. I believe such forensic evidence and approaches should be used to determine the innocence of the defendant. This way, it will be easy to counter the challenge of wrongful convictions in the criminal system. Application of forensic science in the investigation process is essential, and the criminal justice system should emphasize on use of Forensic evidence.
Most of the individuals have been executed based on false confessions. The problem occurs since some of the prosecutors are after winning the case instead of offering justice. Criminal justice should not apply unreliable evidence like confessions alone when making death penalty sentences. Therefore, I agree with you mandatory DNA testing can be a significant improvement in the criminal justice system. If such reforms are made, the death penalty could not be viewed as full of flaws as it is today.