The Death Penalty, Right or Wrong?
... to delay or nullify his execution failed. Coleman's case was marked with many of the circumstances found in other cases where the defendant was eventually cleared. Were Coleman still incarcerated; his friends and attorneys would have a strong incentive to resolve these questions. But because Coleman is dead, further inquiry into the crime for which he was convicted is extremely unlikely. In 1990, Jesse Tafero was executed in Florida. He had been convicted in 1976 along with his wife, Sonia Jacobs, for murdering a state trooper. In 1981 Jacobs' death sentence was reduced on appeal to life imprisonment, and 11 years later her conviction was vacated by a federal court. The evidence on which Tafero and Jacobs had been convicted and sentenced was identical; it consisted mainly of the perjured testimony of an ex-convict who turned state's witness in order to avoid a death sentence. Had Tafero been alive in 1992, he no doubt would have been released along with Jacobs.41 Tafero's death is probably the clearest case in recent years of the execution of an innocent person. (Manderson, 1999, pgs 57-59) The idea of putting another human to death is hard to completely imagine. I know it must be painful, dehumanizing, and sickening. Many people will tell you that they are in favor of the death penalty. It is what some criminals deserve. An eye for an eye is what some say about the death penalty. I wonder if they would feel the same way if they had had to witness one of these executions: April 22, 1983. Alabama. John Evans. After the first jolt of electricity, sparks and Death Penalty 6 flames erupted from the electrode attached to his leg. The electrode then burst from the strap holding it in place and caught on fire. Smoke and sparks came out from under the hood. Two physicians entered the chamber and found a heartbeat. The electrode was reattached to his leg. More smoke and burning flesh. Again the doctors found a heartbeat. Ignoring the pleas of Evans's lawyer, Russ Canan (202-393-7676), a third jolt was applied. The execution took 14 minutes and left Evans's body charred and smoldering. (Radelet, 1995, p.1) March 13, 1985. Texas. Stephen Peter Morin. Had to probe both arms and legs with needles for 45 minutes before they found the vein. (Radelet, 1995, p.1) Often times, jail sentencing does not do justice to murder. Sometimes, crime is so cruel that there is no realistic punishment for it. There are too many victims out there that have suffered and their attacker received a painless life sentence. Painless, when comparing to the horrifying murders that happen everyday. So many murderers are convicted of man slaughter and only receive years in jail. Their victims feel the pain, but imagine the pain and sorrow the families and friends of the victims feel. I am speaking now from personal experience. When I was around ten years old my best friend’s brother, Danny, was murdered. He and a friend, Jim, had gone on a camping vacation to Florida. They made the mistake of picking up two hitchhikers. While Danny and Jim were sleeping the hitchhikers shot them both in the head and dumped their bodies along the highway. The murderers were captured, tried, and convicted. They both received twenty year sentences. Which I don’t understand, because they killed the two boys in cold blood. However, both of the murderers were paroled before seven years were up. Do I think they paid for their Death Penalty 7 crime? Absolutely not. Danny was only nineteen and Jim was twenty-two, they will never get to live their lives the way they wanted to, so why should the men who murdered them be free to live theirs? My friend’s mother was never been the same person again. Part of her died along with Danny. She was a shadow of the woman she once had been. My friend and her other brothers and sisters learned not to speak of him. It was just too painful for them. Now it’s like he didn’t exist, but his murderers do. Do I feel like the death penalty would have been justified in this case? I honestly don’t know. Maybe then Danny’s mother would have had some closure instead of the knowledge that her son’s murderers were walking free. But maybe it wouldn’t have changed a thing about the way she felt. Taking two more lives wasn’t going to bring Danny back. A survey by the New York Times established that in the last 20 years the murder rate had been 48 to 101 percent higher in states with the death penalty than in those without it. Murder rates in 10 of the 12 states without the death penalty are below the national average. People who have been using drugs or alcohol, or are riveted by fear or anger are not likely to be thinking about possible execution for committing a murder. (Amnesty International USA: Death Penalty) Defense of life and defense of the state may be held to justify, in some cases, the taking of life by state officials; for example, when law-enforcement officials must act immediately to save their own lives or those of others or when a country is engaged in armed conflict. Even in such situations the use of lethal force is surrounded by internationally accepted standards of human rights and humanitarian law to inhibit abuse. The death penalty, however, is not an act of defense against an immediate threat Death Penalty 8 to life. It is the premeditated killing of a prisoner for the purpose of punishment - a purpose that can be met by other means. The cruelty of the death penalty is apparent not only in the execution but in the time spent under sentence of death, during which the prisoner is constantly contemplating his or her own death at the hands of the state. This cruelty cannot be justified, no matter how cruel the crime of which the prisoner has been convicted. The inhumanity of the death penalty extends beyond the prisoner to include the prisoner's family Over the centuries, laws and public attitudes relating to torture have evolved. It is no longer permissible to use thumbscrews or the rack as legally accepted means of interrogation and punishment. Attitudes toward the death penalty are also changing, and bringing about abolition requires courageous political leadership, leadership that will be exercised in the defense of human rights. The requirement of respect for human rights has to include the abolition of the death penalty. It is not possible for a government to respect human rights and retain the death penalty at the same time. I uphold the following: A Declaration of Life I, the undersigned, being of sound and disposing mind and memory, do hereby in the presence of witnesses make this Declaration of Life; I believe that the killing of one human being by another is morally wrong. I believe it is morally wrong for any state or other governmental entity to take the life of a human being for any reason I Death Penalty 9 believe that capital punishment is not a deterrent to crime and serves only the purpose of revenge. THEREFORE, I hereby declare that should I die as a result of a violent crime, I request that the person or persons found guilty of homicide for my killing not be subject to or put in jeopardy of the death penalty under any ...