The Death Penalty

The Death Penalty

Saba Tolliver

Jim Pope
Correctional Systems and Practices CJ-4415-XZIA
February 19, 2012

The Death Penalty

2
Introduction

Taking the life of another human being, primarily when speaking in terms of corrections, has
always been a hugely controversial topic. There will always be a group of individuals that profoundly
believe that taking the life of another under any circumstance is absolutely wrong. On the other hand,
there are groups of individuals that believe that if you take the life of another person in cold blood, you
should undoubtedly face that very same fate. Regardless of your stance on the issue, both sides possess
very interesting and plausible points.

The Death Penalty

The opposing side of the issue may feel that there may stand a chance that the inmate actually
may be innocent of the crime he/she was accused of. So therefore, the element of exoneration has
completely been taken out of the equation if a death row inmate is killed and its later discovered that
he/she did not commit the crime they were once accused of. However, the advocates of the death penalty
feel very strongly about taking the life of the accused in place of the life they took from their victim.
Society exacts an appropriate measure of revenge (an eye for an eye), and victims families can be
reassured that the murderer received a just punishment and will not kill others. (Clear, Cole, and Reisig,
2011) Both sides can argue great points in defending their particular stance on death penalty sentencing,
but I personally cant take on a particular position for one side of the argument or the other.

The

argument that if someone takes the life of another human being automatically and necessarily warrants a
death sentence; however, there are some crimes that have been committed that are so egregious and
sickening that the only seemingly rightful decision for that defendant is to issue a death sentence.
Opponents contend that it is morally wrong for the state to take a life; it has no deterrent value and is
inherently discriminatory. Supporters counter that retribution justifies the taking of a life and that the
death penalty does deter; they are generally unconcerned or unconvinced about allegations of
discriminatory impact. (Neubauer, David, 2008)
Most opposers of the death penalty see it as an unjust punishment because of course a deceased
person cant prove their innocence, nor can they ever be exonerated. That is why since the scientific
breakthrough of DNA testing welcomingly carved its way into our world of law and justice in the late
1990s, there have been hundreds of death row inmates that were just days from being executed for a
crime that they did not commit, but were later pardoned. DNA factually proved their innocence and
inmates that were able to prove their innocence through those tests were set free. Guilty of some kind of
crime at some point in time, maybe, but not the crime that they stood trial and later sentenced to death. A
former death row inmate by the name of Earl Washington Jr. grew up extremely poor in rural Virginia.
He was one of five children that grew up in a household with parental drinking and constant violence. As
a young boy he was diagnosed with having brain damage and was considered mentally retarded. He

The Death Penalty

failed school and dropped out when he was fifteen. In 1983 Washington was accused and later confessed
to multiple rapes and murders of white women and regardless of the massive inconsistencies and
discrepancies that existed within the case, Washington was ultimately sentenced to death. Washingtons
confession, according to the defense, was coerced by police. Washington went on to serve 18 years in
prison on death row, and finally on February 12, 2001, he was exonerated after DNA testing proved that
he didnt take part in any of the murders or rapes he was accused of committing. Washingtons story is
definitely an eye opener and it certainly helps us to understand that yes, almost every convict that is doing
time in a penitentiary claims they are innocent, but there are actual inmates that really are wrongly
convicted. The actual assailant in the murders that Washington was accused was never brought to justice.
More than 3,000 prisoners are under a sentence of death. Death row inmates are predominately male,
one percent are female and disproportionately nonwhite (44%); most have never completed high school
and have a prior felony conviction for a violent offense. (Neubauer, David, 2008)
Those who advocate the death penalty claim there is no viable alternative that provides equal
protection for society. They would also argue that the seriousness of the crime requires the maximum
penalty. (Allen, Harry, 2007) The fact that there are truly individuals that commit a crime that is so
gruesome and unbelievable in nature that it shakes society to its very core is undeniable. For example,
the forever infamous Jeffrey Dahmer case. Dahmer sought out his young adolescent and unsuspecting
male victims and brutally tortured, raped and ultimately murdered them. Dahmer also placed them in the
freezer to preserve their flesh for future consumption, like we would normally do with a package of meat
brought home fresh from the grocer. Dahmer randomly chose his victims and lured them into his home
only to later do the unthinkable. Dahmer was an evil and twisted serial murderer and if there was anyone
that deserved the death penalty it was Jeffery Dahmer. Dahmer went on for years preying on and
murdering young boys, until citizens began complaining about the foul odor coming from his residence.
Once police made contact with him at this residence and they were able to search the premises, they
discovered frozen human remains. Among the remains were whole heads from his young victims that had
been decapitated and placed there for his own sick recognition and/or gratification. In some cases he

