English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

15 answers

You definitely need to do your research on this subject. I could sit here and lists dozens of reasons but the main one is so that we do not execute an innocent person.

Any death-penalty expert will tell you that it is impossible to be certain that innocent people will not be executed. Most death-penalty cases do not involve DNA evidence; instead they rely on circumstancial evidence, confessions, eyewitness identifications, and testimony from codefendants or jailhouse snitches.
All of these types of evidence are notoriously unreliable, as demonstrated by cases that do involve DNA. Of the more than 120 DNA exonerations in the past decade, defendants - even though innocent - gave confessions in nearly a quarter of the cases; in nearly 70 percent, an eyewitness identified the defendant as the wrongdoer. Had DNA not subsequently exonerated these men, we would have assumed, on the basis of a coerced confession or an erroneous eyewitness identification, that we had the right person. We would have been wrong.
Now think about the fact that while these 120 or so men were sitting on death row wrongly convicted, there were more than 120 murderers roaming our streets free to kill again.
That is why the convicted are not just killed the day they are found guilty. They are entitled to appeal there cases, point out errors made during the trial, etc. Wouldn't you want that possibility if you were or a loved one were one of the innocent men/women convicted of murder?

2007-03-17 19:05:25 · answer #1 · answered by Injustice sucks 2 · 1 0

I've never understood why this happens in the USA. When we had the death penalty here in UK a judge in passing sentence would tell the condemned that they were to be taken to a place of execution and there to be hanged by the neck until you are dead. A date for the execution would also be set at this point in the trial.

Any appeal against a death sentence then in UK was probably made within a couple of weeks and there would only be a new trial when new evidence was presented. Otherwise the sentence would be carried out.

Death Row must be something to do with the US Justice System which allows a convicted murderer [the condemned] to find peace with God and seek justice while the door is still open.

Anyway, like I say, we no longer have the death penalty here in UK nor anywhere in the European Union.

2007-03-17 12:03:26 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 0 1

Our country has something called due process. The framers of the constitution thought it imperative to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the guilty are truly guilty before the government restricts certain rights. If our government insists on killing some of its citizens, due process mandates that those citizens have the right to an appeal. This is the gist of due process as it affects the death penalty.

If we simply killed people upon a guilty verdict, then we would without a doubt be killing many more innocent people than we are now.

Remember, the death penalty is based on the assumption that the judicial process is 100 percent accurate in identifying guilty people. Unfortunately, we know from many cases that it is not 100 percent accurate and we often convict innocent people. Even if the system is only 99 percent accurate, that is still one innocent person every 100 cases whom the government is killing wrongly.

2007-03-17 11:27:58 · answer #3 · answered by Andy P 3 · 1 0

Because the justice system is not infallible. Sometimes mistakes are made, people are wrongly convicted of committing a crime. So there is a lengthy appeals process which can take many years.

The idea is to make sure that all legal avenues have been explored before someone is put to death. Once you have killed them a pardon or evidence proving them innocent is a little too late to help them.

2007-03-18 10:37:45 · answer #4 · answered by ZCT 7 · 1 0

I'm sure everyone one death row grew up just like everyone else, and had no idea their lives, for whatever reason, took a grave turn for the worst, for everyone involved. For the State, or United States to execute a prisoner, they have to exhaust each and every avenue. As to not hastily execute a person and find out three years later they were not really guilty. Although, I'm sure each and every state in the united states has executed an innocent person. I guess they call it collateral damage.

2007-03-17 11:31:26 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 1 0

Because the process of establishing beyond any doubt that they are guilty takes so long. Innocent people have been wrongly executed, because the deed was carried out too quickly. Nowadays it is not uncommon in a democratic society, for people to be held on deathrow for decades. Or would you rather do a middle east on it, and string them up straight away.

2007-03-17 14:37:18 · answer #6 · answered by breedgemh_101 5 · 3 0

Our Constitution says we cannot take a persons life without due process of law. We have to make the appeals process available to the convicted.

However, I agree with you. A person given the death penalty should be taken behind the courthouse and be shot by the judge after the case is decided.

2007-03-17 11:25:43 · answer #7 · answered by Ben D 3 · 1 2

The average time spent on death row in America, constitutes, excluding the psychological torture involved, a greater punishment than the average murderer in Britain would be sentenced to for that same crime.

2007-03-17 12:06:02 · answer #8 · answered by Veritas 7 · 0 1

The appeal process and so on. One of the reasons it is much more expensive than keeping the prisoner in jail for the remainder of his or her natural life.

2007-03-17 11:18:35 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

The lawers are making a fortune out of it, it creates full time employment for them. Cases going to differant appeal courts all the time, what a money spinner.

2007-03-18 15:36:05 · answer #10 · answered by cassidy 4 · 0 1

fedest.com, questions and answers