Which is more expensive in the USA: death penalty or life in prison?

Answer 1

When reading the link to "Death Penalty Info" by Richard C. Dieter you have to consider a few things. First...he's an attorney. Second...he himself states that both life without parole and the death penalty are both just as expensive.

With forensic sciences as they are in modern day compared to yesteryear...cases now can be solved with 100% accuracy. The problem is those cases of yesteryear that continue today to bias the opinions away from the death penalty.

There is always one case that comes to mind that absolutely convinces me our judicial system has it's problems. This was a case where a young female Alabama trooper, Elizabeth Cobb, was murdered by her Trooper boyfriend Joe Duncan who was financially strapped and killed her for the insurance of which he was the beneficiary.

All the evidence proved beyond a reasonable doubt he was guilty. There was an admission of guilt and a plea agreement allowing him to serve only 25 years in prison. He should have been given the death penalty but to save taxpayer time and money...the agreement was made.

Maybe we should resort to the methods of some countries where a quick shot to the head after a guilty plea and forward the costs of the ammo to the next of kin would be in order.

I for one am for the death penalty as it DOES deter crime. The guilty party will never commit another murder!

Answer 2

KC V's statement that every crime, or even every homicide, can "now" be solved with 100% accuracy would be funny if the idea were not so dangerous. No, that is simply NOT true. Forensic evidence can be very valuable, but NOT every crime, or every homicide, has forensic evidence to be examined. And it is simply untrue that EVERY forensic examination's results are 100% accurate. The judicial system is, and always will be, a system run by human beings, and subject to the errors human beings make. So long as we have a dealth penalty (which has been rejected by almost every other modern democracy in the world) there WILL be mistakes, and innocent people WILL be put to death.

Further, there are always TWO questions in a death penalty case: did this person commit the crime, and should this person be killed. Even if we can know the answer to the first question beyond any doubt, the human factor is ALWAYS going to apply to the second, and that is something which science can never avoid.

Except for the facile comment that a person put to death will not kill again (which is also true of the person sentenced to life in prison without parole), there is absolutely no evidence that the death penalty deters crime. I can tell you that in my experience criminals almost NEVER consider the punishment before committing a crime--they consider only the likelihood of apprehension.

And, to answer the question, it is unquestionable that the death penalty is far more expensive than life in prison, and not, as some have speculated, because of the cost of appeals. Appeals are relatively cheap. It is the trials themselves which are phenominally expensive, and would be only MORE expensive should appellate remedies be limited, since the trial lawyers would have to try even harder to make sure everything was done right.

Answer 3

In so much (if no longer all) states, dying penalty instances are robotically appealed instantly to the state preferrred courtroom. This is extra pricey than a usual attraction. Many lifestyles-in-jail instances don't seem to be appealed, or even the ones which are very not often make it to the preferrred courtroom. The preferrred courtroom overview is a statutory mandate, and it does no longer over-journey a defendant's common attraction rights, so it is thoroughly viable (and no longer individual) for a dying penalty case to be robotically reviewed via the preferrred courtroom, then cross by way of all of the common appeals method for exact disorders, similar to every other case might. Many states additionally require a separate sentencing trial for dying penalty instances. In addition to the "natural" trial in which the defendant is located responsible/no longer responsible, a separate sentencing trial is heard to be able to check whether or not or no longer the dying penalty is correct. Such moment trials don't seem to be usually required for lifestyles-in-jail instances. Then there is the price of housing an inmate on dying row, that is larger safeguard than non-dying penalty inmates, as a consequence costing extra.

Answer 4

Death penalty. Many people are mistaken about this. The death penalty costs so much mostly because of the legal process which is supposed to prevent executions of innocent people.

In New York, for example, over $200,000,000 was spent in a period of 12 years (1995-2007) for a death penalty system that saw 7 men sentenced to death. None now on death row. (In contrast, the cost of incarcerating someone in New York averages about $35,000 per year and if the death penalty is not on the table a large percentage of murder defendents take a plea, sparing most of the trial expense.)

The high legal costs of a death penalty case begin even before the initial trial. The initial trial consists of two separate trials (one to decide on guilt and the second on the penalty) Each of these requires sets of separate expert witnesses. Juries must be "death qualified" so that selecting them is complicated and takes longer than in other trials. If the sentence is death, the defendent is automatically guaranteed an appeal and this is very costly. Defense attorneys who work on subsequent appeals often work on a pro bono basis, but the state must pay for its own case. The legal process can take a long time. Among the 124 wrongfully convicted people eventually released from death row, over 50 had already served more than a decade. Speeding up the legal process will guarantee we execute innocent people.

Other examples for cost figures:
State of Washington
At the trial level, death penalty cases are estimated to generate roughly $470,000 inadditional costs to the prosecution and defense over the cost of trying the same case as an aggravated murder without the death penalty and costs of $47,000 to $70,000 for court personnel. On direct appeal, the cost of appellate defense averages $100,000 more in death penalty cases, than in non-death penalty murder cases. (Comm. on Public Defense, Washington State Bar Association, December 2006)

Tennessee: Death penalty trials cost an average of 48% more than the average cost of trials in which prosecutors seek life imprisonment. (http://www.comptroller.state.tn.us/orea/reports/deathpenalty.pdf)

There are similar findings in other states where studies of costs have been done. The clearest explanation I have seen of why the death penalty process is so expensive is at
www.deathpenaltyfocus.org Click on facts and then on costs.

Answer 5

At the moment, the Death Penalty costs more because a person who has been convicted does nothing else but appeal his sentence over and over and over, clogging the legal system. Life in prison in actuality is much cheaper because all you have to do is feed and clothe them. It would save the government lots of money if there was some sort of limit to the amount of appeals one could make, I doubt that's going to happen. Also the average cost of the injection is usually very expensive, often costing hundreds of dollars per injection possibly. The average bullet costs about 20 cents

Answer 6

Life in prison. That was simple. With life in prison, we have to pay fro their meals, their clothing, their medical needs and then in many cases we have to bury them after they die. The death penalty ends all of that even though it does cost a pretty penny to kill them.

Answer 7

Imposition and carrying out of a death penalty in the US is more costly than a sentence of LWOP.

See: http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/article.php?did=108&scid=7

Answer 8

Death penalty costs more in legal fees only.

Answer 9

my personal thought is the system would much rather give someone a life sentence because they will make money off that person for a long time...

Answer 10

Dealth penalty due to the appeals process.