According to Jeff Landauer and Joseph Rowland the above moral justification

for the death penalty in certain situations assumes absolute certainty regarding
the facts. The problem is that in real-life, despite overwhelming evidence, juries
sometimes make mistakes. The punishment of a criminal is prudence, but the
punishment of an innocent is a tragedy. How much are we willing to risk the
life of an innocent for the punishment of a criminal? If an innocent man is
unjustly imprisoned, he can be set free later when new evidence is discovered,
but there is no recovering from an incorrect execution.

http://www.pao.gov.ph/UserFiles/Public_Attorney's_Office/file/Death-Penalty.pdf

Death penalty is a legalized murder. Being a crime itself it cannot, and can never solve the crimes in our
society. Be that as it may, what then could curb criminality in our country? Strict and thorough enforcement
of the law is the most effective key. Coordinated cooperation of the pillars of criminal justice system could
make this effort on deterrence a whopping reality

http://prezi.com/qwe6jknvj_lz/psychological-impact-of-the-death-penalty/

http://www.importanceofphilosophy.com/Politics_DeathPenalty.html

http://www.ohchr.org/Lists/MeetingsNY/Attachments/27/moving_away_from_de
ath_penalty_web.pdf