Introduction
Imposition of the death penalty as a legal form of punishment has been practiced in America since the early colonial times, when the concept was imported by the colonists from Great Britain (Malik & Holdsworth, 2014, p.693). The purpose of this paper is to review and synthesize the published views and opinions offered by various authors on the death penalty and it’s use as a punishment in today’s America.
The Research
Public Support: An important consideration is whether use of the death penalty currently has public support across the nation. According to Malik & Holdsworth (p.706), such support “reached an all-time high in the mid-1990s, with 78% of Americans in favor of the death penalty for criminals convicted of murder”. The authors continue by stating that near the latter part of the 20th century and on into the 21st century, the race factor became a matter of study. The concern – borne out by these studies – was that there was disparity between the extent of the imposition of capital punishment between white and black defendants. For example, a 2003 study in Virginia by the American Civil Liberties Union found that for capital rape-murder crimes committed from 1978 to 2001, almost 71 percent of white defendants were sentenced to death, whereas the figure for black defendants where the victim was white was virtually 100 percent. Notably, where the victim was also black, the imposition of the death penalty on black defendants was around 29 percent. Hence, there was a clear disparity in sentencing, favoring victims who were white and unduly punishing black defendants (Malik & Holdsworth p.707).
This racial disparity and other factors including a general global trend away from capital punishment have influenced public opinion, undermining the previous weight of support for the death penalty (Malik & Holdsworth pp.708-710).
The death penalty was constitutionally abolished by the US Supreme Court in 1972 after a long campaign by abolitionists, but was re-introduced by the same court in 1976, leading to a new flurry of executions, under a new approach based on regulation rather than retention. However, beginning in the year 2000, the number of executions declined steeply, leading to the present situation where abolition seems more probable than possible (Steiker & Steiker, 2013, pp. 211-212).
Nonetheless, the authors also note that whereas at one time it looked as though abolition of the death penalty could be imminent and public support for it had reached rock bottom, a steep rise in violent crime and other factors caused a reversal of the trend, with the courts focussing on the permissibility of capital punishment rather than its desirability (Steiker & Steiker, 2013, p. 236).
Balko (2011) poses the rhetorical question of why more than 60 percent of Americans still come out in support of capital punishment. Broadly, he considers that it is “out of a desire for vengeance or retribution.” He notes that there is a popular view that if a person legally executed by the state or federal authorities was subsequently found to have been innocent, there would be a huge drop in public support for capital punishment. However, citing a case in Texas where a father convicted of causing the death of his three children and executed was later thought to have been innocent, Balko notes that the expected effect on public support for the death penalty did not occur. Polls showed just one percent drop in support, which Balko claims is within error tolerances. Furthermore, almost half the US population consider the death penalty should be used more (Balko, 2011).
Integrity of Law Enforcement Agencies: Perhaps of even greater concern than the issue of public support for the death penalty is the question of whether law enforcement agencies press ahead – seemingly with scant regard for justice – once they have a conviction and a subsequent death sentence, even when evidence is offered that might prove the defendant to be innocent. Balko (2011) cites an example: Hank Skinner – currently incarcerated on death row in Texas for the murder of his former girlfriend and her children. Skinner claims that forensic evidence found at the scene could prove his innocence through DNA testing. However, when preliminary tests on hair samples showed that they were from neither Skinner nor the victim, the prosecutors banned further tests, and Texas authorities have since blocked more testing. In Balko’s view, such blatant refusals by officials to allow examination of possibly vital evidence represent what he calls “a reckless effort to protect a conviction” (Balko, 2011).
Another such case cited by Balko concerned an Illinois man, Jerry Hobbs, accused in 2005 of murdering his eight-year old daughter and her friend. Semen was found in the daughter’s mouth, vagina and rectum. Hobbs confessed to the murders, but later retracted his confession, stating that his confession followed prolonged and brutal police interrogation. Although DNA testing confirmed the semen was not his, the prosecution claimed it could have entered her body while she was playing in the woods, effectively discounting the lack of a match to Hobbs, who was sentenced to death. However, five years later, that semen was matched to the DNA of a known sexual offender, and Hobbs was freed, proving that scientific evidence can be crucial in proving guilt or innocence (Balko, 2011).
