Battaglia 1

Gianna Battaglia

Ms. Billotte

Academic English 12

09 October 2020

The Death Penalty, an Unnecessary Evil

The death penalty is the irreversible punishment of execution that is used for only the most

extreme crimes, such as murder (aggravated, violent or premeditated), kidnapping (that results in

death), drug trafficking, and treason. The main technique of the death penalty is lethal injection.

While there are other options such as; electrocution, gas inhalation, hanging, and a firing squad.

The death penalty has too many inconsistancies that make enforcing it biased and unfair to people

who commit the same crimes and get a less extreme senetencing. Many people still sit on death

row today and it is a cruel and unusual punishment for an individual who could potentially be

innocent. The death penalty should be abolished due to the possibilty of executing an innocent

life, the bias, and the unnecessary costs.

The death penalty is an outdated and flawed punishment that is hardly used anymore.

Capital Punishment addresses the fact that, “The United States is one of the few nations that

punishes some crimes by death and the only constitutional democracy that does so. The Federal

Criminal Code imposes capital punishment for treason and some murders, as do the criminal codes

of approximately two-thirds of the states” (Graber 196). The United States is one of the only

places that actually uses the death penalty as a form of punishment. Other areas of the world have

grown from this and realized the cruel ideas behind capital punishment. Capital Punishment also

emphazies that, “Most northern state legislatures abolished capital punishment for crimes other than
 Battaglia 2

murder. Michigan became the first state to abolish capital punishment altogether in 1846. A few

states followed” (Graber 197). More states are realizing that the death penalty is wrong. The

northern states of the United States see the wrong in it, while other states still see it as a reasonable

form of punishment.

Capital punishment is used for specific and horrible crimes but there is room for mistakes

within these decisions. Confess or Die: Why Threatening a Suspect with the Death Penalty should

Render Confessions Involutary starts off with, “First, execution is irrevocable. Second, the death

penalty is the most severe punishment imposed by the criminal justice system,” (Morehouse 531+).

This shows that the death penalty is the highest and an irreversible punishment for those who

commit a crime. The court is given complete power over an individual’s life while there is room

for there to be error in this decision. Crime and Punishment explains that, “State and federal laws

vary; however, some capital offenses include aggravated murder, or murder that is premeditated

and violent; kidnapping that results in the victim’s death; certain high-level drug trafficking–related

offenses; and treason” (“Capital Punishment”). Capital punishment is saved for only a select few

crimes. The death penalty should just be abolished to elimate any room for error when coming to

these decisions for these select crimes.

False confessions are very likely due to interrogation tactics. Confess or Die: Why

Threatening a Suspect with the Death Penalty should Render Confessions Involuntary makes the

case of the Norfolk Four, “Because the crime at issue involved the rape and murder of a young

woman, all four men faced the death penalty under Virginia law if convicted. The police used this

to their advantage and threatened the men with the death penalty during the interrogations. The

police told them that the only way to avoid the death penalty was to confess. Under the threat of
 Battaglia 3

the death penalty, the Norfolk Four falsely confessed to a crime they did not commit” (Morehouse

531+). The Norfolk Four were found innocent about twenty years later. They were forced to

confess to a crime that none of them ever committed and this has happened in plenty of other cases.

Police are capable of obtaining a false confession with certain scare tactics during interrogations.

Confess or Die: Why Threatening a Suspect with the Death Penalty should Render Confessions

Involuntary emphasizes that, “One study on false confessions revealed that eighty-one percent "of

the innocent defendants [in the sample] who chose to take their case to trial were wrongfully

convicted 'beyond a reasonable doubt' even though their confession was ultimately demonstrated to

be false” (Morehouse 531+). Even with evidence to prove that an individual was innocent, they

were still wrongfully convicted because their false confession is seen as the above all when it

comes to evidence to a jury. Confess or Die: Why Threatening a Suspect with the Death Penalty

should Render Confessions Involuntary addresses that, “First, execution is irrevocable. Second, the

death penalty is the most severe punishment imposed by the criminal justice system. For these

reasons, the threat of the death penalty can be especially coercive in eliciting false confessions”

(Morehouse 531+). The death penalty is the highest form of punishment an idivudual can recieve.

This high threat can be used to scare someone to falsely confess in order to escape the death

penalty.

Wrongful convictions are a possibility for any case. “A Dying Shame: The State is not

God, and the Death Penalty is not Infalliable” presents that, “The Innocence Project has estimated

that anywhere from 2 to 5 percent of currently incarcerated Americans are innocent. Given that

there are about two million people behind bars today, that roughly translates into 20,000 wrongly

convicted people” (Rizer and Hyden 47+). There are plenty of wrongful convictions that can
 Battaglia 4

occur within the justice system. “A Dying Shame: The State is not God, and the Death Penalty is

not Infalliable” furthers this point with, “We know individuals are wrongfully convicted--and to be

sure, some wrongful convictions are unavoidable. However, when dealing with capital

punishment, that inevitability could have irreversible consequences and can never be tolerated in a

free and law-abiding society” (Rizer and Hyden 47+). With the chance of being wrong, the

ultimate punishment of death should not be an option. It is already proven that innocent

individuals are incarcerated, so innocent lives could end up being given the capital punishment.

