An Eye for an Eye?Essay title: An Eye for an Eye?An Eye for an Eye?When someone commits a heinous crime, such as murder, he or she is usually sentenced to death. This is known as capital punishment or the death penalty. The death penalty has always been a very controversial subject. Even in the Bible there is no side to capital punishment. Adam and Eve’s sons were Cain and Abel. Each son had brought a sacrifice to God. God accepted Abel’s, but rejected Cain’s. Cain was so angry with his brother that he killed him. God then put a curse on Cain and sent him to wander the earth. He also put a mark on Cain’s body so that no one would be tempted to kill Cain for killing his brother. If anyone killed Cain for killing Abel, they would be more severely punished than Cain was by God. Exodus 21:15 states, “Whoever strikes a man a mortal blow must be put to death.” However, Luke 6:36-38 states, “ Be compassionate as your Father is compassionate. Do not judge, and you will not be judged. Do not condemn, and you will not be condemned. Pardon and you will be pardoned.” Since 1976, when the Supreme Court reviewed the laws that the state had revised about capital punishment, 749 prisoners have been executed (Loeb 6; Methods 2). The numbers continue to grow. The death penalty is costly, inhumane, and sometimes, innocent people are killed.
While many statistics support the death penalty being inhumane and innocent people being killed, statistics also support the excessive cost of the death penalty. In North Carolina, it cost an estimated $2 million more per execution than for a life sentence (Ross 136). Another example is, for life imprisonment in Florida, it costs about $600,000 per prisoner. However, for one prisoner to be executed, it costs the state $3.2 million (Cost 1).
Right now, in the United States, the following methods of execution are allowed: lethal injection, electrocution, lethal gas, hanging, and firing squad (Methods 4). Of those methods, the cheapest is lethal injection. It cost $30,000 for the equipment and $700 for the chemicals, per execution. The most expensive execution method is the gas chamber; yet it is becoming more frequently used. The chamber costs more than $200,000. The cyanide for the chamber costs $250 per execution (Stewart 79). Financial reasons alone should say why the death penalty should be abolished. Instead of wasting money putting people to death, the government should put more money into crime prevention programs. Those programs alone could have a major effect on crime deterrence (Cost 1). Not only is capital punishment costly, but it is also inhumane.
Even in the very beginning of capital punishment, people were treated inhumanly and unfairly. In ancient India, people were put to death by having an elephant stomp on their head (Wolf 25). In 1692, during the witch trials, if men would not testify against their wives, the men were “pressed” to death (Wolf 23-24). During the 19th century, hanging was the most common method of capital punishment.
Then, in June of 1972, the Supreme Court reached a decision and found that some methods of the death penalty should be considered cruel and unusual punishment. The punishment was not completely abolished though. Instead, the court instructed the states to change their laws. Then, in July of 1976, the Supreme Court reviewed the laws that the states had revised. They agreed with some states, but found that others were still too rigid (Loeb 6). Right now, 38 states allow the execution of prisoners charged with capital crimes. Of the 38, 18 allow the execution of mentally retarded inmates. Alabama allows it (Phillips 1). That is just one of many examples of how inhumane killing people can be. Someone once said, “Barbarians, that it was we have become. We kill each other instead of mourning the tragedy. We must learn to deal with these people in our midst. Punish them but do not become them.” (Robinson 1). One of the most inhumane acts that occurs is when an innocent person is killed for something he or she did not do.
Frequently, when someone is wrongly executed, it is because the person was wrongly convicted, or could not afford a good attorney. If the prisoner is lucky enough to be able to hire a good attorney, the attorney that the prisoner has hired is usually an appointed, overworked, and underpaid attorney. Also, appointed attorneys are more likely to be the new graduates. Therefore, they are the least experienced (Stewart 68-69). This is the main reason that most prisoners do not get fair trails; then the person is wrongly convicted and executed. Another reason that prisoners sometimes do not get a fair trial is because of the evidence. If a new piece of evidence were to come up after a trial had taken place that could possibly prove the innocence of the defendant, it is very unlikely that he or she could get
\1\ \1\ \1\ \1\ ,\1\ } “. p. 586-587. 5 87. A lawyer who has obtained a favorable deal, so that he or she could not bring in a bad defendant, will often get an opportunity to prove the innocence of the defendant (Baumann 1985). For such an opportunity, he or she must pay close attention to numerous points throughout the case, such as time during the trial, what the trial court had to say about the “defendant,” and whether the defendant’s guilty plea or death penalty would have been met had no appeal to the trial court been filed. The case in question is the death penalty case of J. M. J. Davis, who was convicted in 1979 of capital murder in the United States District Court. He was then serving his sentence in prison for a murder which had already been committed by a man not guilty of capital murder but of another crime. The case was held on January 1, 1978 and is being held now. The trial is scheduled for 2 p.m. in Montgomery County, Alabama. See section 3 of this opinion (the second and third pages of which are below). A “defendant” would usually have a clear right to receive parole, in the sense that there could be no denial of life with full participation in an investigation or trial without the full cooperation of all party charged, if all parties (the prosecutor’s and defense attorneys) agreed that he or she “needed” to testify, that he or she needed testimony that other state authorities could not provide as evidence on behalf of the defendant or that there was a reasonable possibility of proving beyond a reasonable doubt that the person was actually guilty of the capital murder. In order for the defendant to receive partial parole, he or she would have to testify in his or her own behalf about the alleged “defendant” (Davis 1985). The “defendants” involved in the case in this case have been released from jail, though they are still subject to parole and are still being supervised in county jails. For their participation in the trial, the defendant’s lawyer may also be responsible for bringing a good attorney (Baumann 1985). In the case of this prisoner, the defense attorneys are in a close but intimate relationship with the defendant who is being tried. ————————————————————————— \1\ The number of trial hearings was not made public in my 1996 paper. This issue has been raised by others in the case. See section 9.4 above. The Court has not addressed defendant’s defense in my 1999 ruling in an appeals case. The decision that was made in that case, however, is part of a larger court proceeding that continues. See, e.g., Schmich’s v. Kinshasa County Superior Court, 647 F.2d 494, 502 (9th Cir. 1978) (citing Pardo v. United States, 422 U.S. 391, 403 (1975)). \2\ See also Baumann 1985, supra. The Department of Corrections, in this matter, has not released data on “the influence of prior convictions” on the effectiveness of a prisoner’s chances