Balko points out that over 270 individuals have been proved innocent by DNA testing in the last three decades, which suggests that the US criminal justice system is more flawed than the majority of the public realize, yet over 60 percent of Americans still (puzzlingly) support capital punishment. He suggests that one reason for continuing support for the death penalty by the majority of the American public is that the executions are no longer public events (Balko, 2011).
As a matter of interest, the last person to be publicly hanged in the US was a 22-year old black man called Rainey Bethea, who was hanged in Owensboro, Kentucky on August 14 1936 for the rape and murder of a 70-year old white woman. The hanging took place on a public gallows in front of an audience estimated at 20,000 people. It is suggested that the subsequent “media circus” led to public hangings being banned in the US (“Gallows used to hang bootlegger” 2013).
The Death Penalty as a Deterrent: There is a popular view that having the death penalty available to the justice system acts as a deterrent to would-be murderers. However, according to Booth (2013), there is no clear evidence to support that theory. Booth reports that deterrence studies examined by criminologists and other academics indicate that the studies do not prove whether capital punishment is a deterrent or not. Furthermore, the same conclusion was reached from similar studies undertaken three decades earlier. Nonetheless, statisticians continue to try to establish either a proof of the deterrence effect or vice-versa. John McAdams – political science professor at Marquette University (Milwaukee) – makes the point that if there is a deterrent aspect to capital punishment, but we don’t execute the guilty individuals, then we are by inference allowing innocent victims to be murdered. If on the other hand we continue with the death penalty but it is not deterring others from murder, we are only executing murderers. In a 2008 study, 90 prominent crime researchers were consulted on the deterrent issue by Michael Radelet, a professor at the University of Colorado, and 88 percent of them responded that the death penalty is not a deterrent. Conversely, several recent studies indicated that there is a deterrent effect, particularly in states where there are many executions, because criminals realize capital punishment is a very real threat (Booth 2013).
Then again, a National Academy of Sciences Committee tasked with determining if there is a deterrence effect published a report in 2012, which basically said that there is no clear proof either way from research undertaken to date. The report did however see punishing criminal activity as a deterrent, although claiming that the fear of arrest is the actual deterrent rather than any specific punishment (Kliegman, 2014).
The Methods of Execution: The most common method of execution currently used in the United States is by lethal injection. When Clayton Lockett was executed using that method in 2014 in Oklahoma, he was seen to “writhe on the gurney as he was executed. It took nearly 45 minutes, and he eventually died of a heart attack after officials stopped the execution.” Furthermore Lockett was not alone, in that according to a law professor, about seven percent of lethal injection executions are not carried out correctly (Kliegaman, 2014).
The lethal injection method of execution is the preferred method in over half of those states where capital punishment is still in use. Other methods used in the US are hanging, the firing squad, the gas chamber, and electrocution. The map in the Appendix to this paper shows the methods used in each state and the states where capital punishment has been abolished (Chokshi, 2014).
The report by Chokshi notes that in some states there is a choice of the method of implementing the death penalty – either by the prisoner or by the state, dependent on the state concerned, or on circumstances. For example, the state may use an alternative method if lethal injections were to be ruled as unconstitutional. At least 15 states have abolished the death penalty. Chokshi also notes that of the 1366 executions since 1972, 1116 of them have been in the Southern states, and that the states of Alabama, Florida, Missouri, Oklahoma, Texas and Virginia between them have been responsible for two thirds of all US executions (Chokshi, 2014).
Are the Execution Methods Humane? “Executions are not, and never will be, humane” (Hannah, 2015). The article by Hannah maintains that disguising those carrying out the executions with white coats and killing with chemicals rather than bullets does not make the act humane. The reality as she sees it is that the injection method of execution relieves the public from the guilt we might otherwise feel if the gas chamber or the electric chair were used instead. In her view, when lawmakers suggest “better” methods of killing the prisoners it is not for reasons of compassion for the individual, but is part of the plan to hide the reality that capital punishment is a form of brutality. She accepts that nobody wants to intentionally cause the prisoners to die in agony from burning skin (electrocution) or a broken neck (hanging), but insists that the publicized concept of humaneness is in reality a cover to help justify the continued use of the death penalty. Further, she insists that all methods of legal execution are no more than killing for revenge (Hannah, 2015).
