The failing of the US judicial system although regrettable has nothing to do with the right to vengeance of the loved ones of the victims. It goes without saying that the right person should be punished, otherwise how can justice be satisfied?
1 Like
I fail to see the sense in this. By this logic the State would not be able to dole out any punishment out of respect of the feelings of the loved ones of the criminals. Maybe the criminals should consider the impact of their actions on the victims, themselves and their own loved ones.
You would hope that in a developed nation, the law is not built on raw human emotion. I thought we left that to âless-developedâ nations. 
I didnât know the death penalty is something Europeans want - Iâm a huge fan of the rule of law and consequent laws. Iâd like to orient our legal system in a way thatâs efficient and doesnât cause more trouble (and especially cost) than necessary.
The death penalty is not an effective punishment in these regards. The general main idea of âscaring awayâ criminals with high sentences doesnât work - criminals arenât usually 140iq calculator masterminds, theyâre the bottom of the barrel (excluding white color crime) and thus not very reasoned individuals.
But even if we ignore all of this, thereâs a simple, yet very effective âTotschlagargumentâ against the death penalty: The fact that itâs irreversible and leaves no room for redemption - so if there is a mistake inside the judiciary process (for wahtever reason) there is no possibility for the state to correct the verdict. Sure having someone locked up 10y and then saying âsorry bro we made a mistake, but youâre free nowâ is also somewhat irreversible, nevertheless there can be some form of reparation.
Another argument often used is âWell, weâll only use it when itâs 100% proven that the murderer is convictedâ - this is not how the legal system works. A conviction is a conviction, whether itâs 99% or 98% or 110% - it doesnât matter afterwards and if thereâs reasonable doubt during the legal process, courts generally donât (or shouldnât) convict. In practice, a lot of other factors are at play: Media pressure, personal and political agenda of the repsective judges, etc.
A society gains very little in having draconian punishments, yet it loses a lot by forfeiting itâs humanity - thatâs my personal opinion.
5 Likes
It costs ÂŁ60,000 a year to keep someone on a life sentence in prison in the UK, not sure itâs a good use of taxpayers money to keep someone for 20-30 years, thatâs between ÂŁ1.2 -1.8M
1 Like
In the US, people on death row can also be there for many years before they are killed so maybe the savings are not so significant.
5 Likes
Vengeance or revenge is hardly an excuse for taking a human life. And what about the Vengeance and revenge for the close relatives of the executed person. I canât see the logic that one gets revenge and the other doesnât.
1 Like
Exactly. Rather than endless legal appeals and the spectacle of a 50-year-old, completely reformed person being executed for a crime they committed as a teenager, give them their 30-year sentence, try to rehabilitate them and assess whether they can safely be released earlier.
Anyway aside from being morally repugnant, Capital Punishment is inherently unfair because a rich man will never be executed. So any system that can be gamed like that deserves to be abolished.
1 Like
And a lot of that money is simply wasted in trying to ârehabilitateâ or look after these monsters.
Mercy to the guilty is cruelty to the innocent.
And a 9mm costs 0,20 Cents.
Perhaps the more humane solution; think about it: living with years of angst, hope, disappointment. Trying time and time again to save your own life, thinking you have a chance but knowing your death has been decided⊠what does that do to a persons psyche. Especially to somebody innocent and wrongly accused?
NopeâŠ! That is cruel.
âStand here on this plastic sheet.â
âHere?â
âUuuuh, a bit to the left.â
âMy left or your leftâ
âMine, perfectâ
âBANGâ
There is a saying: âBetter 50 guilty men go free than one innocent be put to deathâ. I think this is fair to say.
Rottting life-long is a cell is a far greater deterrent than a fast-track into the next world.
Remember that the death penalty is not only applied for violent crimes. Singapore will hang you for quite a small amount of narcotics. Japan remains the other wealthy country to retain the death penalty, but the do seem reserve it for the highest of crimes.
3 Likes
Not sure, hope is a very powerful motivation, most persons on death row (at least in the US) are not fully aware of the consequences, most are of a low wattage intelligence and not a few believe that Jesus will swoop in and take them to the promised place.
In my very humble opinion, either shoot them inside 10 minutes after conviction or abolish the death penalty.
Perhaps. However, none of us (I assume) have witnessed an execution in real life. I believe that experience would change the mind of many, if not most, death penalty supporters.
1 Like
The problem with that, as has been demonstrated over the years, is that sometimes the âlow wattageâ criminals are also low on funds and canât afford decent or competent legal representation. They may accidentally incriminate themselves through a technicality and end up with a guilty verdict when perhaps they arenât. Itâs not unusual that, maybe years later, forensic techniques develop sufficiently to prove as such.
Unless you have the crime reliably witnessed in real-time, you can never be 100% sure of guilt. This is why people are convicted based on âbeyond reasonable doubtâ.
2 Likes
Not to mention bent cops, overzealous DAs, governors desperate to look âtough on crimeâ and prosecutors who need a conviction at any cost. The whole process is flawed and there are plenty of documented cases of innocent people being sentenced to death, or death-row inmates subsequently released when evidence was shown to be flawed or new evidence emerges.
Most of these cases are taken up by charities or as a result of viral social media campaigns involving celebs. How can this conceivably be termed âJusticeâ?
This is the case in Japan, quick executions and the condemned do not even know their execution date. Theyâre simply woken up from their sleep, and then taken to die.
1 Like
Maybe most death penalty supporters arenât that bothered about innocent people being executed too and feel that itâs a price worth paying (by other people). They canât be unaware that it happens.
Of course, if you execute someone soon after conviction, you not only have the bonus of saving money but know that theyâre guilty and that no innocent parties are ever executed.
1 Like
This is why it shouldnât be a populist decision. One of the foundational principles of the British criminal justice system, articulated by the jurist William Blackstone is that âit is better that ten guilty persons escape than that one innocent suffer.â
The whole point of due process is that justice should be based on evidence and the law, not on public anger or the desire to see someone punished.
4 Likes
That might be the case by definition, from a japanese perspective: The conviction rate is 99% for violent crimes.
Yeah, because in Japan, ±70% of all cases donât even go to trail - in Switzerland itâs 7% - so Japan keeps itâs high conviction rate by only prosecuting basically already safe cases - this is very different from how our justice system works - the DA acts in dubio pro duro, so yeah
Well said, Aargauer.
Since 1973, in the US 203 people have been exonerated after being convicted and sentenced to death.
203 people. Let that sink in.
For more on cases of wrongful conviction, see this from The Innocence Project, including itâs links to other studies:
And from the Center On Wrongful Convictions:
1 Like