Innocence
A.) Statistics:
1.) 124 people have been released based on evidence that they were wrongfully convicted
a.) 50 of whom had already served a decade
2.) DNA available in less than 10% of homicides
3.) Legal procedures in place to try and prevent the execution of innocent people, but are very expensive, and difficult to speed up
4.) 1 found to be innocent for every 7 executed
5.) approximately 2% of known murderers are sentenced to death
6.) low representation costs (under $320,000) twice as likely to receive death sentences than those with higher representation costs
7.) 33 years before set free
Deterrence
A.) Studies have shown the death penalty is not an effective deterrent of crime
B.) Punishment is neither sure and swift
C.) When other factors are accounted for, there is no significant difference between countries or states with or without the death penalty
D.) Statistics:
1.) Canada banned the death penalty in 1962 and has seen a decrease in crime, with murder rates moving in parallel with the US
2.) Texas, with the death penalty and the highest execution rate in the nation, has twice the murder rate of Wisconsin, a state without the death penalty
3.) Research in Tennessee shows no clear indication of effectiveness
4.) 5.5/100,000 in DP states vs. 3.6/100,000 in non
5.) Murder rates consistently lower in non-DP states than DP states (4.22 vs. 5.9/100,000 in 2006), stayed at about a 40% difference for the past 5 years, even when compared with geographically neighboring states
6.) