AFFIRMATIVE - Fullerton College



TABLE OF CONTENTS

AFFIRMATIVE BLOCKS

THE DEATH PENALTY ILLUSTRAUTES THE WORST OF SOCIETY 2

CHECKS TO ENSURE INNOCENT AREN’T PUT TO DEATH ARE NOT ENOUGH 3

CRIMINAL JUSTICE SYSTEMS CANNOT BE FIXED TO GUARENTEE JUST DEATH PENALTIES 4

CRIMINAL JUSTICE SYSTEMS ALLOW FOR COURTROOM ERRORS IN CAPITAL CASES 5

MORALITY IS A KEY FACTOR IN DETERMINING PUNISHMENT 6

LETHAL INJECTIONS ARE NOT HUMANE AND SHOULD NOT BE ALLOWED IN A JUST SOCIETY 7

INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS AND THE DEATH PENALTY 8

RACIAL BIAS IN DEATH PENALTY DISTRIBUTION PREVENTS JUSTICE 9

THE DEATH PENALTY IS A FORM OF STATE CONTROL 10

NEGATIVE BLOCKS

DETERRENCE IS NOT A GOOD JUSTIFICATION FOR DEATH PENALTY 11

INNOCENT PEOPLE ARE NOT PUT TO DEATH BY THE GOVERNMENT 12

THE DEATH PENALTY IS A DETERRENT 13

CHOOSING TO COMMIT A CRIME IS CHOOSING TO GIVE UP YOUR LIFE 14

JUSTICE OCCURS THROUGH DEATH PENALTY PUNISHMENTS 15

THE DEATH PENALTY IS MORE HUMANE THAN OTHER CURRENT PUNISHMENTS 16

LETHAL INJECTIONS ARE A HUMANE DEATH PENALTY METHOD 17

COURTS ERR IN FAVOR OF THE GUILTY 18

DEATH PENALTY IS THE BEST WAY TO COMPENSATE VICTIMS’ FAMILIES 19

LIFE SENTENCES ARE NOT PUNISHMENT FOR CRIMINALS 20

WITHOUT THE DEATH PENALTY THERE IS NO WAY TO ESTABLISH DIFFERENT LEVELS OF HARM 21

THE DEATH PENALTY ILLUSTRAUTES THE WORST OF SOCIETY

1. THE DEATH PENALTY IS SOCIETY ACTING AT ITS MOST UNCIVILIZED

Rand Richards Cooper, writer, 2005.

“Basic Instinct,” COMMONWEALTH, p 39.

“My point isn't to harangue the family members--quite the opposite. If Ross had raped and murdered my daughter, I would surely feel the same temptation to snarl and taunt; it is deeply a part of my nature. But is it the part I should nurture? Outside the prison on the night Ross was executed, a school-aged girl held up a sign, "Ross Deserves To Be Sauce." Such brutal sentiments link us to that gruesome tradition of execution as spectacle. They represent a giving-in to a deep and uncivilized satisfaction”

2. THE DEATH PENALTY IS NOT A FORM OF CLOSURE FOR FAMILIES

Michael Cohen. Professor emeritus of English, Murray State University. Jan/Feb 2006.

“The victims and the furies in American courts,” HUMANIST, p 25.

“… the message is that the wrong done in crime is felt by the whole community. But in this it is felt more impersonally and coolly, objectively and rationally, than how the victims and their immediate families feel it. And when the punishment is removed from the hands of those immediately wronged it is made a less personal matter. The crime is punished rather than the victim avenged. And the punishment isn't designed to make the victims feel better or experience "closure." It is society that is wronged and thus society moves to punish the crime. Until it does so--coolly, not in the heat of vengeance, deliberately rather than swiftly--there will be no justice, only an endless cycle of crime following crime.”

3. THE DEATH PENALTY IS SIMPLY A FORM OF SOCIETAL VENGENCE

Michael Cohen. Professor emeritus of English, Murray State University. Jan/Feb 2006.

“The victims and the furies in American courts,” HUMANIST, p 19.

“Vengeance seems to be society's strongest reason for embracing the death penalty, regardless of what name we give it. And it doesn't bother most people that it might actually be in conflict with other justifications, such as deterrence. As Gary Wills points out in a June 2001 article in the New York Review of Books, juries that impose the death penalty for horrendous crimes "reflect more the anger of society" while they "fail to make the calculations that we are told future murderers will make."

4. JUSTICE DESTORYS ITSELF WITHOUT DIGNIFYING THE ACCUSED

Fr. Thomas Williams, rector of the Generalate House of the Legionaires of Christ, 1998.

“Capital punishment and the just society,” accessed August 27, 2007:

“In summary we conclude that capital punishment corresponds to a certain strain of justice, but a justice which is insufficient as a principle for ordering society because it fails to take into account the dignity of the person. For such a right ordering of society, justice must be tempered by love. In his 1980 encyclical letter Dives in Misericordia, Pope John Paul wrote that “[t]he experience of the past and of our own time demonstrates that justice alone is not enough, that it can even lead to the negation and destruction of itself, if that deeper power, which is love, is not allowed to shape human life in its various dimensions.””

CHECKS TO ENSURE INNOCENT AREN’T PUT TO DEATH ARE NOT ENOUGH

1. DNA TESTING CAN BE TAMPERED WITH OR MISHANDLED

“Testing times,” ECONOMIST, 2005, p 36-37.

“Defense lawyers and prisoners' advocates have long been worried that DNA tests can be compromised by human error. As Eric Freedman, a lawyer for Mr Washington, told the Richmond Times-Dispatch, "There's every reason to believe that in every capital case, there is enormous political pressure to break the rules, if necessary, to keep the defendant convicted." In the case of Mr Washington, the audit by the American Society of Crime Laboratory Directors showed that a state forensic scientist, Jeffrey Ban, relied on botched tests on semen found in Mr Washington's alleged victim to rule out another suspect, Kenneth Tinsley, a convicted multiple rapist now serving two life sentences.”

2. STUDY SHOWS INMATES’ PLEASE OF INNOCENCE GO UNHEARD

Terry Golway, curator of John Kean Center for American History at Kean University, 2006.

”Wrongly Convicted,” AMERICA, p 8.

“With two million people serving time in American prisons, the Innocence Project’s mission could hardly be more urgent. How many of those two million have been wrongly convicted? The number certainly is small, but the presence of even one innocent person in proson mocks the very notion of justice. Once imprisoned, as Deskovic discovered, inmates and their continued pleas of innocence generally go unheard. Judges, prosecutors and the public at large generally do not regard convicted felons as sympathetic or credible figures.”

3. FOUR HUNDRED AND SIXTEEN INNOCENT PEOPLE PUT TO DEATH IN THE U.S.

Dahlia Lithwick, reporter, 2007.

“The dying death penalty?” THE WASHINGTON POST, p B2.

“The Innocence Project, a nonprofit legal clinic associated with the Benjamin N. Cardozo School of Law at Yeshiva University in New York, says there have been 194 post-conviction DNA exonerations. A wrongful-executions study by Hugo Bedau and Michael Radelet of contends that from 1900 to 1991, 416 clearly innocent people were sentenced to die.”

4. THE US JUSTICE SYSTEM ACTS ARBITRARILY

Michael E. Antonio, Ph.D. in Law, Policy and Society from Northeastern University, 2006.

“Arbitrariness and the Death Penalty: How the Defendant’s Appearance During Trial Influences Capital Jurors; Punishment Decisions,” BEHAVIORAL SCIENCES AND THE LAW, p 215.

“A common belief is that the American judicial system operates on the basis of legally permissible evidence including facts gathered from a crime scene, eyewitness and expert testimony, DNA testing, fingerprint analysis, etc. With this belief comes the notion that a criminal defendant could be found innocent or guilty and sentenced accordingly based only on the legal facts presented in court. In an ideal world this is how a legal system would function; however, there is much evidence lending support to the argument that the American legal system, in particular our courts of law, often operate in an arbitrary and capricious manner.”

