Home > Opinion > John A. Farrell > The Death Penalty and Its Perils—A Story for Maryland, O'Malley and the Supreme Court

The Death Penalty and Its Perils—A Story for Maryland, O'Malley and the Supreme Court

Reader Comments
Back to blog

The Death Penalty Provides More Protection for Innocents
Dudley Sharp, Justice Matters, contact info below
Enhanced Due Process
No knowledgeable and honest party questions that the death penalty has the most extensive due process protections in US criminal law.
Therefore, actual innocents are more likely to be sentenced to life imprisonment and more likely to die in prison serving under that sentence, that it is that an actual innocent will be executed.
That is. logically, conclusive.
Enhanced Incapacitation
To state the blatantly clear, living murderers, in prison, after release or escape, are much more likely to harm and murder, again, than are executed murderers.
Although an obvious truism, it is surprising how often folks overlook the enhanced incapacitation benefits of the death penalty over incarceration.
Enhanced Deterrence
16 recent studies, inclusive of their defenses, find for death penalty deterrence.
A surprise? No.
Life is preferred over death. Death is feared more than life.
Some believe that all studies with contrary findings negate those 16 studies. They don't. Studies which don't find for deterrence don't say no one is deterred, but that they couldn't measure those deterred.
What prospect of a negative outcome doesn't deter some? There isn't one.
Enhanced Fear
Some death penalty opponents argue against death penalty deterrence, stating that it's a harsher penalty to be locked up without any possibility of getting out.
Reality paints a very different picture.
What percentage of capital murderers seek a plea bargain to a death sentence? Zero or close to it. They prefer long term imprisonment.
What percentage of convicted capital murderers argue for execution in the penalty phase of their capital trial? Zero or close to it. They prefer long term imprisonment.
What percentage of death row inmates waive their appeals and speed up the execution process? Nearly zero. They prefer long term imprisonment.
This is not, even remotely, in dispute.
What of that more rational group, the potential murderers who choose not to murder, is it likely that they, like most of us, fear death more than life?
In choosing to end the death penalty, or in choosing not implement it, some have chosen to spare murderers at the cost of sacrificing more innocent lives.
Furthermore, possibly we have sentenced 25 actually innocent people to death since 1973, or 0.3% of those so sentenced. Those have all been released upon post conviction review. The anti death penalty claims, that the numbers are significantly higher, are a fraud, easily discoverable by fact checking.
There is no proof of an innocent executed in the US, at least since 1900.
Of all the government programs in the world, that put innocents at risk, is there one with a safer record and with greater protections than the US death penalty?
Unlikely.

Dudley Sharp of TX 8:12PM February 28, 2009

The death penalty is about justice, what about the family's and the victims of these heinous acts, when someone commits the ultimate crime they should have to pay the ultimate penalty.
our law are there to preserve a civil society. Schaefer said "it about vengeance", I strongly disagree;vengeance is when the victim or family takes the law in their own hands, but when the government tries and convicts a person "in a court of Law"that's justice! the government is not mad at perpetrator, the government is there to find the truth an has a responsibility to protect it's citizens from lawless violent individuals. and certain crimes should require the death penalty.
now. there should be a criteria for the death penalty,if a person commits a premeditated murder,or commits a robbery, or a rape that results in death, or if they molest a child , that person should be eligible for the death penalty.
DNA evidence is a useful tool that has exonerated the innocent, but it has also confirm a persons conviction, and in some cases found the real prepetrator. so this is a two edged sword, they to should be tried and if convicted be eligible for the death penalty,you can't have your cake and eat it t
fare and in between.
some libs like to bring up the wrongful convictions; but, these wrongful convictions are fare and in between; there are fare more people that are convicted on DNA and well as eyewitness evidence and circumstantial evidence the "Scott Peterson Case is a good example of that. they did not have one drop of DNA but the circumstantial evidence was overwhelming!.
last but not least, the libs assume that when a perpetuate goes to jail they stop committing crimes. but nothing could be further from the truth, the same things that go on the streets continue to go on in prison, they rape they rob and extort and continue to murder. they are more dangerous in jail then on the streets, especially to the staff and inmates,they'll find a weaker inmate ,they also attack prison staff as well a kill prison inmates and guards.
and were do we send them after that, to Jail LOL on top of the fact the average cost to house a inmate is anywhere from $44,0000 to $60,000 a year.
liberals people the a not the victims, I'm sure they would be felling a hole lot different if they Got a call that their or daughter son was killed on the streets or in jail Be cause of some guy who has already killed some one. or ask a prison guard's about the dangerous conditions they deal with every day! not knowing if they will see there family again.

TonyP of NC 2:03AM February 28, 2009

In my opinion, the death penalty is a complex issue. Obviously the death penalty or any other type of justice that is meeted out to people should not be about revenge, but about making society aware that this type of behavior will not be excused or condoned so that others do not become emboldened to think that they can get away with the same. The DNA evidence is of utmost importance. The obvious reason for this is so that innocent people are not being executed for crimes they did not commit. I read about a business owner that was robbed a few years ago in the state of California. The robber had a gun to his head ready to shoot him and the business owner told the man "You know in California if you kill me they will give you the death penalty?" He said the robber turned and ran out and did not shoot him. He fully believed it was the fact that there was a death penalty that saved his life that day.
I think we also have to take into consideration with any particular crime if the crime took place 25 or 35 years ago et cetera then prison time, the death penalty et cetera may not always be the proper response if a person has shown a real change in their life. I am sure the death penalty is an issue that will continue to be debated for many years to come.

Deborah Solomon of MO 1:39PM February 27, 2009

There are three reasons the death penalty is wrong;
1. We know that mistakes have been made in the past and that the innocent have been killed. That makes all of us responsible to some degree.
2. The death penalty is about vengeance, not deterrence. If my child were murdered would I want the murderer killed - probably. But grief, anger and revenge is not justice.
3. The time between the conviction and execution often spans decades. Often the person convicted has had a true change of heart. They are truly sorry and suffer through their contrition daily. So then, after these many years of sincere change of character and regret, who are we really executing? Certainly not the same man.
The death penalty and abortion are both evil and neither should be condoned by a just society.

R.L. Schaefer of CA 1:09PM February 26, 2009

I like most liberal causes, but I differ from my flock on the death penalty.
The advent of DNA evidence is the reason we should be ramping up the death penalty, not abandoning it. We should demand overwhelming DNA evidence in every capital case and for that matter in every case where we contemplate life without parole.
We should use DNA as much as possible to exonerate those innocents now imprisoned or on death row.
We likewise should stop the insanity that says we cannot afford the death penalty because we cannot afford the lawyers for the appeals. If you use the overwhelming DNA standard, there will not be endless appeals.
But putting evil men/women in prison forever to prey on their co-prisoners is a cowardly thing for society to do. Lifers have nothing to lose and they make the "Corrections" departments a living hell that prohibits any actual corrections from taking place there. Prison gangs run most of your prisons now. Inside murders by lifers are then just unpunishable. Are you willing to just shut your eyes and accept that? If so, why?

Muser of NM 11:58AM February 26, 2009