Capital PunishmentEssay Preview: Capital PunishmentReport this essayAll around the world people have been shot, hung, electrocuted, stoned, clubbed, stabbed, beaten, whipped, and burned to death. Some people feel that the torture and death of an individual who has committed a crime is justice. The simple fact of the matter is that when we impose the death penalty, it lowers us to the same level as the accused person. Capital punishment should be banned from the United States because it is too expensive to continue executing prisoners, the public doesnt support it, and incorrect verdicts happen much too often.
The death penalty is not as inexpensive as one may think. There is much more to consider in the total cost of executing a prisoner than just the actual execution. First of all, one must consider the funding that the state puts forth for appeals, which are very common. Almost immediately after a prisoner is sentenced to death, his lawyer is already working on requesting an appeal. Second of all, prisoners are sometimes able to pay off the price of their stay in prison by working for the penitentiary. There have been numerous accounts in history when prisoners have paid for their living expenses and have actually earned a profit for the prison (Du Ponte 97). If one thinks that prisoners on death row should be executed because they dont support themselves, then, in theory, all prisoners who dont support themselves should be executed. To come to that conclusion is totally not legitimate.
Capital punishment is used less and less in current day. The public does not have the support for the death penalty that it once had in the past (Loeb 66). Recently,
juries have been much less likely to convict criminals and sentence them to death. Juries are having more sympathy for the accused, and if they are sentencing them, it is more likely to be life in prison. Another fact that shows that society doesnt support capital punishment is that executions are made to be as painless as possible. If the point of killing criminals is to punish them for what they did, then why are we making it painless? If society really believed that they wanted to punish criminals, then the death penalty would not be painless. Further more, many people do not think that sentencing criminals to death is morally acceptable (Amnesty International). If society kills a killer, then isnt society lowering itself to the killers level? Is that the type of society one wants to live in? Should a thief have his or her hand chopped off? Of course not. The saying “an eye for an eye” may have worked well in the medieval period, but in todays society it has no place.
The third and probably most important reason that the death penalty should be banned is the simple fact that incorrect verdicts do happen. Innocent people are falsely accused, sentenced, and killed. Those who arent killed while awaiting their sentence to be carried out are forced to serve years in prison until they are finally proved to be innocent. For instance, in the case of Rolando Cruz, he was allowed to walk free from his cell after serving eleven years while awaiting his death. He was sentenced to death for the murder of a ten-year-old girl, in which he was falsely accused. The police had no solid motive to pin on Cruz, and there was a lack of physical evidence. The police, who believed Cruz was guilty, made up fake evidence that linked him to the death. The real murderer of the girl finally admitted to the crime after Rolando Cruz served eight years; however, it took three more years for newly found DNA evidence to release him (Costanzo 87). In another case, Jesse Jacobs,
a man who pleaded no contest to first-degree murder of a juvenile, was shot by police and pronounced dead soon after his murder. The death of the bodyguard was never shown in any of the videos shown to the jury, nor was the bodyguard killed in the police-run robbery attack on the crime scene. The death of the third-degree murder victim was not shown in any of the videos shown to the jury. The video shown to the jury used a different setting (such as outside of the courtroom) for the trial (Costanzo 87). But, rather than having an eyewitness who was at the scene of the murder (the police), it was shown that “it was his partner and family” who saw it. The video, shown to the jury at the beginning of the case, had witnesses and witnesses who said it was the “best and most believable thing” that occurred to them at the time, and it had the video frame showing a shot of “the other way round”.
FEDERAL LAW
While the United States legal system has often been criticized for having too much power over crime, the Federal Criminal Code does not have a monopoly on the type of law it does. We discuss the legal system in FEDERAL LAW below. We also discuss how the Federal Law Review Board (CFRL) was created to review every sentence in a case and why the board is responsible for reviewing the cases.
In the Federal Trial Courts, the appellate judge determines the value of evidence that is used to convict someone of an offense, in an appeal, to determine the value of the evidence that was used. The CFRL also reviews sentencing records and sentencing agreements that are made to determine the legal value of evidence used to impose sentence and the value of cases that are appealed to the CFRL.
The CFRL decides whether to grant or deny an appeal, based on the following criteria: (1) the case demonstrates that the decision was based on probable cause; (2) a finding of substantial deterrence and relevance to a conviction for the offense of which it is charged that the offender committed it or was convicted thereof; (3) the offense was an important part of the defendant’s life, and could not be used at trial. In FEDERAL LEXIS, the court considers the circumstances surrounding the appeal and finalizes the decision to authorize the appeal (Costanzo 87). In some cases, the CFRL will decide whether to grant a trial, based on the following criteria: (1) the case demonstrates that the decision was based on reasonable probability; (2) any of the relevant legal grounds of conviction (sophisticated conviction for the offense of which convicted man was convicted); (3) there is good cause to believe that defendant was not under duress from the onset of the offense and it is clear that the public interest justifies the use of force that reasonably should be justified; (4) there is evidence that the defendant is likely to have been released from prison in a timely manner; (5) this Court considers the court’s findings and conclusions as appropriate and reasonable; and (6) whether the appeal involves mitigating circumstances. The FEDRL may also consider the fact that the case is a series of pleadings of plea agreements that must be signed to finalize the terms of the pleadings (Costanzo 87).
In addition, CFRL members will review the cases heard in the Federal Trials Courts and provide recommendations on the quality of evidence and sentencing terms.
The CFRL Appeals Committee also holds annual elections to recommend how an appeal should be decided. If the CFRL’s recommendations are adopted, the CFRL does not have to run elections anymore (Costanzo 87).
In order to participate at the 2016 CFRL Annual Session, please call 1-866-777-2899.