Death Penalty Annotated Bibliography

The death penalty has been a controversial topic of debate for years, specifically whether the punishment is ethical and effective. Many have even argued that the criminal justice system has imposed flawed and misguided standards and practices which have caused choatic conditions to seep into American life. Truman Capote’s novel “In Cold Blood” examines the nature of this system by recounting the trail of Dick Hickock and Perry Smith, who had been accused of murdering the Clutter family in rural Kansas. Through Capotes vehement opinions about numerous aspects of the process, the narrative includes a stong implicit answer to the central question of whether society actually achieves justice when it imposes the death penalty. Throughout “In Cold

In “Kill Capital Punishment” by Janine Espino a Reagan High school student argues that Capital Punishment should be abolished in all fifty states, Espino’s position is vaild. The author claims that killing another human cannot be taken back, one you murder a living individual you cannot take it back. The author argues that since manslaughter another individual in a malicious fashion is illegal so should capital punishment. Espino gives a quote by Peggy Parks in that was published in the article “Current Issues: The Death Penalty” published on 29 March.

Oshinsky did a remarkable job explaining the history of the death penalty in a clear and concise way. While the text was fairly short, he effectively provided his readers with well documented and relevant information on how controversial the death penalty has been throughout the past few centuries. He undertook an exceptionally important issue that many Americans do not know much about, or may have conflicting feelings

Capital punishment, also known as the death penalty, and the debate about its abolition is the largest point of the essay written by Steve Earle, titled "A Death in Texas”. This form of punishment should be abolished for 3 reasons; First, It does not seem to have a direct effect on deterring murder rates, It has negative effects on society, and is inconsistent with American ideals. To begin, the death penalty is unnecessary since it is ineffective at deterring rates of murder. In fact, 88% of the country's top criminologists do not believe the death penalty acts as a deterrent to homicide, according to the Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology. In opposition, supporters may argue that it may indeed help to deter murder rates as they have

Whether a criminal is guilty of committing murder or any other capital offense, they should all be given the same sentence - life in prison. How is it fair to allow them to voluntarily choose the death penalty over prison? Criminals willingly sought to break the law and should endure the lifelong debt they owe not only to society but to the family of the innocent victims whose lives have been taken. As asserted by Robert Johnson, a professor of justice and law, and Sandra Smith, a professor of legal studies, death by incarceration is a more effective and suitable form of punishment than the death penalty (Cromie and Zott 174). Although some might argue that it is unfair to keep a criminal alive, they fail to understand that the freedom they once had is permanently lost.

“ we make mistakes. Scores of innocent people have been exonerated after being sentenced to death” (Stevenson 16), this quotation reminds me of a story that happened in 1991 to Todd Willingham, as detailed by the Travis County District Court of Texas. Willingham was executed as he was found guilty of the murder of his three children in a fire that took place at their home. The Innocence Project, however emphasizes that the wrongful execution of Willingham is a tragedy and must never happen again. We must restore the good name of Willingham, and ensure that a tragedy of this kind never happens again of executing an innocent man.

These mistakes are not repairable as death is final and several cases have been re-examined where DNA that exonerates someone was not involved in court proceedings due to the time-period resulting in the execution of an innocent. They respond with the notion that the death penalty detracts from the sympathy of people for the pain and suffering of the families of the victims of crime and shifts the sympathy to the offender instead. Some human rights groups speak against the execution of an individual on death row gaining that individual a following in the media for sympathy with their impending death for the heinous acts they committed. They say that it is insulting to the victims’ families and makes a mockery of the heinous acts that were committed. Finally, abolitionists contend that capital punishment does not bring the victim back to life.

In recent years, anti-death penalty propagandists have succeeded in stoking the fear that capital punishment is being carelessly meted out. Ironically, Of the 875 prisoners executed in the United States in modern times, not one has been retroactively proved innocent. The benefits of a legal system in which judges and juries have the option of sentencing the cruelest or coldest murderers to death far outweigh the potential risk of executing an innocent person. First and foremost, the death penalty makes it possible for justice to be done to those who commit the worst of all crimes. The execution of a murderer sends a powerful moral message: that the innocent life he took was so precious, and the crime he committed so horrific, that he forfeits

“The law may be color-blind as it is written, but not as it is enforced.” Racial bias in the death penalty can be traced back to Furman v. Georgia, where handing down the death penalty sentence, unfairly, constituted as a cruel and unusual punishment, violating the Eighth and Fourteenth Amendments. The reinstatement of the death penalty with its new sentencing guidelines, implemented by the Supreme Court, was to ensure that the death penalty sentence was used in a constitutional way. Despite these guidelines, somehow, racial bias has found a way to thrive. It has been documented that an individual is more likely to receive the death penalty in a case where the victim is White than in cases where the victim is Black.

The topic of capital punishment presents a test of values. The arguments in support of and opposition to the death penalty are complex. In the end, this is a question of an individual’s values and morals. The topic requires careful thought to reach a reasoned position. Both sides of the argument are defensible.

Death Penalty is a very ominous punishment to discuss. It is probably the most controversial and feared form of punishment in the United States. Many are unaware, but 31 of the 52 states have the Death penalty passes as an acceptable punishment. In the following essay, I will agree and support Stephen Nathanson's statement that "Equality retributivism cannot justify the death penalty. " In the reading, "An Eye for an Eye?", Nathanson gives objections to why equality retributivism is morally acceptable for the death penalty to be legal.

Anthony Hinton spoke to us about his time on death row, and the events leading up to arrest, conviction, and being exonerated. He was there to inform us on his experience and the injustice that can come with the death penalty. This eventually leads to him trying to persuade the audience to take action to get rid of the death penalty. As a strong believer of the death penalty, Hinton’s

Deterrence and the Death Penalty: The Views of the Experts. The Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology (1973-), 87(1), 1. doi:10.2307/1143970 This article was written by Michael L. Radelet and Ronald L. Akers. They both consulted experts on criminology and criminal behaviour to evaluate the effectiveness of the Death Penalty.

She appeals to the audience who are more familiar with the death penalty and its activists and those who are opposed; She explains it well enough for those who are ignorant on the subject. Davis explains that it is her hope that her book would help with any assumptions made by themselves or formulated by another on the topic of the American prison system, would be rethought. Her blunt tone guides the reader to only read facts without bias to reassure them that their beliefs are solely factual.

In the case of the death penalty, it has the added bonus in guaranteeing that the person would not offend again. Supporters of harsh punishments argue that the would-be criminal would consider the costs versus the benefits of committing a crime. If the costs outweigh the benefits, then it is assumed that he would stop what he is doing, effectively ‘deterred’. Furthermore, the usage of harsh punishments to effectively deter crime is ethically justified as it prevents more people from falling victim to crime. However it is extremely difficult to judge a punishment’s effectiveness based on its deterrence effect, consequently we must consider other variables that would entail a person to commit a crime.