Blakeley (2013) reviews the various methods of execution, in an attempt to determine which (if any) should be viewed as the most humane of those in general use. He begins with hanging, and in particular the so-called “long-drop” method (as used in 2006 to execute Saddam Hussein). The technique requires calculation of the length of drop needed to break the neck of the condemned, which in turn requires measurements of his (or her) height, weight and general build. The intention is that the body descends quickly and far enough (perhaps between five and nine feet) after opening the trapdoor, to generate a torque on the neck of between 1,000 and 1,250 ft. lbs. when the noose jerks tight. When it works as it should, the spinal cord is then severed, causing a rapid loss of consciousness. However, brain death may not occur for several minutes and complete death may not exist until maybe 15-20 minutes after the trapdoor opens, although the hanged person should not experience any of that process. Unfortunately, hangings can and do fail to go according to plan, particularly if mistakes are made in the calculations. If the drop is too long the person can be decapitated; if it is too short the person can remain conscious but be starved of oxygen and remain struggling for as long as maybe 30 minutes (Blakeley, 2013).
The firing squad is the second method discussed in Blakeley’s article. In this method the prisoner is strapped into a chair and has a target affixed over his heart. If wished, he can wear a black hood over his head. The firing squad comprises five expert marksmen who all fire at exactly the same time from a range of at least 25 feet. Traditionally, one of them has a blank round instead of a live bullet loaded into his rifle, so that none of them know which one has the blank. The idea is to reduce potential guilt feelings by the marksmen. Medical opinion indicates that the heart ceases beating within 15 seconds after the shots (Blakeley, 2013).
Death by lethal injection – the most commonly used method – is implemented by introducing into the convict’s bloodstream a lethal cocktail of drugs. The mixture normally includes a barbiturate to suppress respiration and to act as a sedative, a neuromuscular paralytic to stop breathing and to help limit convulsions, plus a potassium electrolyte to bring the heart to a stop. Each drug on its own is intended to be sufficient to bring about death. Blakeley questions the reliability of this system because the dose is always the same, irrespective of the physical weight of the subject, which has resulted in cases where breathing and the heart have continued after the injections have been applied. Unfortunately, there have been a number of problems due to unskilled personnel performing the injections, which has caused some states to suspend the lethal injections method pending further evidence (Blakeley, 2013).
The electric chair was originally conceived as a humane alternative to hanging. Typically, an alternating voltage of circa 2,000 volts at a current of 5A is applied. This method is also prone to errors by inexperienced operators, which can cause unnecessary suffering to the occupant and a slower than intended death (Blakeley, 2013).
Finally, there is the gas chamber, in which potassium cyanide pellets are dropped into sulfuric acid causing deadly hydrogen cyanide gas to be released into the sealed chamber containing the condemned man. Seizures, coma and cardiac arrest follow, though not always as rapidly as might be hoped – sometimes several minutes (Blakeley, 2013).
Having considered all these methods of execution, the author concludes that there seems to be no clearly reliable most humane method (Blakeley, 2013).
Conclusions
Appendix:
Map Showing Execution Methods Used in Each US State:
(Source: Deathpenaltyinfo.org)
Annotated Bibliography:
Balko, Radley. (Sept. 2011). “Why Americans Still Support The Death Penalty.” Huffington Post: Politics. Web. Accessed 25 April 2015. URL: <http://www.huffingtonpost.com/radley-balko/death-penalty-support-america_b_984931.html>.In this Huffington Post article, Balko seeks to explore just why Americans in large numbers still support capital punishment, even though there have been a number of instances of apparent miscarriages of justice, indicating that the US justice system is more flawed than many realize, and cites instances where the authorities have declined to use DNA testing that could conclusively either clear or convict defendants. He sees vengeance as a primary reason why many want to continue using capital punishment as a tool against crime. He also notes that executions are no longer public, being carried out in front of just a few witnesses, a policy which Balko sees as hiding the brutality of the process from the public. Overall, the article is a strong indictment of capital punishment.
Blakeley, Paul. (May 2013). “Making a Killing: Which is the Most Humane Method of Execution?” Unpopular Science. Web. Accessed 26 April 2015. URL: <http://www.unpopularscience.co.uk/making-a-killing-which-is-the-most-humane-method-of-execution/>.This article provides some useful detail to inform about the various methods of execution currently available to the authorities in America. Whilst one method may have been chosen in favor of another on the grounds of humanity, Blakeley concludes that no single method can be reliably considered as humane, and that maybe it comes down to questions of ethics and morality.