CRIMINAL JUSTICE SYSTEMS CANNOT BE FIXED TO GUARENTEE JUST DEATH PENALTIES

1. IT IS IMPOSSIBLE TO FIX THE PROBLEMS WITH THE DEATH PENALTY

Justice Harry Blackman, Supreme Court Juustice, 1994.

“Callins v. James on Writ of Certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit” No. 93-7054.

“From this day forward, I no longer shall tinker with the machinery of death. For more than 20 years I have endeavored - indeed, I have struggled - along with a majority of this Court, to develop procedural and substantive rules that would lend more than the mere appearance of fairness to the death penalty endeavor. Rather than continue to coddle the Court's delusion that the desired level of fairness has been achieved and the need for regulation eviscerated, I feel morally and intellectually obligated simply to concede that the death penalty experiment has failed. It is virtually self evident to me now that no combination of procedural rules or substantive regulation ever can save the death penalty from its inherent constitutional deficiencies. The basic question - does the system accurately and consistently determine which defendants "deserve" to die? - cannot be answered in the affirmative.”

2. THE FALLIBILITY OF ALL CRIMINAL JUSTICE SYSTEMS CANNOT BE FIXED

Kenneth Roth, executive director of Human Rights Watch, December 15, 2004.

“New York: Death penalty can not be fixed,” HUMAN RIGHTS NEWS, accessed August 27, 2007,

“Human Rights Watch opposes capital punishment in all circumstances because of its inherent cruelty and because executions are inevitably carried out in an arbitrary manner, inflicted primarily on the most vulnerable – the poor, the mentally ill, and persons of color. The intrinsic fallibility of all criminal justice systems assures that even when full due process of law is respected, innocent persons are sometimes executed “

3. Marc H. Morial, President of the National Urban League, February 25, 2004.

“Innocent of the crime, but almost executed anyway,” MAXIMSNEWS, accessed on August 27, 2007,

“There are growing calls for moratoria on executions, a growing reluctance among juries to levy the death penalty, efforts to insure that defendants in capital cases, who are most often poor, are represented by good attorneys, and even legislative attempts at the state and federal levels to fix the flaws in various parts of the steps of death-penalty cases. These efforts are worthwhile—in our view, both for their practicality and for their underscoring the moral arguments against the death penalty: It is a practice that cannot be ‘fixed’ by the application of ‘practical’ measures. “

4. LEVELS OF EXONERATION SHOW TOO HIGH ERROR RATES

Russ Feingold, U.S. Senator, January 9, 2003.

“U.S. Senator Russ Feingold on the National Death Penalty Moratorium Act,” accessed August 27, 2007,

“The year 2002 was a landmark year for the examination of the death penalty. Last year the 102nd person was exonerated from death row in the modern death penalty era; 102 innocent people have been exonerated, in some cases just days from execution, after being found innocent of crimes for which they served sometimes years on death row. That is not a small number. In the modern death penalty era, our Nation has executed 820 people. That means that according to our best estimates, since the death penalty was reinstated in 1976, for every 8 people executed, one who had been convicted and sentenced to death has been found innocent. That is an unacceptable high error rate in the administration of a punishment for which errors caught too late cannot be fixed. That's a rate of error with which none of us should be comfortable. “

CRIMINAL JUSTICE SYSTEMS ALLOW FOR COURTROOM ERRORS IN CAPITAL CASES

1. STUDIES SHOW EL.ICITING JURY SYMPATHY CAN CHANGE TRIAL OUTCOMES

Michael E. Antonio, Ph.D. in Law, Policy and Society from Northeastern University, 2006.

“Arbitrariness and the Death Penalty: How the Defendant’s Appearance During Trial Influences Capital Jurors; Punishment Decisions,” BEHAVIORAL SCIENCES AND THE LAW, p 234.

“Indeed, the policy implications of this research go beyond simple jury instructions, however. This analysis draws into question whether the modern capital punishment system in the United States is designed in such a way as to allow bias, prejudice and arbitrariness to influence the decision to impose a death sentence. The simple fact that some defendants might be able to use the situation to their advantage by acting in ways to elicit juror sympathy, while other defendants may be less able or skilled to do so, shows the inherit arbitrariness that exists in the manner in which capital jurors decide who should live and die.”

2. SUPREME COURT JUSTICES RECOGNIZE INQUALITIES IN JUSTICE SYSTEM

Erwin Chemerinsky, law professor, 2006.

“The Rehnquist Court and the death penalty,” GEORGETOWN LAW JOURNAL.

“In the area of the death penalty, a majority of the Justices seemed to recognize that there are enormous problems and inequities in the way the death penalty is administered. Innocent people are sentenced and put to death in the United States. Those being tried for capital crimes often lack even minimally competent counsel and have no right to attorneys at all in collateral proceedings. Racial bias infects every aspect of the criminal justice system, especially in death penalty cases.”

3. WE CANNOT TRUST TRIALS AS INHERENTLY ACCURATE BECAUSE COURT DECISION MAKING IS TAINTED WITH FACTORS OUTSIDE OF THE LAW AND FACTS OF A CASE

Michael E. Antonio, Ph.D. in Law, Policy and Society from Northeastern University, 2006.

“Arbitrariness and the Death Penalty: How the Defendant’s Appearance During Trial Influences Capital Jurors; Punishment Decisions,” BEHAVIORAL SCIENCES AND THE LAW, p 217.

“As these studies indicate, the presence of psychological or extra-legal factors during the trial can impact courtroom procedures and also influence the decision-making process itself. These factors may be presented at trial intentionally to elicit certain reactions, but many times can be the result of random happenstance.”

4. VERDICTS ARE BIASED BASED ON PERCEPTIONS OF HOW THE JURY DETERMINES A JUDGE'S INTEREST IN A TRIAL

Michael E. Antonio, Ph.D. in Law, Policy and Society from Northeastern University, 2006.

“Arbitrariness and the Death Penalty: How the Defendant’s Appearance During Trial Influences Capital Jurors; Punishment Decisions,” BEHAVIORAL SCIENCES AND THE LAW, p 216.

“In another study that examined courtroom behavior and expectancy effects, research subjects were asked to watch videos of actual trials and instructions to the jury. The purpose of the study was to uncover whether the mock jurors were susceptible to expectation effects or order of presentations upon reaching a verdict. Results showed that jurors gave more non-guilty verdicts when they believed the judge expected such a verdict, while jurors who thought the judge expected a guilty verdict gave more verdicts in line with that expectation.”

MORALITY IS A KEY FACTOR IN DETERMINING PUNISHMENT

1. CRIME TO PUNISHMENT CORRESPONDANCE WOULD EMPTY PRISONS

Fr. Thomas Williams, rector of the Generalate House of the Legionaires of Christ, 1998.

“Capital punishment and the just society,” accessed August 27, 2007:

“Secondly, must punishment necessarily correspond to the crime committed? If this were the case, the use of prisons would be limited to those who detain others against their will. As it stands, the practice of incarcerating thieves, rapists, and drunk drivers reflects our understanding that punishment, in order to be just, need not be of the same species as the crime committed. As long as the penalty is proportionate to the gravity of the crime, it satisfies the demands of justice.”

2. PROPORTIONALITY IS KEY TO CONSIDERING PUNISHMENT

Fr. Thomas Williams, rector of the Generalate House of the Legionaires of Christ, 1998.

