NCJ Number
45562
Date Published
1978
Length
12 pages
Annotation
A POINT-BY-POINT REFUTATION OF ARGUMENTS AGAINST THE DEATH PENALTY IS PRESENTED: THE CRUCIAL QUESTION IN THIS ISSUE IS WHETHER CAPITAL PUNISHMENT ACTS AS A DETERRENT.
Abstract
THE ARGUMENTS AGAINST CAPITAL PUNISHMENT ADDRESSED IN THE ARTICLE ARE: (1) CAPITAL PUNISHMENT IS CRUEL AND UNUSUAL; (2) HUMAN LIFE IS SACRED; (3) EXECUTING THE MURDERER WILL NOT BRING THE VICTIM BACK TO LIFE; (4) CAPITAL PUNISHMENT IS APPLIED ARBITRARILY AND IT DISCRIMINATES AGAINST RACIAL MINORITIES; (5) WE MIGHT EXECUTE AN INNOCENT MAN; AND (6) CAPITAL PUNISHMENT DOES NOT DETER MURDERERS. THE AUTHOR CITES THE SUPREME COURT'S RULING THAT THE DEATH PENALTY IS NOT 'CRUEL AND UNUSUAL PUNISHMENT' AND STATES THAT, ALTHOUGH THE ABOLITIONISTS MAY CHARACTERIZE CAPITAL PUNISHMENT AS CRUEL AND UNSUAL, LEGALLY IT IS NOT. TO PROPONENTS OF CAPITAL PUNISHMENT, THE LIFE OF THE VICTIM IS AS SACRED AS THAT OF THE MURDERER; THE MURDERER'S DEATH WOULD ASSURE THAT THE LIFE OF A SECOND VICTIM WOULD BE SAVED, VINDICATE THE VICTIM'S RIGHT NOT TO HAVE BEEN KILLED, AND EXPRESS THE OUTRAGE OF SOCIETY. EXAMPLES OF CONVICTED MURDERERS WHO WENT ON TO KILL AGAIN ARE PRESENTED IN THE CONTEXT OF THIS ARGUMENT. THE AUTHOR HOLDS THAT, WHILE THE DEATH PENALTY WAS HELD ARBITRARY AND DISCRIMINATORY IN THE 1972 SUPREME COURT DECISION ON THE CASE OF FURMAN V. GEORGIA, THE 34 STATES IN WHICH DEATH PENALTY LAWS WERE RENDERED INVALID AS A RESULT OF THAT RULING HAVE SINCE INSTITUTED NONARBITRARY AND NONDISCRIMINATORY LAWS. HE ALSO POINTS OUT THAT CRIME, ESPECIALLY MURDER, DOES DISCRIMINATE AGAINST THE SAME MINORITIES TO AN APPALLING EXTENT. THE STATISTICAL CHANCES OF AN INNOCENT MAN BEING EXECUTED ARE SO REMOTE, HE STATES FURTHER, THAT THE ARGUMENT IS RENDERED NEGLIGIBLE. REVIEW PROCEDURES IN CAPITAL CASES MAKE IT EXTREMELY UNLIKELY THAT AN INNOCENT MAN COULD EVER BE EXECUTED UNDER THE U.S. CRIMINAL JUSTICE SYSTEM. ON THE QUESTION OF DETERRENCE, IT IS NOTED THAT IF CAPITAL PUNISHMENT COULD BE PROVEN WITH MATHEMATICAL CERTAINTY TO BE A DETERRENT, THERE WOULD BE NO FURTHER DEBATE ON THE ISSUE. SINCE THIS IS NOT THE CASE, THE QUESTION BECOMES: ON WHICH SIDE SHOULD WE ERR -- THAT OF THE CONVICTED MURDERER OR THAT OF THE POTENTIAL MURDER VICTIM? IF CAPITAL PUNISHMENT IS A DETERRENT, THEN BY ENACTING AND ENFORCING DEATH PENALTY LAWS, INNOCENT LIVES WILL BE SAVED. IF IT IS NOT A DETERRENT, THEN THE MORE VICIOUS AND DEPRAVED OF THOSE CONVICTED OF MURDER WILL HAVE BEEN EXECUTED. THE AUTHOR HOLDS THE POSSIBLE SAVING OF INNOCENT LIVES AS THE DIRECTION TO TAKE. EXAMPLES OF TESTIMONY FROM INDIVIDUALS DETERRED BY THE DEATH PENALTY ARE PRESENTED. NOTES ARE PROVIDED. (DAS)