Booth, Michael. (2013). “No credible evidence on whether death penalty deters, experts say.” The Denver Post. Web. Accessed 25 April 2015. URL: <http://www.denverpost.com/ci_23374844/no-credible-evidence-whether-death-penalty-deters-experts>.Booth’s article in the Denver Post examines the evidence for and against the idea that capital punishment is a deterrent. Citing various studies and research, he finds that is no conclusive proof that it really has a deterrent effect on would-be murderers
Chokshi, Niraj. (Apr. 2014). “Map: How each state chooses to execute its death row inmates.” The Washington Post. Web. Accessed 26 April 2015. URL: <http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/govbeat/wp/2014/04/30/map-how-each-state-chooses-to-execute-its-death-row-inmates/>.Chokshi’s article not only provides a very useful US map with annotations and supporting text, showing which states use which methods to implement the death penalty (and those that have abolished it), but also highlights the fact that it is the Southern states which account for the majority of executions, including six states which between them account for two out of every three implementations of the death penalty. An interesting and factual article.
“Gallows used to hang bootlegger who SMILED as he faced death at one of America's last public executions in 1928 are discovered in an old barn”. (May 2013). Mail Online. Web. Accessed 25 April 2015. URL: <http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2325294/Gallows-used-hang-bootlegger-SMILED-faced-death-Americas-public-executions-1928-discovered-old-barn.html>.Although the main focus of this Mail Online article is about the 1928 hanging of one Charlie Birger (a famous bootlegger), it is included because it provides details of the last public hanging in the US (in 1936), which led to the abolition of public executions – an important event in US justice history. An interesting and enlightening document providing important historical detail.
Hannah, Elizabeth. (Mar. 2015). “No method of execution is humane enough to be legal.” The Daily Wildcat. Web. Accessed 26 April 2015. URL: <http://www.wildcat.arizona.edu/article/2015/03/no-method-of-execution-is-humane-enough-to-be-legal>.This University of Arizona published article states the view by Elizabeth Hanna that no method of execution should be called humane. As mentioned in the article by Balko, Hannah also sees all forms of legal executions as revenge killings. Furthermore, she sees the need to stop the pretence of any executions being considered as humane, in the interest of allowing meaningful dialogue about the merits of the death penalty. Hannah is clearly very strongly against capital punishment as practiced in the US today.
Kliegman, Julie. (May 2014). “Tom Coburn: Death penalty deters violent criminals.” Tampa Bay Times. Web. Accessed 26 April 2015. URL: <http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2014/may/06/tom-coburn/tom-coburn-death-penalty-deters-violent-criminals/>.Kliegman examines a claim by Oklahoma Senator Tom Coburn that the death penalty is an effective deterrent. She cites various studies and research, coming to the conclusion that there is no proof it is a deterrent, rounding off by stating that Coburn’s claim is “Mostly False”.
Malik, Sheherezade C. & Holdsworth, D. Paul. (2014). “A Survey of the History of the Death Penalty in the United States.”, University of Richmond Law Review, Vol. 49, pp.693-710. Web. Accessed 25 April 2015. URL: <http://scholarship.richmond.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1097&context=law-student-publications>.This paper is a Law Student publication summarizing the history of the death penalty as applied in the United States, spanning the period from the first such execution in 1607 to the present day, divided into two parts – the early days up to the 19th century; and the more recent era of the 20th and 21st centuries. The authors discuss the execution methods used, the effects on the prevalence for imposition of the death penalty caused by certain individual cases, the race factor, and the differences between individual states and their policies. They conclude that for various reasons, the trend away from capital punishment is increasing. This is an informative paper which provides a good historical background.
Steiker, Carol S. & Steiker, Jordan M. (Feb. 2013). “Entrenchment and/or Destabilization? Reflections on (Another) Two Decades of Constitutional Regulation of Capital Punishment.” Harvard Law School. Web. Accessed 25 April 2015. URL: <http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2127792>.This Harvard Law School paper plots the history of capital punishment in the US from the early 1960s to the present day, including the brief nationwide abolition of the death penalty in 1972, and its cycles of increase and decline since then, noting how in its present guise – decentralized in law terms by the different states – it somehow seems ill-adapted to modern justice. In conclusion, the authors see abolition as a real possibility in the future. It is a detailed and well-researched paper.