“Capital punishment and the just society,” accessed August 27, 2007:

“The opinion that murder, especially when premeditated and particularly cruel, necessarily requires the death penalty as the only commensurate chastisement, cannot be sustained. Commensurability is relative, not absolute. Justice demands a certain proportion between punishment and crime, but justice will always be approximate and imperfect in this life. There are crimes qualitatively or quantitatively worse than a single murder, such as certain forms of torture, mass murder or serial killing, which could not be redressed absolutely even by the death of the perpetrator.”

3. PUNISHMENT REQUIRES MORAL JUSTIFICATION IN ORDER TO BE ACCEPTABLE

Jeffrie G. Murphy, Professor of Philosophy and Law, Arizona State University, 1987

“Does Kant Have a Theory of Punishment?” COLUMBIA LAW REVIEW, p 510.

“Punishment may not be morally justified at all. Since punishment is by definition coercive or invasive, it must (by anyone who takes liberty to be an important moral value) be considered prima facie wrong and in need of moral justification. A theory of punishment must bring a systematic moral theory to bear on the questions of criminalization and punishment in order to show how conduct that is clearly wrong when considered in isolation (e.g., locking someone up in a cage for several years) can be morally justified all things considered.”

4. THE APPROPRIATE ROLE OF A TRIAL IS NOT TO SERVE AS CATHARSIS AGAINST THE PAIN OF VICTIMS, IT IS TO JUDGE BASED ON THE ACTION ITSELF

Michael Cohen. Professor emeritus of English, Murray State University. Jan/Feb 2006.

“The victims and the furies in American courts,” HUMANIST, p 25.

“When I think about what should have happened to the man who killed my father, I have a luxury other victims lack: I am emotionally insulated from the event of my father's killing because it happened when I was too young to know what was going on. Such emotional insulation is precisely what society has and needs in order to pursue justice. It isn't the business of juries to feel the victims' pain but to decide what harm has been done to society. It isn't their business to give satisfaction or closure to victims but, rather, to render swift, reliable, unbiased punishment for the harm done to society as a whole. As a victim, I would like juries and the society from which they are chosen to think not as victims do but as members of a responsible body that measures wrong by a different yardstick from emotional pain.”

LETHAL INJECTIONS ARE NOT HUMANE AND SHOULD NOT BE ALLOWED IN A JUST SOCIETY

1. THERE ARE NUMEROUS EXAMPLES OF INHUMANE LETHAL INJECTIONS

Karen Harrison, Senior Lecturer, University of the West, England, April 2007.

“The Death Penalty by Lethal Injection and Hill v McDonough: Is the USA Starting to See Sense?” JOURNAL OF CRIMINAL LAW, p 178.

“Elliot Rod Johnson, executed on 24 June 1987 in Texas, had to wait nearly an hour for the execution technicians to complete the execution due to collapsed veins. Another inmate Raymond Landry, who was executed on 13 December 1988 in Texas, was pronounced dead 40 minutes after being strapped to the gurney and 24 minutes after the drugs had been first administered. Two minutes into the procedure the catheter came out of the inmate’s vein and sprayed deadly chemicals around the room. It took a further 14 minutes for the execution technicians to reinsert the needle.”

2. WITHOUT THE COOPERATION OF MEDICAL PERSONAL, LETHAL INJECTIONS ARE CRUEL AND UNUSUAL

Karen Harrison, Senior Lecturer, University of the West, England, April 2007.

“The Death Penalty by Lethal Injection and Hill v McDonough: Is the USA Starting to See Sense?” JOURNAL OF CRIMINAL LAW, p 180.

“The USA now has to consider seriously that the lack of detailed execution protocols coupled with the lack of anesthesia training is causing prisoners to suffer cruel or unusual punishment and is in breach of the Eighth Amendment. Indeed without the cooperation of medical personal, it may not be possible to carry out executions by lethal injection.”

3. ANIMALS ARE KILLED MORE HUMANELY THAN HUMANS

Christopher Brauchli, lawyer, October 18, 2003.

“Inhumane drug used in many executions,” , accessed at August 27, 2007,

“It would be easy to simply condemn Tennessee for being a state that lacks respect for life. That would be a mistake. Tennessee has a law that is known as the ‘Nonlivestock Animal Humane Death Act.’ Nonlivestock is defined to include pets, captured wildlife, exotic and domesticated animals, rabbits, chicks, ducks and potbellied pigs. Tennessee law says: ‘A nonlivestock animal may be tranquilized with an approved and humane substance before euthanasia is performed.’ The law then provides that ‘any substance which acts as a neuromuscular blocking agent, or any chamber which causes a change in body oxygen may not be used on any nonlivestock animal for the purpose of euthanasia.’ The unfortunate thing, as far as those facing the executioner's needle in Tennessee is concerned, is that humans are excluded from the definition of ‘nonlivestock animals.’ Thus, the requirement for a humane execution that is imposed on those killing animals is not imposed on those killing humans. Tennessee is not alone in being more concerned about kind executions of nonlivestock animals than humans.“

4. CONFLICT BETWEEN MEDICAL ETHICS AND LAWS

Amnesty International, January 30, 1998.

“Lethal injection: The medical technology of execution,” accessed August 27, 2007,

“Experience in the USA has shown that lethal injection has a corrosive effect on the medical profession which finds itself reluctantly conscripted to play a role in state-sponsored executions. In some states, laws are in conflict with medical ethics, encouraging doctors to infringe their ethical obligations to assist the state in its lethal objective. Even in states where medical participation has been excluded by statute, regulation or practice, the fact remains that someone plays the role of executioner and that that person has to apply medical knowledge and have some medical training in order to carry out the task. “

INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS AND THE DEATH PENALTY

1. THE U.S. HAS THE HIGHEST INCARCERATION RATE IN THE WORLD

Andrew Gumbel, author. August 15, 2007.

“A nation’s brutal approach to punishment,” THE INDEPENDENT, p 2.

“The persistence of the death penalty is only one way in which the United States stands out from the rest of the Western world on crime and punishment. It also has the highest incarceration rate of any country, with more than two million people behind bars. (China, second in the rankings, has an estimated 1.5 million, and Russia just short of 900,000.) The US has just 5 per cent of the world's population, but 25 per cent of its overall prison population. Some of the reasons behind the extraordinary machinery of incarceration - including the death penalty - is cultural and historical. In the South, in particular, the phenomenon is inextricably linked to the long history of racial inequality, with blacks put away in numbers vastly disproportionate to their overall population. The states with the highest ratio of prisoners per population are all former slave states with long traditions of jailhouse brutality, chain gangs and other barbaric practices: Louisiana (816 prisoners per 100,000 people), Texas (694) and Mississippi (669). In many states, blacks are up to 15 times as likely as whites to find themselves behind bars. In Florida, one in three adult black men has a criminal record.”

2. THE U.S. MAY SUFFER ECONOMICALLY BECAUSE OF DEATH PENALTY SUPPORT

Richard C. Dieter, executive director of the Death Penalty Information Center, 1999.

“International perspectives on the death penalty: a costly isolation for the U.S.” accessed August 27, 2007,

“In the future, the U.S. may face economic sanctions for its death penalty stance. European Parliament official Alan Donnelly warned of possible economic consequences for U.S. states that continue to use the death penalty. In a letter to Texas Governor George Bush, Mr. Donnelly pointed to the European Parliament's condemnation of the death penalty and stated that ‘Many companies, under pressure from shareholders and public opinion to apply ethical business practices, are beginning to consider the possibility of restricting the investment in the U.S. to states that do not apply the death penalty.’”

3. COUNTRIES THAT SUFFER FROM VIOLENCE RECOGNIZE SANCTITY OF HUMAN LIFE

Frank Jarolimek and Martin Searle, members of the End to Capital Punishment Movement, August 7, 2007.

