Death Penalty
A life for a life, or as the Old Testament states an eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth, maybe you don’t believe in this old proverbs, but many of us still do. Death penalty is still a controversial argument in classrooms, news, and or courtrooms. But who has the right to take life from another human being, right? But, what will you do if it happens to you? If your family suffers the loss of a little child that was kidnapped and then killed, or someone broke into your sister’s house and committed murdered. Would you still be okay to let this person enjoy his or her life without justice? Could you bare the pain of losing a loved one that was murdered? Most of us put ourselves in someone else’s shoes, and I do time to time, but I can not understand why someone will do such a terrible thing to another human being. Now, what would happen, if the person that was found guilty, was in the wrong place at the wrong time? It is difficult, for many of us, that support the death penalty. On the other hand, you do not want to support a law that, without enough evidence. punishes the wrong person. According to the Old Testament, the answer is eye for an eye and tooth for a tooth, someone that murders and other human being, should pay for it with their own life. But what if it was in self-defense? Will you still think that that person deserves the death penalty? or what if this is a serial killer? This individual takes pleasure in making others suffer. According to philosopher Igor Primoratz, “The value of human life is not commensurable with other values, and that consequently there is only one truly equivalent punishment for murder, namely death, does not necessarily presuppose a theistic outlook.” for instance, he/she deserves to die as well! Why would you let someone like this to serve years in prison, and then later walk out of prison on parole? In other words, provide this individual the liberty to have the opportunity to do it again. The perfect system would allow to punish anyone that takes an eye to have their own eye taken out. Many people believe that the death penalty violates the right of life, but based on this belief, a murderer didn't violate their victim’s right to life, why can perpetrators violate, but they can’t pay for what they have done? Would not you agree with that, I know for certain that many of us strongly agree that death penalty should apply in some cases. Now, take for instance the serial killers, they feel that they have the right to kill their victims in the worst possible manner that one can imagine, they even torture to inflict the most pain on another individual. For instance, son of Sam or the .44 caliber Killer, David Berkowitz in the summer of 1976 he shot 6 people dead and wounded 7 others with a .44 calibre Bulldog revolver. Eventually he was captured in August of 1977. Berkowitz confessed and he was sentenced to 25 years to life in prison for each murder. Larry Bittaker and Roy Norris, nicknamed “The Tool Box Killers” together murdered 5 young women in California in 1979, they kidnaped their victims in their van and they both raped and tortured them with their tools before killing them, in 1981 they were charged with murder, kidnapping and rape. Larry Bittaker was sentenced to death penalty and he is still on death row until today. Roy Norris was sentenced to 45 years in prison. Jeffrey Dahmer was another serial killer and sex offender known as Milwaukee Cannibal, murdered and dismembered 17 men and boys. Milwaukee Cannibal also ate parts of his victims dismembering and cooking their body parts eating them. in 1992 he was convicted of 15 murders and sentenced to 15 terms of life imprisonment. According to Stephen Nathanson, we should not treat a kidnapping with a kidnapping, therefore he says that “”An eye for an eye” once was a genuine principal, but now it is merely a Slogan. These principles provide no guidance in deciding whether murderers deserve to die.” You decide! In addition, and because some of these individuals played the insanity card, many of these serial killers were not sentenced to death penalty, even though these were the people that should have been punished with the death penalty, Further, the financial costs to try to defend these sellier killers, or just to treat them with mercy, or just to see if they are mentally ill, is becoming a burden on taxpayers. Once again, what if the murderer claims that it was in self defense? Lena Baker for instance, was an African American woman who was executed in 1945 for killing her white employer. Lena Baker stated that she killed him because she was imprisoned by her boss, mistreated and raped many times and claimed that was in self-defense. In Lena’s trial she stated many times that she was told by her boss that if she were to leave he will shoot her, Lena took his gun and shot him to death. Lena was charged with capital murder on August 14, 1944 and later convicted, by an all-white and all-male jury, convicted to be executed by electrocution in Georgia, being the only woman to be executed by electrocution in Georgia. Lena Baker was a mother of three children and worked as a maid to support her family, Ernest Knight, broke her leg, he also owned a grist mill and held her against her own will for days. At the night of the murder, Mr. Knight threatened her with an iron bar, Baker tried to escape for her life and shot him, Lena immediately reported the incident and reported that it was in self-defense. Later, Baker beg for clemency in January 1945 but the Board of Pardons denied it and on entering the execution chamber, baker sat on the electric chair and said “ What I have done, I did in Self-defense or I would have been killed myself. Where I was I could not overcome it. God has forgiven me. I have nothing against anyone. I picked cotton for Mr. Pritchett, and he has been good to me. I am ready to go. I am one in the number. I am ready to meet God. I have a very strong conscience.” Cory Jermaine Maye is a former prisoner in the state of Mississippi, Maye testified on trial that it was dark in his department when he heard someone trying to open the back door of his department. Maye stated “After I fired the shots, I heard them yell ‘police! police!’ Once I heard them I put the weapon down and slid it away. I did not know they were police officers.” Maye killed Officer Jones on the night of December 26, 2001. He was convicted of murder and sentenced to death, and according to Maye’s supporters his conviction is racial and social inequities and Maye’s acted in self-defense. So, could this be racially discriminatory on minorities when applying death penalty? According to Richard C. Dieter there is considerable evidence that death penalty is discriminatory and only given iron arm to minority. In 1990 the U.S. General Accounting officer found a pattern evidence indicating racial disparities in the charging, sentencing, and imposition of the death penalty only on minorities. According to the Death Penalty Information Center, half of the people on death row are from minority groups that only represents 12% of the country’s population. In a National poll of jurors, over 67% of black jurors agreed that blacks and hispanics are unfairly given the death penalty more often than whites. According to the Database of Death Penalty, Florida has never executed a white person for killing a black or hispanic person. What are the chances that you could be taken to jail because you were in the wrong place at the wrong time? Sadly, for many people this has been the scenario, been in the wrong place at the wrong time. Or maybe mistakenly confused because you could look like someone that has committed a murder or not even that, but just because you are in the same ethnicity group. Rolando Cruz and Alejandro Hernandez were sentenced to death for the murder of a ten year old Jeanine Nicarico. Alejandro Hernandez was dismissed in 1995, who was released on bond and charges were subsequently dropped on december the 8th of the same year. Another man, Brian Dugan, who had already pleaded guilty to two rapes and murders, including the 8 year old girl, authorized his lawyer to tell his persecutors that he killed Nicarico. Cruz was convicted at a second trial in 1990, at which Dugan did not testify, even though Brian’s DNA was linked to the murder of Jeanine Nicarico. Rolando was convicted to the death penalty despite the fact that the police had no physical evidence linking Hernandez and Cruz to the crime. Ruben Cantu, Texas convicted and executed in 1985. Ruben Cantu was 17 years old when charged with capital murder for the shooting death of a San Antonio man during the attempt of robbery. Ruben had persistently proclaim that his innocence, Juan Moreno who was wounded in the robbery testified against Cantu, later stating that the only reason why he had testified against Cantu is because he was been pressured by the prosecutor and the police, but Cantu was not the man they were looking and it was bad to blame someone that it was there at the time of the shooting. In Addition David Garza, Cantu’s co-defendant during his 1985 trial, recently signed a sworn affidavit saying that he allowed Cantu to be executed even though he wasn’t with him at the time of the killing. A Chicago Tribune investigation released in 2006 A Chicago Tribune investigation released in 2006 revealed groundbreaking evidence that Texas may have executed an innocent man in 1989. The defendant, Carlos DeLuna, was executed for the fatal stabbing of Texas convenience store clerk Wanda Lopez in 1983. New evidence uncovered by reporters Maurice Possley and Steve Mills casts doubt on DeLuna’s guilt and points towards another man, Carlos Hernandez, who had a record of similar crimes and repeatedly confessed to the murder. A news piece aired on ABC’s "World News Tonight” also covered this story. The new evidence casted strong doubt on DeLuna’s guilt. This is the fourth investigation in the past two years pointing to the execution of a probably innocent man. Similar questions have been raised in the cases of Cameron Todd Willingham and Ruben Cantu in Texas, and Larry Griffin in Missouri. In conclusion, racial bias has always been a significant issue in death penalty debates. There have been many careful statistical studies indicating that race plays a significant role in determining who lives and who dies. Moreover, the errors in capital cases are not mere “legal technicalities.” The possibilities that someone gets sentence because racial discrimination are very high and that an innocent person could be executed are also very high, whether you support or are against the death penalty. Once again many of us who support death penalty this could change your thinking, why will a serial killer would not be sentence to death but someone that kills in self defence or innocent do get the death penalty. The system is broken and if minorities are getting the iron arm and sentenced to death, is not just. The moral is that every sin should be weighted on a scale, but if the scale is not equally balanced for everyone, and it weighs more for the minorities, we should abolish the death penalty! References http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/ http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/executed-possibly-innocent http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/documents/FactSheet.pdf http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/04/28/innocent-death-penalty-study_n_5228854.html http://list25.com/25-most-evil-serial-killers-of-the-20th-century/ |