Death Penalty? or NO Death Penalty?

Different aspects of the stages in a capital case function to protect the rights of the accused. In a way, they are searching for reasons to declare you innocent. In the Pre-Trial (phase I) evidence is gathered from both sides of the case and if they are proven guilty, the case continues onto the Guilt Phase Trail where prospective jurors examine and question if the case is "death qualified" by considering aggravating and mitigating evidence. During the case, the defendant tries to rebut the prosecution's evidence to help establish innocence. A Direct Appeal is possible if the defendant can show that a "critical mistake was made in the process that convicted him." The review does not revisit factual issues decided at trial, and only new evidence is taken into account. In the Federal Habeas Corpus phase, the a writ can be brought to ensure that the imprisonment is legal. However, an evidentiary hearing can be held to try to prove or disprove a statement in the habeas corpus petition and an appeal can be heard by a panel of three judges. Last, one can plead for clemency to reduce the punishment declared by the courts.

I believe that the system and stages of a Capital Case do give plenty of opportunities to appeal and prove an individual innocent. I find this effective to a certain point. If the individual was declared guilty in the first case, I don't believe the Court made a mistake if all the evidence shows he was guilty. In those cases in which one later tries to prove himself innocent seems like a waste of time. The justice system does have flaws, but not so many that anyone should be able to appeal and prove themselves guilty; there must have been a reason one was declared guilty. . . And only if there is new legitimate evidence should the Court hold a hearing for review. If people keep pleading for clemency and try to fight for their innocence, the justice system will become more flawed. I believe the government needs to have some type of requirement or limit that the prisoner needs to pass in order to appeal. And if they pass, then one should be able to appeal and fight for their life.


There have been many different methods to execute those found guilty and on death row. I believe the most humane way to kill someone is to lethally inject someone because it is quick, but still allows the individual to suffer. The most inhumane ways would be hanging, electrocution, or gas chambers because it kills an individual slowly, causing them to feel the pain. When someone is hanged, if he or she is not heavy enough, the fracture-dislocation of the neck will not occur and the individual will suffocate, due to the lack of oxygen. This method is very painful and cruel. People may argue that it is as if they are going back in time when hanging blacks was okay. That was found wrong, so why should they bring this method back into play? The electrocution method was seen to be a "more humane method of execution than hanging," but I believe it is still cruel and unusual punishment. Volts are sent through the body for thirty seconds, then a break follows after; if the individual is still alive, the process is repeated, until he is pronounced dead. According to the passage, "the prisoner's eyeballs sometimes pop out and rest on [his] cheeks. The prisoner often defecates, urinates, and vomits blood and drool. The body turns bright red as its temperature rises, and the prisoner's flesh swells and his skin stretches to the point of breaking. Sometimes the prisoner catches fire.... Witnesses hear a loud and sustained sound like bacon frying, and the sickly sweet smell of burning flesh permeates the chamber" (Ecenbarger, 1994). This description is so detailed that it makes me sick. How can one withstand watching someone suffer and be in this much pain, no matter the circumstance? I would not be able to withstand watching such a process, for it is brutal and causes a lot of suffering. The gas chamber and firing squad seem to be not as inhumane as hanging, but not as "humane" as lethal injection. They are found somewhere in the middle of this scale. Firing squad is a quick death, unless a shooter chooses or accidentally misses the heart. The gas chamber is more cruel than the firing squad  for it cuts off all source of oxygen, causing a slow, painful death. Slowly the heart and brain shuts down because of the lack of oxygen, but their death is only a matter of time. I believe all methods are "cruel and unusual" according to the Eighth Amendment, except that of lethal injection and firing squad. From statistics, lethal injection is the most common way to execute if the state allows the death penalty. I was not surprised for this is the most humane way to "put someone down," as they always phrase it. But some argue that this does not allow enough pain and suffer becuase the chemicals are injected, and it is over. So how much should someone suffer? What seems reasonable?

Illinois at some point had the death penalty and had an average rate of 6.0 homicides per 100,000 people. The lowest rate was 0 with New Hampshire who doesn't have the death penalty and 18.8 in Puerto Rico; the average rate which I see around the nation is around 4.5. The death row by ethnicity and gender reallly surprised me. Blacks had the highest rates, up to 252 people in California and as low as zero for thsoe states that do not have the death penalty. The next ethnicity i clicked on was Asian and it was a huge difference. almost every number dropped to zero on the map, except a few. California with 22 really caught my attention. Why does California always have such high numbers? I understand it is a large state, but so is Texas that only has four Asians and had 129 blacks; Florida even had 139 blacks. The numbers for whites was also pretty high. I was not surprised to see California and Texas with high numbers, but it did when I saw Florida with 221 whites. These differences in race really struck me becuase many people stereotype and associate blacks with crime. Now I can say that they truly are correct, but it this doesn't defeat the fact that it is wrong to follow stereotypes and base beliefs off them. For example, the numbers for whites and blacks were similar. But how come Asians weren't? Are they just more humble as they meditate (another stereotype? These statistics based on race really casued me to take a step back to try to make sense of the results. But I guess there isn't no real answer. Gender also really plays a big role, being that the numbers for males are significantly higher. Why is this? Because males are known to let their anger out more regularly? Because they have more strength and could carry out a murder? It really puzzled me to see such a large difference, but in a way I am glad that the females had lower numbers. Next I compared the total number of people on death row to executions. Generally, the numbers of executions was lower than the number of those on death row. Texas was the only state that really struck me, having 333 on death row and 466 executions. But what do these numbers mean? What can we conclude? Why do these differences create such a big gap between numbers within the nation, within states? I sadly can't answer these questions and only was able to provide theories.

Seeing all the different criminal offenses in Illinois really surprised me. I didn't realize that there can be so many different cases and situations regarding murder. The document on homicide goes into such detail that it in a way frightened me. Some of the crimes  I hadn't even considered. It went into such detail about murder, death penalty, and exceptions. I understood that the process was long with all the trials, but this document really laid out the details and how they determine who gets the death penalty. I believe Illinois doesn't have the death penalty anymore because the process is so long. I looked at the statistics and when they did have the death penalty, many were acquitted, granted clemency, or got a lesser punishment. It is as if they tried to find reasons to keep them innocent. For example, 187 clemencies were granted and 20 people were freed from the death row.

The majority vote to choose a punishment other than the death penalty for murder was 61% in a study in 2010. So most people are against the death penalty, but so many states still have it. This seems contradicting, as if the government does not listen to its citizens. How can the government have support, if the majority is against what the justice system declares? Also the death penalty shows that many executions are not dependent on race. The leading race of executions is white with 56%, while the leading race of the victim is also white with 76%. Many believe that blacks would have the highest execution rate, but they are wrong. They are the second largest race, but still not as big as the white race. I was surprised by the study showing that a total of 138 people on death row were released due to evidence of innocence. Illinois was one of the top states with 20 releases. There obviously must have been a flaw in the justice system if so many people were released for innocence.