The Death Penalty

even kidnapped his young victims and held them captive while they were bound at their wrists and ankles
until he brutally murdered them. Unlike Earl Washington, Dahmer committed a much more horrendous
crime than Washington was accused of, but he was given life without the chance of parole. I believe that
the rapes and murders that took place in Washingtons case are just as horrific and important as the
victims in Dahmers case, but Dahmers victims were just small children and didnt really possess the
strength to fight off their attacker like those adult women may have had a chance to do. Instead of a life
sentence, he should have shared the same fate as the young children he so brutally murdered. In a sense,
he did eventually share that fate when he was killed by another inmate a year after he was sentenced to
spend the rest of his natural life in a maximum-security prison.

The decision in whether a convicted

criminal is given the death penalty or given life without parole is the consensus of the judge and jury. The
underlined issue with sentencing criminals across the nation is the inconsistent sentencing methods used
by the judge and jury, or should I say lack of a uniform method for determining sentencing.
Advocates of the death penalty dont always see the likelihood of stories like Earl Washington,
who was nine days from losing his life for something that he didnt do. Those that favor the death penalty
argue that capital punishment has a deterrent effect, and increasing the probabilities of being executed
tends to reduce the crime rate. To give someone a life sentence of incarceration for murder diminishes
the worth of the victim, is costly to society, and does not lessen the possibility that the offender will do
further harm either while incarcerated or on parole. (Clear, Cole, Reisig, 2011) Some retentionists argue
that Christian scriptures mandate the heinous crimes, because any other punishment would denigrate both
the values that crime violates and the victim. Secondly, some rententionists argue that there are killers on
death row who, if not executed but eventually released, would continue to kill other victims. Case
studies of certain offenders whose death sentences were commuted to life in prison and were
subsequently paroled only to kill again are used as examples that prove their dangerousness. This
position is sometimes called the mad dog argument in favor of the death penalty; the debate continues.
(Robinson, Bruce, 2002) I completely agree with the idea that if there is a violent criminal set free into
society, they will offend again and next time they offend they may commit an even more horrific crime.

The Death Penalty

6
Conclusion

I propose that serious changes are made within the judicial system as it relates to sentencing,
particularly to reflect changes to whom the death sentence is to be administered to. If a criminal has been
convicted of a capital offense he or she should not be sentenced to death unless his or her case was
founded upon pure physical factual evidence such as DNA, fingerprints, and/or confessions. With that
being the criteria, it would drastically decrease the complaints and exoneration of innocent persons.

The Death Penalty

Works Cited
Allen, Harry. (2007). National and international corrections. (p. 35). Upper Saddle River, New
Jersey: Pearson Prentice Hall.
Clear, T. R., Cole, G. F., & Reisig, M. D. (2011). American corrections. (9th ed., pp. 544-563).
Belmont, CA: Wadsworth Pub Co.
Neubauer, David. (2008). America's courts and the criminal justice system. (pp. 45-46).
Belmont, CA.: Thomas Wadsworth Publishing.
Robinson, Bruce. (2002). Capital punishment: The death penalty. (p. 4). Ontario, Canada:
Ontario Consultants.