“Death penalty widens moral chasm between U.S. and world,” CARNEGIE COUNCIL, accessed August 27, 2007,

“The sanctity of human life is common to all ideologies, but the prism of global cultures, with their varying conceptions of the right and the good, will challenge any claim to ideological infallibility. The international forum is an arena of debate and deliberation; of sharing and judging ideas. Such exchanges, and the treaties born from them, are particularly relevant in the shared goals of combating violence and entrenching protection for human rights. That many countries, most recently the Philippines, Liberia, Rwanda, and Burundi, have sought to abolish capital punishment after witnessing and suffering from violence on the grandest scale offers insights into alternative ways to deal with criminal behavior while respecting human rights. “

RACIAL BIAS IN DEATH PENALTY DISTRIBUTION PREVENTS JUSTICE

1. PENNSYLVANIA STOPPED THE DEATH PENALTY BECAUSE OF RACE EQUALITY

Amnesty International, 2003.

“United States of America: Death by discrimination – the continuing role of race in capital cases,” accessed August 27, 2007,

“In March 2003, Pennsylvania’s Committee on Racial and Gender Bias in the Justice System, appointed by a 1999 state Supreme Court order, recommended a moratorium on executions in the state. It wrote in its final report: ‘Based on existing data and studies, the Committee concluded that there are strong indications that Pennsylvania’s capital justice system does not operate in an evenhanded manner’ and that ‘at least in some counties, race plays a major, if not overwhelming, role in the imposition of the death penalty.’”

2. RACIAL DESCRIMINATION OCCURS AT ALL LEVELS OF THE TRIAL PROCESS

Michael Kroll, former executive director of Death Penalty Information Center, 1991.

“Chattahoochee Judicial District: Buckle of the death belt: The death penalty in microcosm,” DEATH PENALTY INFORMATION CENTER, accessed August 27, 2007,

“The quality of counsel in capital cases is a national disgrace, but nowhere more so than in the South. In most southern states, there is no statewide indigent defense system. Lawyers are so poorly reimbursed that they are often working for less than minimum wage. On occasion, lawyers who have never tried a single criminal case at all are appointed to represent defendants facing the death penalty. According to a comprehensive report in The National Law Journal (6/11/90), lawyers in capital trials in the South have been "suspended, disbarred or otherwise disciplined at a rate (up to) 46 times the discipline rates" for other lawyers in those states. It is not uncommon for all-white juries to sentence black men to death in the electric chair after less than an hour's deliberation. In one recent Chattahoochee case, after the federal court reversed just such a death sentence, competent lawyers assigned to the case resisted the DA's attempts to remove black jurors. As a result, a jury which included blacks sentenced the same defendant to life in prison. “

3. RACISM EXISTS THROUGHOUT THE COUNTRY’S DEATH PENALTY PRACTICES

Michael Kroll, former executive director of Death Penalty Information Center, 1991.

“Chattahoochee Judicial District: Buckle of the death belt: The death penalty in microcosm,” DEATH PENALTY INFORMATION CENTER, accessed August 27, 2007,

“Former Columbus Superior Court Judge, Albert Thompson, recently described the justice system as having "two faces: one white and one black."[27] Unfortunately, this observation is not limited to a single judicial district. The Chattahoochee Judicial District in Georgia is a microcosm of death penalty practices in this country, both historically and currently. While state resources to seek death are virtually unlimited, defense lawyers are severely hobbled by lack of money, not just for their own time but for the services of investigative and mental health experts. Local politics provide irresistible incentives for ambitious prosecutors to turn white-victim murder cases into dramatic vehicles for their ambition, especially when the defendant is black. Official racism manifests itself repeatedly in capital trials, from choosing which cases to select for death and which to plea bargain, to keeping families of victims informed or not, to striking black prospective jurors, to resorting to press conference theatrics to denounce unfavorable decisions. “

THE DEATH PENALTY IS A FORM OF STATE CONTROL

1. THE DEATH PENALTY IS NOT ABOUT GIVING JUST PUNISHMENT, IT IS A PERVERSE GAME TO GIVE THE STATE THE POWER TO PLAY GOD

Chuck Klosterman, journalist, 2006.

“How Old Is Too Old to Die?” ESQUIRE, p 88-90.

“In September of 200S, Allen was resuscitated by prison medics after he suffered a heart attack. This is the most intriguing twist to the story: The state of California saved Allen's life so that it would be able to kill him later. This is like having sex with someone you despise just so you can break up with her on Valentine's Day. "The 'People of California' are in a morbid race with God to see who can kill Clarence Ray Allen first," wrote Michael Kroll in the January 10 issue of New America Media, and that's a flashy little sentence. However, I think Kroll had it backward. The People of California were in a morbid battle against God to keep Clarence Ray Allen alive until they could kill him on their own terms. And I don't know if this makes the People of California merciful, wicked, or insane.”

2. DEATH PENALTY INMATES ARE NOT HELD TO THE SAME PUNISHMENT STANDARDS AS OTHER CRIMINALS

Chuck Klosterman, journalist, 2006.

“How Old Is Too Old to Die?” ESQUIRE, p 88-90.

“Now, I realize this scenario is wholly hypothetical and (possibly) more interesting than plausible. But it does illustrate a core problem with capital punishment: Even when you accept its existence, it's hard to regulate. As soon as death becomes part of the equation, all the other rules change--often because they suddenly become irrelevant. For example, inmates on death row are always on suicide watch. They are not allowed to kill themselves. Why? If a jury decides that someone must die on the morning of June 1, why is he obligated to live until May 31? This is akin to someone getting a DUI and having his driver's license revoked for eighteen months while also being prohibited from selling his car. ‘The defendant's '88 Caprice Classic must remain in his garage with a full tank of gasoline,’ the judge would decree. ‘He obviously can't drive it, because that is the penalty. But he can't just decide to quit driving.’”

3. DEATH PENALTY IS A POLITICAL TOOL

Leigh Bienen, law professor, Northwestern, 1997.

“Race and the death penalty,” AMERICAN BAR ASSOCIATION, accessed August 27, 2007,

“The death penalty is a symbol of state control and white control over blacks. Black males who present a threatening and defiant personae are the favorites of those administering the punishment, including the overwhelmingly middle-aged white, male prosecutors who -- in running for election or re-election -- find nothing gets them more votes than demonizing young black men. The reasons for this have much more to do with the larger politics of the country than with the death penalty. “

DETERRENCE IS NOT A GOOD JUSTIFICATION FOR DEATH PENALTY

1. DETERRENCE SHOULD NOT OUTWEIGH THE IMMORALITY OF THE DEATH PENALTY

Clive Stafford Smith, legal director of Reprieve, August 20, 2006.

“Forget the statistics, killing is wrong,” NEW SCIENTIST, p 20.

“This is untenable, and immoral. My African-American, juvenile, mentally disabled client Ryan Matthews was recently exonerated from death row by six DNA tests. He has only one life, and it would have been no consolation to him, had he been executed in error, that some academic pondering the view from his office window thought that his arbitrary death was OK because the murder for which he was falsely convicted was arbitrary too. The crux of my argument is this: the notion that statistics can solve all the world's problems is facile. Sunstein and Vermeule even hint at the absurdity of their "moral obligation" thesis when they apply it to highway safety. In effect, they argue that if it were proved that a speed limit of 8 kilometres per hour would save 50,000 lives a year on American roads, the government would be morally obligated to impose it — no matter that the average daily commute would take a full 6 hours each way.”

2. EUROPEAN VIOLENT CRIME RATES LOWER THAN AMERICA

“Down with the death penalty,” ECONOMIST, May 15, 1999, p 20.

“Despite voluminous academic studies of American executions and crime rates, there is no solid evidence that the death penalty is any more effective at deterring murder than long terms of imprisonment. This seems counter-intuitive. Surely death must deter someone. But the kinds of people who kill are rarely equipped, or in a proper emotional state, to make fine calculations about the consequences. Moreover, even for those who are, decades of imprisonment may be as great a deterrent as the remote prospect of execution. Although European countries have abolished the death penalty, their rates of violent crime have risen more slowly than crime overall. Indeed, their murder rates remain far below America's.”