There are plenty of cases along with the Norfolk Four that furthers innocent and wrongful

convictions. As previously stated, Confess or Die: Why Threatening a Suspect with the Death

Penalty should Render Confessions Involuntary addresses that the Norfolk Four, “Each confessed

to the crime, "alter[ing] their confessions to accommodate details fed to them by the police." Nearly

twenty years later, a federal judge vacated two of the convictions. Less than a year later, Virginia

Governor Terry McAuliffe pardoned the four men” (Morehouse 531+). The Norfolk Four is a

famous case of four false confessions driven by scare tactics that were proven to be false twenty

years after. Confess or Die: Why Threatening a Suspect with the Death Penalty should Render

Confessions Involuntary also states, “a false confession led to a wrongful conviction is that of

Christopher Ochoa, who was convicted of the rape and murder of a young woman in Texas. In Mr.

Ochoa's case, the police told him that he would receive the death penalty unless he cooperated,

going so far as to "show him photos of death row" and "point out the spot on his left arm where

the needle would be inserted” (Morehouse 531+). Mr. Ochoa’s case is another example of a

conviction that was later proven to be wrongful. He was coerced with the police’s scare tactics and

only confessed to avoid what he was being shown.

 Battaglia 5

Racial bias can be spotted throughout capital punishment sentences. Capital Punishment

observes, “Among other factors, the races of both the victim and the defendant were found to

influence sentencing. Despite comprising less than 15 percent of the US population, African

Americans comprised more than half of the nearly four thousand people executed from 1930 to

1967 and 90 percent of those executed for rape” (“Capital Punishment”). Race has been shown to

influence an individual's sentencing. This makes it so the death penalty is biased. It should not be

used due to it being unfair towards other races. “A Dying Shame: The State is not God, and the

Death Penalty is not Infalliable” explores, “a 19th century North Carolina law mandated the death

penalty when a black man raped a white woman, but gave a maximum punishment of one year in

prison to a white man for the same crime” (Rizer and Hyden 47+). A white man got away with a

one year sentence for the same crime a black man would get the death penalty for. Although it is

an old law, there was racial bias involving the death penalty and still is today. “A Dying Shame:

The State is not God, and the Death Penalty is not Infalliable” stresses that, “a Justice Department

study established that, between 1930 and 1972, when an individual was sentanced to death for the

crime of rape (a crime that no longer carries the death penalty), 89 percent of the defendants put to

death were black men. More disturbing was the fact that in every rape execution case, the victim

was white. Not one person received a death sentence for raping a black woman, despite black

women being up to 12 times more likely to be rape victims” (Rizer and Hyden 47+). Racial bias

can be seen within the study. Many more black men were put to death compared to white men for

committing the same crimes. Also, black rape victims were more likely to be assulted, yet no one

was put to death for assulting a black victim.

 Battaglia 6

General bias can also be seen within death penalty convictions. Capital Punishment

informs the reader that, “The Supreme Court in Atkins v. Virginia, 536 U.S. 304 ( 2002 ), ruled

that mentally [ill] persons may not be executed, and in Roper v. Simmons, 543 U.S. 551 ( 2005 ),

that the death penalty may not be imposed when the defendant is under eighteen at the time of the

murder” (Graber 198). Not everyone can be killed for committing the same crime. It makes it

unfair or biased with who can be executed and who gets a life sentence instead. “Death Penalty

Focus” reviews that, “According to the Criminal Justice Project of the NAACP, there are 2,620

people on death row…[and] there are 53 women on death row in the United States as of January 1,

2020” (“Death Penalty Focus”). There are many people who just sit on death row awaiting their

punishment. Also, there are only 53 women out of 2,620 people who are on death row. This

could be seen as unfair and biased since women do not get as harsh of a punishment as a man

would for the same crime.

Capital punishment creates a lot of unnessecary costs. “A Dying Shame: The State is not

God, and the Death Penalty is not Infalliable” found that, “In the 1990s, Richardson County,

Nebraska, mortgaged their ambulances to fund two death cases and Jasper County, Texas, raised

property taxes by 7 percent to finance capital proceedings. In response, many states have since

shifted much of the financial burden from the local to the state level, but the high costs remain.

More recently, numerous cost studies have examined the death penalty's expense and found that it

far outweighs the price of life without parole” (Rizer and Hyden 47+). There is a much higher cost

when the death penalty is not abolished. A life sentence is a safer and more cost efficient way to

deal with high crimes. “Death Penalty Focus” presents California’s death penalty with,

“...taxpayers spend $150 million every year to support a system that has killed 13 people in since
 Battaglia 7

1978 and no one in the last decade...The state’s Legislative Analyst’s office estimates that

California would save $150 million a year if it replaced the death penalty with a sentence of life

without parole” and “Studies of the California death penalty system, the largest in the US, have

revealed that a death sentence costs at least 18 times as much as a sentence of life without parole

would cost” (“Death Penalty Focus”). If all of the United States made the switch to life sentencing

and abolishing the death penalty, costs would go down. That saved money could be used to

benefit other areas that need worked on.

