Posted by Dave on 10/21/05 at 12:00:00 pm
Categories: Capital Punishment, Crime and Justice

People say that executing criminals does not take away from their dignity-- if it is done with dignity. But the fact of the matter is that whether you're waiting to die by lethal injection-- waiting to for the poison to flow down your veins--or waiting for a bullet, or waiting for a rope, or waiting for gas, or waiting for the electric current--there is no difference: there is no lesser or greater dignity in dying. The practice of the death penalty is the practice of torture. And by the time people I have been with finally climb into the chair to be killed, they have died a thousand times already because of their anticipation of the final horror.

--Sister Helen Prejean

This is as good of a time as any to give a brief explanation for my opposition to the death penalty. If any of you have read through my many posts and comments regarding the death penalty, you should have an idea why I oppose what I consider to be a very evil practice. There are many, many reasons to be opposed to the death penalty; while in turn (at least in my mind) there are very few reasons to support such a practice. I will address a few of the main reasons for my opposition to the death penalty. I am going to break this into two different posts - one on the death penalty in practice and one on the death penalty in theory. This post is long, but please read the entire thing.

[More:]

To start of with, the use of capital punishment claims innocent lives. It is clear that there have been many innocent people convicted to death row:

Since 1973, more than 115 people have been released from death rows throughout the country due to evidence of their wrongful convictions. In 2003 alone, 10 innocent defendants were released from death row.

While the numbers above are people who have later been exonerated (and have had their lives spared), it is reasonable to believe that there are still significant numbers of people that have been innocent when executed. It is very rare that one is found to be innocent once an execution occurs, mainly due to the fact that people stop trying to prove innocence. A 1987 study has found that 23 people in the last century have been innocent when they were executed, with 8 more innocent people being executed since then. And these are only the cases that have found evidence after death.

Just recently a woman who had been executed in Georgia 60 years ago was "pardoned". A little late, don't you think?

When one in seven people sentenced to death are found later to be innocent, do you truly believe that more innocent people are not going to die?

Some attempt to support capital punishment by using the argument that they are "on the sides of innocents". But this argument quickly breaks down, because innocent people are dying. Some see this as "acceptable", as I talked about a couple of months ago. This is from Kent Scheidegger, legal director of the Criminal Justice Legal Foundation:

I wouldn't say that 20 or 30 cases out of 8,000 constitutes a broken system.

So let me get this straight. You are perfectly okay with 20-30 innocent people dying because it is a small percentage? Don't get me wrong. I understand that 20-30 people "only" make up 2-4% of the 8,000. But does that mean those 20-30 innocent deaths are inconsequential?

Mr. Scheidegger is perfectly okay with 20-30 innocent people dying in order to quest his thirst for "justice" and vengeance. But I will say this - a small percentage does not equate with an unbroken system. If we are killing any innocent people, the system is broken.

Of course, the problems with the death penalty do not stop there. Not only does the death penalty kill innocent people, but it also is incredibly racially biased. For information on this you can see both the National Coalition to Abolish the Death Penalty or Amnesty International. Examine these two figures, based on numbers just in California:

This is just one clear example of the racial bias that is inherent within the administration of the death penalty. But it does not stop there:

In a 1990 report, the non-partisan U.S. General Accounting Office found "a pattern of evidence indicating racial disparities in the charging, sentencing, and imposition of the death penalty." The study concluded that a defendant was several times more likely to be sentenced to death if the murder victim was white. This confirms the findings of many other studies that, holding all other factors constant, the single most reliable predictor of whether someone will be sentenced to death is the race of the victim.

Senator Russ Feingold has this to say:

We simply cannot say we live in a country that offers equal justice to all Americans when racial disparities plague the system by which our society imposes the ultimate punishment.

A recent study that I talked about here gave more evidence of the inherent bias within the death penalty. Here are some of the results:

The murder of a white person, especially in nonurban counties, is far more likely to result in a California death sentence than urban crimes against minorities, according to a new study.

Death penalty opponents say this new evidence that race and geography dictate how the state metes out capital punishment proves the system is skewed and must be halted at least until it is fixed.