3. CRIMINALS ARE ENCOURAGED BY PUBLIC EXECUTION

Taylor Jr. Stuart, author, May 26, 2001.

“Does the death penalty save innocent lives?” NATIONAL JOURNAL, p 1551.

“There are two untidy little problems here. The first, of course, is the disclosure just six days before McVeigh's now-postponed May 16 appointment with death that the FBI had failed--most likely through incompetence, not design--to turn over to his attorneys more than 3,000 pages of possibly relevant documents. The second, less noticed, problem is that executing McVeigh, with the attendant media circus, seems more likely to provoke future carnage than to deter it: It risks lighting some other potential terrorist's psycho-pathological fuse, just as the 1993 Waco disaster lit the fuse that led to the bombing in Oklahoma City two years later. With luck, McVeigh's execution--if and when it comes--will not be avenged. But can we be confident of that, after watching him glory in the fame that mass murder has brought, to the point of suggesting that his execution be televised? And after seeing the Middle East convulsed by suicide bombers craving martyrdom? Terrorists ‘are not deterred by the threat of severe penalties,’ in the words of a 1976 book by Frederick J. Hacker. ‘In fact, they are attracted by dangerous risks and the expectation of a heroic death.’”

INNOCENT PEOPLE ARE NOT PUT TO DEATH BY THE GOVERNMENT

1. NO INNOCENT PEOPLE HAVE BEEN PUT TO DEATH BY THE GOVERNMENT SINCE DNA

Kenneth Jost. 2005.

“Death penalty controversies,: CQ RESEARCHER, p 785-808. Retrieved August 26, 2007, from CQ Researcher Online, .

“Law enforcement groups emphasize in particular that anti-death penalty groups have yet to document a case in the modern era of someone who was executed and later proven conclusively to have been innocent of the crime. ‘They're looking for the innocent defendant who was executed,’ says Joshua Marquis, district attorney in Clatsop County (Astoria), Ore., and chairman of the National District Attorneys Association's capital litigation committee. ‘They haven't found one yet. I don't think they're going to find one.’”

2. MOST APPEALS ARE NOT QUESTIONS OF INNOCENCE

Kent Scheidegger, Legal Director, Criminal Justice Legal Foundation, 2005.

Retrieved August 26, 2007, from CQ Researcher Online, .

“Only a handful of capital cases involve genuine questions of innocence. By all means, we should put those few on hold as long as it takes to resolve the questions, and the governor should commute the sentence if a genuine doubt remains. At the same time, we should proceed with the justly deserved punishment in the many cases with no such questions, and considerably faster than we do now.”

3. DNA TESTING IS NOT THE CAUSE OF EXONERATIONS, LEGAL LOOPHOLES ARE

Gregg Sangillo, Author. April 28, 2007.

“Death and Innocence,” NATIONAL JOURNAL. p 36-40.

“Such obsession with perfection and "innocence" is overblown, supporters of capital punishment argue. Dudley Sharp, who heads an organization called Justice Matters based in Houston, says that almost all post-conviction exonerations turn on legal points, not actual evidence such as DNA tests. The justice system -- including the long appeals process -- is designed to weed out mistakes, and it does, he contends. "I don't think anybody could imagine anything that accurate," he says.

4. DNA TESTS CONFIRM GUILT OF DEATH ROW PRISONERS

Julie A. Singer, researcher at the Grant Sawyer Center for Justice Studies, 2007.

“The Impact of DNA and Other Technology on the Crimial Justice System: Improvements and Complications.” ALBANY LAW JOURNAL OF SCIENCE & TECHNOLOGY, p. np.

“Because of concerns over faulty evidence convicting the wrong man, in early January 2006, Virginia Governor Mark Warner ordered new DNA tests in the case of Roger Keith Coleman, who had already been executed in 1992 for rape and murder. However, these DNA tests confirmed that Coleman was rightfully convicted for his crimes. This news came as a blow to Coleman's supporters, who believed in his innocence, and to death penalty opponents who were certain that this case would involve "the first scientific proof that an innocent man had been executed in the USA." Despite these results, Peter Neufeld, co-founder of the Innocence Project, has asked governors to study the 1,004 executions that have taken place since 1976, when the death penalty was reinstated, for possible DNA testing. Therefore, this case illustrates that not only can DNA free the innocent, it also can reaffirm the accuracy and validity of the legal system in catching those who are guilty.”

THE DEATH PENALTY IS A DETERRENT

1. WHEN DEATH PENALTY IS ENFORCED IT HAS BEEN PROVEN TO BE A DETERRENT

Kent Scheidegger, Legal Director, Criminal Justice Legal Foundation, 2005.

Retrieved August 26, 2007, from CQ Researcher Online, .

“On the other hand, a powerful reason for the death penalty becomes clearer every year. Study after study confirms that the death penalty does deter murder and does save innocent lives when it is actually enforced.

Conversely, delay in execution and the needless overturning of valid sentences sap the deterrent effect and kill innocent people.”

2. EVEN A SLIGHT DETERRENT EFFECT WOULD SAVE LIVES

Theodore Dalrymple, retired prison psychiatrist, 2007.

“’Barbaric!’ They Charge,” NATIONAL REVIEW, p 19.

“The effectiveness of the death penalty as a deterrent would have to be only very slight for it to be worthwhile from the point of view of saving lives. In the last 65 years of the penalty in Britain, about 13 people were hanged per year. If the deterrent effect were only 2 percent, it would save 16 lives per year. Moreover, the lives lost on one hand would be those of murderers, and on the other of victims of murderers. It seems to me to be carrying the principle of all being born equal a little far if we don’t prefer to save the lives of victims rather than those of perpetrators – assuming, of course, that the deterrent rate of 2 percent is real.”

3. DEATH PENALTY COULD HAVE SAVED NUMEROUS LIVES

Cass R Sunstein, Professor of Jurisprudence, the University of Chicago Law School, 2005.

“Is capital punishment morally required? Acts, omissions, and life-life tradeoffs,” STANFORD LAW REVIEW, p 703-751.

“The foundation for our argument is a significant body of recent evidence that capital punishment may well have a deterrent effect, possibly a quite powerful one. A leading national study suggests that each execution prevents some eighteen murders, on average. If the current evidence is even roughly correct-a question to which we shall return-then a refusal to impose capital punishment will effectively condemn numerous innocent people to death. States that choose life imprisonment, when they might choose capital punishment, are ensuring the deaths of a large number of innocent people. On moral grounds, a choice that effectively condemns large numbers of people to death seems objectionable to say the least.”

4. STATISTICAL STUDIES SHOW DETERRENCE IN UNITED STATES

Hashem Dezhbakhsdh, professor of economics at Emory, 2006.

“The deterrent effect of capital punishment: Evidence from a ‘judicial experiment,’” ECONOMIC INQUIRY, p 512-536.

“We perform before-and-after moratorium comparisons and regressions using both national time-series data and state-level panel data for 1960-2000. The results are boldly clear: Executions deter murders, and murder rates increase substantially during moratoriums. The results are consistent across before-and-after comparisons and regressions regardless of the data's aggregation level, the time period, or the specific variable used to measure executions.”

5. BRITAIN SAW CRIME INCREASE SINCE DEATH PENALTY ABOLITION

Theodore Dalrymple, retired prison psychiatrist, 2007.

“’Barbaric!’ They Charge,” NATIONAL REVIEW, p 19.

“Let us take Britain as an example. The homicide rate has doubled since the abolition, but the rate of homicidal violence has increased by up to ten times, if an American study is correct that improvements in trauma medicine have reduced the death rate from such violence by four-fifths. Moreover, the type of killings that would once have attracted the death penalty – for the majority of homicides were never punished by the death penalty in Britain – has increased disproportionately.”