The opposing side views the death penalty in a dfferent way, although it can be proven to

be incorrect. Capital Punishment says, “Supporters of capital punishment argue that it deters

people from committing capital crimes and represents ultimate justice in criminal cases involving

intentional murder” (“Capital Punishment”). Some say that it deters criminals from committing

crimes, but this is simply not true. “A Dying Shame: The State is not God, and the Death Penalty

is not Infalliable” proves this with, “Daniel Nagin and John Pepper's 2012 publication, "Deterrence

and the Death Penalty," was the largest-ever survey of deterrence studies. After conducting their

examination, the authors concluded that no evidence exists to suggest that the death penalty serves

as a general deterrent to murder. In fact, when analyzing homicide rates between states that share

comparable economic, demographic, and social characteristics, there is no statistically significant

difference between murder rates in states with or without the death penalty” (Rizer and Hyden

47+). The death penalty is proven by one of the largest studies done to not deter individual’s from

committing crimes. In fact, “Death Penalty Focus” concludes, “Regions with the most executions

also have the highest murder rates. What’s more, in states that have repealed the death penalty,

there has been no subsequent spike in murder rates. In fact, the murder rate has fallen in New York,
 Battaglia 8

New Mexico, Illinois, and Connecticut in the years after they repealed the death penalty” (“Death

Penalty Focus”). Death penalty does not deter crime or keep people safer. It seems to be as it gets

abolished, safety of the people either stays relatively the same or actually increases. Capital

Punishment furthers the opposing side by pointing out, “Abolishing capital punishment would be

unconstitutional because the Fifth Amendment authorizes its application as long as "due process of

law" has been followed” (“Capital Punishment”). The opposing side believes it goes against their

fifth amendment, however it also goes against the eighth amendment. Capital Punishment also

states, “The death penalty should be abolished because it is applied arbitrarily and violates the

Eighth Amendment's protection against "cruel and unusual punishment" by the state” (“Capital

Punishment”). The punishment of death should be seen as a cruel and unusal punishment,

therefore making the death penalty unconsititutional. Capital Punishment considers, “They believe

murderers do not deserve to be punished by death because the vast majority of murderers are at

least partly influenced by such background elements as abuse and poverty, which the murderer

could not control. The death penalty, in their view, is based on destructive desires for revenge and

fails to accept that all persons are capable of rehabilitation” (Graber 199). There is always another

side. Criminals with specific backgrounds could be mentally ill from their own past experiences.

The ultimate decision of the death penalty should not be used due to not knowing someone’s

background.

The abolisment of the death penalty is a necessary and essential step to ensuring no bias in

sentencing. There is too much room for error for the capital punishment to be enforced. It is also

more cost efficient for the United States to get rid of the death penalty and to only give out life

sentences. The death penalty has to be removed everywhere for the justice system to be fair
 Battaglia 9

towards every individual life and to ensure no innocent life can be executed due to a forced false

confession or wrongful conviction.

 Battaglia 10

Works Cited

"Capital Punishment." Gale Opposing Viewpoints Online Collection, Gale, 2019. Gale In Context:

Opposing Viewpoints, https://link.gale.com/apps/doc/PC3010999123/OVIC?

u=pl2127&sid=OVIC&xid=f4aff193. Accessed 3 Sept. 2020.

"Death Penalty Focus." Gale Opposing Viewpoints Online Collection, Gale, 2020. Gale In

Context: Opposing Viewpoints, https://link.gale.com/apps/doc/MUXJGJ123661783/

OVIC?u=pl2127&sid=OVIC&xid=8de6ea92. Accessed 23 Sept. 2020.

Graber, Mark A. "Capital Punishment." American Governance, edited by Stephen Schechter, et

al., vol. 1, Macmillan Reference USA, 2016, pp. 196-200. Gale eBooks,

https://link.gale.com/apps/doc/CX3629100087/GVRL?u=pl2127&sid=GVRL&xid=7a6c6

621. Accessed 21 Sept. 2020.

Morehouse, Lauren. "Confess or Die: Why Threatening a Suspect with the Death Penalty should

Render Confessions Involuntary." American Criminal Law Review, vol. 56, no. 2, Spring

2019, p. 531+. Gale In Context: Opposing Viewpoints, https://link.gale.com/apps/doc/

A584328686/OVIC?u=pl2127&sid=OVIC&xid=32290477. Accessed 2 Sept. 2020.

Rizer, Arthur, and Marc Hyden. "A Dying Shame: The state is not God, and the death penalty is

not infallible." The American Conservative, vol. 17, no. 6, Nov.-Dec. 2018, p. 47+. Gale

In Context: Opposing Viewpoints, https://link.gale.com/apps/doc/A559832460/OVIC?

u=pl2127&sid=OVIC&xid=83e29eb8. Accessed 18 Sept. 2020.