White person kills a black person? Less jail.
Black person kills a black person? More jail.
White person kills a white person? Even more jail, possibly death.
Black person kills a white person? Death.

Do you see the problem here?

Would you be okay if you wrote a paper for a class that was equally as good as a classmate, yet you received a lower grade for absolutely no reason? Would you be okay if you got pulled over along with another driver for speeding, and the other driver was let off with a warning because he was driving a $100,000 car, while you received a ticket in your $10,000 car?

If you are not okay with these situations, why would you be okay with some receiving a death sentence in an unfair and arbitrary manner? Let me give you just a few facts:

• Ninety-five percent of death row inmates cannot afford their own attorney.
• Prosecutors seek the death penalty far more frequently when the victim of a homicide is white than when the victim is African-American or of another ethnic/racial origin.
• Co-defendants charged with committing the same crime often receive different punishments, where one defendant may receive a death sentence while another receives prison time.
• Approximately two percent of those convicted of crimes that make them eligible for the death penalty actually receive a death sentence.
• Each prosecutor decides whether or not to seek the death penalty. Local politics, the location of the crime, plea bargaining, and pure chance affect the process and make it a lottery of who lives and who dies.
• Since the U.S. Supreme Court reinstated the death penalty in 1976, 80% of all executions have taken place in the South. The Northeast accounts for less than 1% of executions.

Do you see the ramifications of the facts above? Currently the system of capital punishment in this country is completely arbitrary - two people committing the same crime together may get different punishments. Those with money are significantly more likely to not receive a death sentence. On top of that, the income difference creates a drastic difference in the quality of defense. Most court appointed attorneys in capital cases are inexperienced, overworked, and underpaid. Many do not have the time needed to provide an adequate defense for their client. Some have even been known to sleep through trials. All because the client cannot afford their own attorney.

Outside of the economic issues involved, the arbitrary nature of the administration of death sentences gets even worse. Contrary to what some people think, the District Attorney has complete freedom to choose what sentence to request in a capital case. And this decision is a capricious one, with only 2% of those eligible receiving the sentence of death. Often times the decision is for political/publicity reasons. If a case has received significant media attention, this will impact the decision of the D.A.'s office. And of course the region impacts what decision is made. If you saw the last fact above, 80% of all executions have occurred in the south. A person can commit the same crime on the west coast and be significantly less likely to receive death than a person in Texas. Some will write this off as "states' rights", yet this still highlights the completely arbitrary manner that the death penalty is administered.

A recent study in Ohio included the following findings:

Offenders facing a death penalty charge for killing a white person were two times more likely to go to death row than if they had killed a black victim. Death sentences were handed down in 18 percent of cases where the victims were white, compared with 8.5 percent of cases where victims were black.

Nearly half of the 1,936 capital punishment cases ended with a plea bargain. That includes 131 cases in which the crime involved two or more victims. Twenty-five people had killed at least three victims.

In Cuyahoga County, a Democratic stronghold, just 8 percent of offenders charged with a capital crime received a death sentence. In conservative Hamilton County, 43 percent of capital offenders ended up on death row.

It is fairly clear - a sentence of death is dispensed in an incredibly arbitrary manner that unfairly targets the poor, minorities, and those in certain regions. It also is not consistent. Are you really okay with that?

Some studies:

• The cost of executing a prisoner in Kansas has been found to be approximately 70% higher than a non-death penalty prisoner.
• The cost of executing a prisoner in Tennessee has been found to be approximately 48% higher than a non-death penalty prisoner.

You can read more information here.

Often one will hear an argument that these are murderers and that our tax dollars should be not paying for them to live in prison. But in reality the cost of keeping a prisoner a life off of death row is significantly cheaper than getting them to death row, keeping them there, and then killing them.

As I said in the beginning of this post, this is just an example of some of the reasons to oppose capital punishment in practice. But it does not end there. Make sure you read about why we must also oppose capital punishment in theory.

Please...discuss your thoughts about this information in the comments. But please limit your comments to what is relevant to this post.

[cross posted at Street Prophets]

9 comments | Permalink