CHOOSING TO COMMIT A CRIME IS CHOOSING TO GIVE UP YOUR LIFE

1. MAN FREELY CHOOSES TO GIVE UP LIFE

Anthony McCarthy, Linacre Center for Healthcare Ethics research fellow, 2007.

“Penultimate Penalty,” TOUCHSTONE, p 16.

“It is man’s end – that which his capacities are to realize – that give him dignity. And it is right to say that this is written into his very nature. The capacities remain what they were created to be, and the goal is unchanging. But it is, tragically, possible for man to choose freely against this goal. While man has an ontological dignity, given the kind of being he is, he also has a variable existential dignity – i.e., a dignity that is affected, for better or worse, by his freely chosen actions,”

2. RIGHT TO LIFE IS DERIVED FROM TRANSCENDENT MORAL GOAL

Anthony McCarthy, Linacre Center for Healthcare Ethics research fellow, 2007.

“Penultimate Penalty,” TOUCHSTONE, p 16.

“Man’s right to life, like his other rights, is ultimately derived from his transcendent moral goal. And a man can lose his right to life, like his right to freedom, without losing his truly inalienable right: the right and duty to seek his transcendent moral goal while life remains.”

3. MURDERS ARE NO LONGER A PART OF THE HUMAN SPHERE

David Anderson, author, 2005.

“The Death Penalty – a defence,” accessed on August 27, 2007,

“There is no greater crime on earth than when a man takes a fellowman’s life. A man cannot be violated in a more brutal way. Human value cannot be more despised in a more drastic way. A murderer gives his victim a horrible punishment: never to see the light of the sun again, never hear the birds sing, never again feel the sent of the rose, never again hear the voice of a loved one, never again stroke the baby’s cheek, never again spend time with friends, never again smile at the nice and beautiful in life. But this meant nothing for the violent criminal and the murderer. To him man is worth nothing. He has started a war against humanity. Every time a man is battered the whole body of society is beaten and every time a man is murdered part of the body of society is killed. Every attack on a fellowman is an attack on humanity, and an aggressive enemy of humanity should not be able to demand an inviolable value before the State. A violent criminal or a murderer has therefore passed a holy border. He has crushed the conscience- and moral barrier and has passed outside the invisible border that makes us normal people. In that sense he does no longer belong to the humane humanity. He has through his actions left the human sphere. “

JUSTICE OCCURS THROUGH DEATH PENALTY PUNISHMENTS

1. JUSTICE IS INDEPENDENT OF DISTRIBUTIONAL INEQUALITIES

Ernest van den Haag, Heritage Foundation scholar, 1986.

“The Ultimate Punishment: A Defense,” PBS FRONTLINE,

“Equality, in short, seems morally less important than justice. And justice is independent of distributional inequalities. The ideal of equal justice demands that justice be equally distributed, not that it be replace by equality. Justice requires that as many of the guilty as possible be punished, regardless of whether others have avoided punishment. To let these others escape the deserved punishment does not do justice to them, or to society. But it is not unjust to those who could not escape.”

2. PERFORMING JUST ACTIONS = SUFFICIENT JUSTIFICATION FOR PUNISHMENT, INCLUDING THE DEATH PENALTY

Ernest van den Haag, Heritage Foundation scholar, 2004.

“The Possibility That the Death Penalty Deters Murder Justifies Its Use,” AT ISSUE: THE ETHICS OF CAPITAL PUNISHMENT, p np.

“However, if one does include justice among the purposes of punishment, it becomes possible to justify any one punishment—even death—on grounds of justice. Yet, those who object to the death penalty because of its alleged injustice, usually deny not only the merits, or the sufficiency, of specific arguments based on justice, but the propriety of justice as an argument: They exclude ‘doing justice’ as a purpose of legal punishment. If justice is not a purpose of penalties, injustice cannot be an objection to the death penalty, or to any other; if it is, justice cannot be ruled out as an argument for any penalty.”

3. THE THREAT OF DEATH MINIMIZES HARM TO INNOCENTS BECAUSE DEATH PENALTY TRIALS ARE MORE SERIOUS

Ernest van den Haag, Heritage Foundation scholar, 2004.

“The Possibility That the Death Penalty Deters Murder Justifies Its Use,” AT ISSUE: THE ETHICS OF CAPITAL PUNISHMENT, p np.

“Despite all precautions, errors will occur in judicial proceedings: The innocent may be found guilty, or the guilty rich may more easily escape conviction, or receive lesser penalties than the guilty poor. However, these injustices do not reside in the penalties inflicted but in their maldistribution. It is not the penalty—whether death or prison—which is unjust when inflicted on the innocent, but its imposition on the innocent. Inequity between poor and rich also involves distribution, not the penalty distributed. Thus injustice is not an objection to the death penalty but to the distributive process—the trial. Trials are more likely to be fair when life is at stake—the death penalty is probably less often unjustly inflicted than others. It requires special consideration not because it is more, or more often, unjust than other penalties, but because it is always irrevocable.”

4. FAMILIES OF VICTIMS EQUATE THE DEATH PENALTY WITH JUSTICE

Gregory Kane, journalist, February 5, 2003

“To murder victims’ families, executing killers is justice,” BALTIMORE SUN, accessed August 28, 2007,

“‘It won't bring closure,’ Fred Romano said. ‘Dawn will never be back. I'm not looking for closure. That's a bad misconception on the part of some people. I want Oken to die for the murder of Dawn, Patricia Hurt and Lori Ward.’ This isn't even about revenge, another rallying cry of the anti-capital punishment crowd, who chide death penalty advocates for seeking vengeance. ‘It's justice,’ Fred Romano said. ‘It's not revenge.’ His wife, Vicki Romano, agreed, then elaborated. ‘Revenge would be going out and killing one of [the murderer's] family members," Vicki Romano said. "The death penalty isn't revenge. It's the law.’”

THE DEATH PENALTY IS MORE HUMANE THAN OTHER CURRENT PUNISHMENTS

1. JUSTIFYING THE DEATH PENALTY STILL PRESERVES HUMAN WORTH

Anthony McCarthy, Linacre Center for Healthcare Ethics research fellow, 2007.

“Penultimate Penalty,” TOUCHSTONE, p 17.

“It does not follow, as some have suggested, that if the death penalty is justifiable, then various forms of torture must also be permissible, and for the same reasons. For man’s ontological dignity imposes certain duties on others, and these duties will preclude torture and other disrespectful treatment.”

2. THE DEATH PENALTY IS NO WORSE THAN LIFE IN PRISON

Joshua Marquis, district attorney, 2005.

“The myth of innocence,” THE JOURNAL OF CRIMINAL LAW & CRIMINOLOGY, p 520.

“Yes these same advocates urge the substitution of life without parole, claiming (as is sometimes true) that many inmates consider a life sentence to be worse than execution. Peel back the layers of this reckoning and you’ll find these advocates claiming that it is just as horrible to threaten to take away the remaining days of a murderer’s life, and therefore we must abolish all long prison sentences as well as the death penalty.”

3. LIFE SENTENCES ARE JUST A PROLONGED DEATH PENALTY

Jens Soering, prisoner serving two life sentences, December 6, 2004.

“The bad thief,” AMERICA, p 22-24.

“The comparatively small penitentiary where I am housed holds at least two men who have spent over 40 years behind bars, several with more than 30 under their belts, and literally dozens in the "20-plus-years" club. With only 18 years of incarceration-almost half my life-I am actually considered a "fresh fish" around here. But we lifers, we are the dead. Our executions may be stretched out over four or five decades, but in the end, life without parole produces exactly the same result as lethal injection: 127,677 human beings killed by their government.”

