Execute justice, not people.” Though some of the innocent death row inmates have managed to escape their execution, there are numerous others who are unable to overturn their sentence through appeals. Many cases of innocence go unheard and result in the unfortunate fatality of an innocent bystander. When the death penalty in 1972 was ruled unconstitutional in Furman v. Georgia, the Justices expected that the “adoption of narrowly crafted sentencing procedures would protect against innocent persons being sentenced to death”. But the chances that innocent persons have been or will be executed remain astoundingly high (Bedua 344). The United States justice system was formed on the premise that it should protect society’s general well being from any harm.
Agreeing with someone killing another person is the furthest thing from being right but if someone serves there time and is rehabilitated why shouldn’t they be able to choose who runs our country? When President Lyndon Johnson signed The Voting Rights Act we saw and end to denying minorities the right to vote. When a felon has the right to vote taken away from them they become disenfranchised. A person is sent to jail or put on probation to help rehabilitate the offender, the sad thing is many don’t have strong enough belief in the prison system and in the change for the better of the felon. When a felon comes out of prison they return to society where they have the right to get a job, drive, buy a house and have kids but losing the right to choose who leads our country is a right that is stripped from them.
Although he was found not guilty, McNaughtan spent twenty years in a mental asylum until his death. Although helpful to truly insane criminals, the insanity plea has many flaws when it comes to the victims. Pleading insanity should be outlawed because it is unfair to the victims’ families, dangerous to society, and ambiguous in its interpretation. One flaw of the insanity plea is how the victims and their families are affected. For example on March 21, 2010, Kathy Powell, the mother of 21 year old Taylor Powell, who was brutally murdered by Jarrod Wyatt outside Klamath, Oregon, said the suspect's recent insanity plea was a complete lie.
There should be some type of punishment when the United States court system fails; matters should be taken into the hands of the citizens. In “The Killings” by Andre Dubus, Matt decides the fate of the Strout who murdered his beloved son because he believed the court system will not prevail. In the court system, there are only three options the verdict could be: plead insane, receive capital punishment, or could be put on parole. The first verdict of the trial would be for Strout to plead insanity. Insanity defence is the claim that a defendant is not responsible for their actions in the case due to mental health problems.
The people of this country have come to the realization that capital punishment should be removed from our state 's legislature because it is does not prevent crime, it does not bring those who died back to life, and can easily be replaced with life without parole. The death penalty, stemming from both its brutal past and ineffective present, is a controversial and complex topic that all over the United States is becoming more clear that it is not an acceptable punishment due to the brutal methods, and lack of precise rules. A large factor in the support for capital punishment is the claim that the death penalty prevents crimes from occurring, which is false. Data presented Doctor Michael Radelet, who has a PhD in sociology, in the essay “How does Detterence Work?” He stated “We expect that some of the would-be Texas murderers who think about sanctions would recognize this new law and take their friend or loved one to New Mexico to kill them, thus risking “only” LWOP. Obviously, this idea is absurd.
The sentencing of an innocent person not only displays the inefficiency of a government’s judicial system to uphold these values, but also the irreversible damage done to the individual. The pressure that law enforcement officials face from the public to find closure to cases highlight one reason why the burden of proof is essential in the judicial system. When a police department cannot find suspects to charge for a crime, it is then seen as a failure on its part. In October, a rally was organized against the death penalty in Houston, Texas. Amnesty International revealed 180 boxes containing unexamined files with vital information about cases involving prisoners on death row.
The jury ruled him “not guilty by reason of insanity”. The reason for the verdict was M’Naughten... ... middle of paper ... ...eople that went to jail because of the confusion with the insanity defense and the law has become unfavorable towards the insanity defense. As the New York Times says,” Congress barred federal courts from finding defendants legally insane “merely” because they were too mentally ill to have avoided committing the crime.” This means that mentally unstable people are going to jail untreated. The insanity defense has come to questioning our morals. When someone is mentally unstable, do they deserve to be endure the sometimes harsh punishments of our law or should they be treated for their illness in a psychiatric hospital?
Max Soffar, whose mental illness left him particularly vulnerable to giving a false confession, stands convicted and sentenced to death for allegedly killing four victims during an armed robbery in a Houston bowling alley (Thorn, par. 2). The court overturned the conviction in 2004 because during his trial, lawyers failed to argue that Soffars confession contradicted the other evidence in the case, and he ended up on death row (Thorn, par. 4). From two unfair trials to a death sentence, the court ruled that the false confession given by Soffar should stand.
A study by the Death Penalty Information Center found that “executing the insane is unconstitutional; however, if an inmate's mental competency has been restored, he or she can then be executed (deathpenalty).” The time has come for us to accept the fact that executing mentally ill offenders is not beneficial to society for many reasons. Although some mentally ill criminals have broken the law, we need to have a federal law that mentally ill criminals shouldn’t be executed because it’s amoral to take away a life. According to the American Civil Liberties Union that works to protect human right, argued that mentally ill criminals should not be put to death. Evidence supports that many people, including judges and jurors, misunderstand mental illness, which can lead to a person without a clear understanding of right and wrong being put to death. The organization explained that mental illness is caused by disorders of the brain; The ACLU implores that the United States stop executing mentally ill offenders, which is in keeping most nations and international laws.
The supporters claim that the death penalty will eliminate criminals and that these offenders will not be around to repeat any future crimes. Legally, criminals should be "innocent until proven guilty;” but in reality, they are often accused to be "guilty until proven innocent.” However, the abolitionists argue that innocent people have been mistakenly placed on death row and executed because of the flaws in the current criminal justice system. Amnesty International discovered that “innocent people may be sentenced to death through judicial error” ("Evidence Against Death Penalty”). As a result, tragedies are irreversible. An innocent victim by the name of “Steven Truscott was wrongly convicted of murder… It was horrible for Truscott and the victim 's family because the real culprit got away with murder” (Wheeler).