|
Week 4b Readings
|
Week 4b: The Death Penalty
Reading:
One of the most controversial and complex mechanisms of the American system of criminal justice is the use of the death penalty as a form of punishment. Various ideologies of punishment are used in an attempt to justify, or argue against, the use of the death penalty by the criminal justice system when it comes to rendering punishment. The goals/justifications of punishment that help explain the administration of the death penalty include retribution, deterrence, and incapacitation. Supporters of the concept of retribution explain the punishment of death as the “right” of the state on behalf of the victim to seek justice. On the other hand, opponents of the death penalty feel that the government does not have the right to take a life. Those who believe in deterrence attest that the death penalty has a deterrent effect on other members of society (i.e., general deterrence); however, opponents of the sanction argue that the death penalty exerts no specific or general deterrent effects. Incapacitation serves as one basis of support for the death penalty since the offender will no longer be able to commit future crimes. This point is difficult to argue, yet many opponents of the death penalty feel that the offenders convicted of capital crimes can be incapacitated with a sentence of life without the possibility of parole (LWOP) more humanely and without the possibility of executing an innocent person. Today, five methods are used to carry out the death sentence in jurisdictions that utilize the penalty in the United States. These methods include: (1) hanging, (2) the gas chamber, (3) the firing squad, (4) the electric chair, and (5) lethal injection. Most states offer more than one method of execution. In Florida, inmates have a choice between the electric chair and lethal injection. Nevertheless, it is important to note that lethal injection is the predominant method used today throughout the jurisdictions that use the death penalty in the United States. Public executions were in effect until the 1830s. During the Progressive Period, the carrying out of the death sentence was taken behind prison walls. Despite the fact the forms and circumstances of executions administered by the state have changed, the arguments and controversies surrounding this complex issue date back as far as the seventeenth century. Is the sanction of death a just and fair punishment? The selection by Waldo and Paternoster (Chapter 14 of Blomberg and Cohen) attempts to address this question by taking a multifaceted approach to the examination of the machinery of death. Their key arguments are summarized below. There are various arguments that either support or oppose the use of the death penalty in the United States. Some scholars and commentators have noted that arguments tend to be of a moral or utilitarian basis. Opponents of the death penalty base their arguments in the idea that the state has no right to take a life, and thus it is wrong for the government to do so. This issue is especially salient in light of the findings that many defense attorneys who represent offenders charged with capital crimes have been deemed ineffective (some have even been disbarred, suspended, or professionally disciplined). Opponents also point out that mistakes have been made, and discriminatory factors are evident in that minorities, such as African Americans, are disproportionately misrepresented on death row (see the cases detailed by Waldo and Paternoster). DNA evidence suggests that there are in fact innocent people on death row in America. In addition to the above points, opponents also claim that the death penalty has no deterrent effect on specific offenders as well as the general population. Abolitionists have also raised the issue of the enormous cost of the death sanction. For example, it costs the state of Florida approximately 3.2 million a year to house one inmate on Florida’s death row. Why is this sanction so costly? The death penalty is not costly in terms of housing and feeding a death row inmate. Many resources devoted to death penalty inmates are allocated to court costs for appeals. On the other hand, supporters of the death penalty strongly believe that the sanction deters specific offenders and the general population because the harsh and final nature of the punishment instills a fear in people and stigmatizes crimes that are codified as capital in nature in specific jurisdictions. Supporters also claim that a retributive and incapacitative function is served, and these goals cannot be met through a sentence of life without the possibility of parole. Some advocates of the death penalty even claim that it is impossible to execute innocent persons because of the lengthy and meticulous appeals process. Nevertheless, human decisions are involved in the meting out and delivery of the death sanction; thus, error is possible. In turn, Waldo and Paternoster have noted that perhaps the most humane way to reform the machinery of death is to abolish it. The Death Watch Team In Chapter 35 of Latessa et al., Johnson details the work of correctional officers who comprise the execution team. This team includes highly disciplined and efficient correctional staff, with each member of the team taking part so as not to emotionally overload/burden the person who “pulls the switch.” These correctional officers seek to carry out the procedure properly and professionally. Many members of this team are actively involved with the inmate during his or her last 24 hours. The “high level” officers of the team are chosen by the warden to take part in the administration of the death sentence, as each officer is responsible for a different duty after the inmate enters the death chamber, thus serving to diffuse the responsibility inherent to such a task. |