4. LIFE SENTENCES ARE EXTENDED TORTURE

Gauthier De Beco, , Spetember 2005.

“Life sentences and human dignity,” THE INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF HUMAN RIGHTS, p 414.

“According to Murphy, imprisonment, which he pretends turns people into ‘new people,’ does not deprive them of this opportunity. However, he admits that long-term imprisonment could be ‘a kind of slow torture and psychic mutilation.’”

5. LIFE SENTENCES ARE NOT ONLY COSTLY TO TAXPAYERS, BUT CAUSES SEVERE PSYCHOLOGICAL HARM TO CRIMINALS

Davie Liezen, corrections officer, May 7, 2006.

“Defending the defenseless,” , accessed August 28, 2007,

“I, for one, have seen plenty of inmates serving ‘life without.’ They don't bear up very well over the decades, some developing irrational fears or paranoia. Some were manic depressive/bi-polar or suffering other disorders, dependent upon psychotropic drugs to maintain a semblance of normalcy. Few admitted their guilt, ignoring the length of their rap sheets or the depth of their criminal behavior. Too often, they're so bound to depraved attitudes and habits they must be kept in max units and isolation. Anyone who's read their jackets or warehoused these guys for long knows habitual criminals are typically a danger to themselves and everyone else. And I won't even go into the cost to government and the taxpayer except to ask, ‘Why should we propose to maintain them until (natural) death do us part? Why leave the door open for them to do another capital crime?’”

LETHAL INJECTIONS ARE A HUMANE DEATH PENALTY METHOD

1. IF IMPLEMENTED CORRECTLY, LETHAL INJECTION IS NOT INHUMANE

Amy Mottor, J.D. Candidate, Appalachian School of Law, Spring, 2007.

“Student Note & Comment: Morales and Taylor: The Future of Lethal Injection.” THE APPALACHIAN JOURNAL OF LAW, p. np.

“In spite of the lack of definitive evidence that any inmate has been conscious during the executions, the Court found that the implementation of lethal injection lacked professionalism and was "at the very least[,] ... deeply disturbing." The Court also took into consideration "the fact that the use of pancuronium bromide masked any outward signs of consciousness ... ." Ultimately, the Court held that the method currently used for lethal injection presented "an undue and unnecessary risk of" violating the Cruel and Unusual Punishment Clause of the Eighth Amendment. However, the Court stated that, if administered correctly, lethal injection is constitutional. Therefore, if the deficiencies are corrected, the Court will likely lift the stay of execution.”

2. NO EVIDENCE FOR CLAIMS OF LETHAL INJECTIONS BEING INHUMANE

Dudley Sharp, advocate for Justice Matters, April 27, 2007.

“Lethal injection: What pain? Current controversies resolved,” MEDICAL NEWS TODAY, accessed August 28, 2007,

“The evidence, including the immediate autopsy of executed serial murderer/rapist Michael Ross, supports that there is no pain within the lethal injection process. There is a concern that some inmates may be conscious, but paralyzed, during execution, because one of the three drugs used may have worn off, prior to death. First, there is no evidence this has occurred. Secondly, if properly administered, it cannot occur with the properties and amounts of the chemicals used and within the time frame of an execution. “

3. VETERINARIANS STUDY WAYS TO MAKE LETHAL INJEECTION HUMANE

Malcolm Gay, journalist, December 15, 2004

“Uncomfortably numb,” RIVER FRONT TIMES< accessed August 28, 2007,

“Veterinarians, on the other hand, have been studying how to humanely euthanize animals for decades. In a report published in 2001, the American Veterinary Medical Association (AVMA) condemned the chemical combination of sodium pentothal and Pavulon for animal euthanasia. Similarly, Missouri veterinary regulations prohibit the barbiturate/Pavulon sequence. The AVMA recommends euthanizing animals with a massive overdose of a long-acting barbiturate. Anesthesiologist Mark Heath says the same logic should apply to humans. ‘As long as you give them enough of the barbiturate to fall asleep, they're going to stay asleep,’ says Heath. ‘When you're unconscious, nothing can be cruel.’“

COURTS ERR IN FAVOR OF THE GUILTY

1. THE JUSTICE SYSTEM HAS CAUSED MORE HARM THAN GOOD

Joshua Marquis, district attorney, 2005.

“The myth of innocence,” THE JOURNAL OF CRIMINAL LAW & CRIMINOLOGY, p 517-518.

“The justice system is far from perfect and has made many mistakes, mostly in favor of the accused. Hundred, if not thousands, have died or list their livelihoods through embezzlement or rape because the American justice system failed to incarcerate people who were guilty by any definition.”

2. PAROLES RETURN TO LIVES OF CRIME

Joshua Marquis, district attorney, 2005.

“The myth of innocence,” THE JOURNAL OF CRIMINAL LAW & CRIMINOLOGY, p 518-519.

“Instead, let’s tally the additional victims of the freed: Nine, killed by Kenneth McDuff, who had been sentenced to die for child murder in Texas and then was freed on parole after the death penalty laws at the time were overturned. One, by Robert Massie of California, also sentenced to die and also paroled. Massie rewarded to man who gave him a job on parole by murdering him less than a year after getting our of prison.One, by Robert Marquette, in Oregon, sentenced to “lie” (which until 1994 meant about eight years in Oregon) for abducting and then dismembering women.”

3. CRIMINALS COMMIT CRIMES EVEN AFTER LIFE SENTENCES

Charlene Hall, author

PRO-DEATH , accessed August 28, 2007,

“In 1985, 13-year-old Karen Patterson was shot to death in her bed in North Charleston, S.C. Her killer was a neighbor who had already served 10 years of a life sentence for murdering his half-brother Charles in 1970. Joe Atkins cut the Pattersons' phone lines, then entered bearing a machete, a sawed-off shotgun, and a pistol. Karen's parents were chased out of their home by Atkins. Karen's mom ran to the Atkins home nearby, where Joe then murdered his adopted father, Benjamin Atkins, 75, who had worked to persuade parole authorities to release Joe from the life sentence. “

4. PAROLE BOARDS RELEASE MURDERERS ON THE STREETS MULTIPLE TIMES

Julie Manganis, staff writer, February 26, 2007.

“Recent cases put Parole Board in the spotlight,” GLOCHESTER DAILY TIMES, p 1, accessed August 27, 2007,

“Twenty years ago, Charles ‘Chucky’ Doucette shot a man in the head and killed him. While out on bail, he committed two home invasions. In 1991, he was sentenced to seven consecutive life terms.

Doucette, 48, was released from Bridgewater State Hospital earlier this month, having convinced the state Parole Board he will not commit any more crimes.”

5. THOSE RELEASED AFTER SERVING TIME AREN’T TRACKED

Julie Manganis, staff writer, February 26, 2007.

“Recent cases put Parole Board in the spotlight,” GLOCHESTER DAILY TIMES, p 3, accessed August 27, 2007,

“More than half of those being released were inmates who had ‘wrapped up’ their sentence - they had served the full term, without getting parole - and were then being released directly to the streets without supervision or assistance. They had little incentive to stay out of trouble - there was no balance of a sentence hanging over their head, no possibility of going back to jail unless they were caught committing a new crime. ‘Like it or not, the most dangerous offenders, generally, are those who are unsupervised, untreated and, in the case of sex offenders, unclassified,’ Walsh said. ‘We don't know their whereabouts, can't offer treatment or employment, and can't make sure they're drug- and alcohol-free and abiding by the law.’”

DEATH PENALTY IS THE BEST WAY TO COMPENSATE VICTIMS’ FAMILIES

1. BLOOD ON THE GROUND IS ONLY WAY TO ATONE FOR CRIME

David Anderson, author, 2005.

“The Death Penalty – a defence,” accessed on August 27, 2007,

“A lost human life can only be fully compensated through the death penalty. As long as this does not happen there will, in a symbolic way, be the call of blood from the ground with the message that the crime has not been atoned. Most of us understand and feel that there is a debt that has to be paid in a just way. There is a debt to the victim, to the relatives of the victim, and a debt to the world. It is easiest for the relatives of the victims to hear and understand this call from the blood on the ground. And this atoning, recompense and compensation that can silence the cries from the victims is the death penalty. The capital punishment means that society comes as close to full justice as possible.”

2. EXECUTIONS SERVE AS HEALING STEP FOR VICTIMS’ FAMILIES

Shannon Brownlee, journalist, June 16, 1997.

“The place for vengeance,” US NEWS & WORLD REPORT, p 24-32.

“For some survivors, the execution of a killer does quench the rage. Paula Foster's daughter, Jennifer Burns, then 21, was a bookkeeper at an Arlington, Texas, nightclub when David Lee Herman shot her in the back of her head during a robbery attempt in 1989. Foster says Herman's six years on death row kept her full of hate. ‘When it first happened, I didn't have much anger toward him,’ she says. ‘I didn't know him. But I became more angry at him because of all the appeals. He didn't deserve to live during those six years.’ But defeating the anger only left Foster alone with her grief. Foster says that during the trials and appeals she felt she was doing something for her daughter. Since the execution, on April 2 in Huntsville, she says, ‘I keep thinking, “What can I do for Jennifer now?” The execution is another healing step. Maybe I'm finally realizing that Jennifer is really gone.’ “

3. FAMILIES OF VICTIMS SUFFER AFTER CRIME FOR YEARS

Gregory Kane, journalist, February 5, 2003

“To murder victims’ families, executing killers is justice,” BALTIMORE SUN, accessed August 28, 2007,

“Yes, Frederick A. Romano -- who prefers to be called just ‘Fred’ -- remembers it all. He remembers the man who murdered his sister and two other women -- Patricia Antoinette Hirt and Lori Elizabeth Ward -- and how he has waited for 15 years for one Steven Howard Oken to, in the younger Romano's words, ‘meet his maker.’ ‘It's caused a lot of emotional problems for me and my mom and dad,’ Fred said. ‘They're on so many drugs to keep themselves calm, it's unbelievable.’That is a suffering death penalty opponents can't or won't understand. The pain of homicide victims' relatives never ends. It chips away at their souls and psyches year after depressing year. So what's the appropriate punishment for that?”

LIFE SENTENCES ARE NOT PUNISHMENT FOR CRIMINALS

1. LIFE IN PRISON IS NOT PROPORTIONAL TO MURDER

David Anderson, author, 2005.

“The Death Penalty – a defence,” accessed on August 27, 2007,

“Even if it were a lifetime sentence without parole or mercy, the convict would get used to his new life in prison. He would soon adjust to this new world that he in a limited way can form so that the existence still becomes fairly decent for him. The prison term cannot be made unbearable for him, because then the prison becomes like a torturing pain, which would be inhuman. The prison term must therefore be made tolerable and humane by the state governed by law. But then justice falls flat on the ground. The deceased victim does not get to participate in the good of life, not even a fraction of what the lifetime convicted criminal takes part of. The victim’s lot in comparison to the convict’s cannot even be compared; the difference is so complete. One got death, the other life, even if it is a life with limited freedom. No one can call this justice. On the contrary, it is scornful and rude injustice and means that the victim’s dignity and value in comparison to the convict becomes exceedingly small.”

2. SENTENCING CRIMINALS TO LIFE LEAVES CHANCE OF RELEASE

William F. Buckley Jr., journalist, November 2, 1992.

“Execute Guzman,” NATIONAL REVIEW, p 71.

“Guzman wasn’t executed, went through a military trial, and now has been sentenced to life in prison. That failure of nerve (he should have been shot) is a sentence of death for who knows how many Peruvians. Moreover, the sentence of perpetual life in jail is all but meaningless. Precedents crowd the mind, one of them only weeks old. In an attempt to settle old divisions in South Africa, President de Klerk agreed with Nelson Mandela to release even those prisoners who were being held as guilty of capital crimes, such as the habit of necklacing dissidents. These had been spared the death penalty, and put away for life. But now they are all free.”

3. LIFE SENTENCES ALLOW CRIMINALS TO ORCHESTRATE FURTHER CRIMES

Shannon Brownlee, journalist, June 16, 1997.

“The place for vengeance,” US NEWS & WORLD REPORT, p 24-32.

“Jannie Coverdale lost her two grandsons, Aaron, 5, and Elijah, 2, in the bombing. She said she opposed the death penalty--until the bombing. She fears McVeigh would attract a following of extremists in jail and end up orchestrating the killing of others, so she wants him executed. But she's trying not to hate him. ‘Hatred is a sickness,’ she says, the proof being what it drove McVeigh to do in the first place. ‘That's why our loved ones died. I won't put myself on Timothy McVeigh's level.’ She says she hasn't forgiven McVeigh yet, but, for her own sake, she's trying.”

WITHOUT THE DEATH PENALTY THERE IS NO WAY TO ESTABLISH DIFFERENT LEVELS OF HARM

1. THE DEATH PENALTY IS THE ONLY PROPORTIONAL PUNISHMENT FOR THE CRIME

David Anderson, author, 2005.

“The Death Penalty – a defence,” accessed on August 27, 2007,

“Justice and Law are married to each other. If there is a divorce between these two, both will have difficulties surviving. If there is no justice the law will be transformed from being the threatening sword into being something like an non-threatening toothless tiger, i.e. following a crime nothing that in a real sense can be counted or experienced as a punishment is imposed. That which constitutes a society where there is law and order is that justice is administered. But if the state governed by law refuses to administer justice and instead shows the criminal a kinder side, then justice and the law in its usual and original meaning has ceased to function. What then is the consequence if justice is once again placed in the high seat in the state governed by law? When it comes to the violent criminal and the murderer the death penalty becomes natural, because no other punishment can be called fair and just if proportion to the crime committed is to be maintained and defended and respected.”

2. THE DEATH PENALTY SHOWS VALUE OF HUMAN LIFE

David Anderson, author, 2005.

“The Death Penalty – a defence,” accessed on August 27, 2007,

“And man’s value is revealed in the following ways: If I am guilty of defamation the punishment may stay at probation. If I am guilty of abuse the punishment may be a few months in prison. If I am guilty of murder the punishment will be a few years in prison up to lifetime in prison. One important reason for this increasing punishment when it comes to more cruel crimes is the human value. A punishment is in other words also related to the human value. Therefore the death penalty, more than any other punishment, would show how incredibly high the human life is valued.”

3. WITHOUT THE DEATH PENALTY, THERE IS NO INCREASE IN PENALTIES FOR MULTIPLE MURDERS

Henry Barrett Chamberlin, Operating Director, Chicago Crime Commission, August-September 1927.

THE CONGRESSIONAL DIGEST, p 241.

“Life imprisonment, when a final sentence, is an invitation to the imprisoned murderer to slay wantonly, if necessary, to effect an escape or to avenge a slight or fancied wrong for he knows that his penalty can under no conditions be increased.”

4. WITHOUT DEATH PENALTY, SOCIETY SENDS A MESSAGE THAT MURDER ISN’T TERRIBLE

Jeff Jacoby, journalist, September 28, 2003.

“Execution saves innocents,” BOSTON GLOBE, accessed August 28, 2007,

“When a vicious killer is sent to the electric chair or strapped onto a gurney for a lethal injection, society is condemning his crime with a seriousness and intensity that no other punishment achieves. By contrast, a society that sentences killers to nothing worse than prison -- no matter how depraved the killing or how innocent the victim -- is a society that doesn't really think murder is so terrible.”

................
................

In order to avoid copyright disputes, this page is only a partial summary.

Google Online Preview   Download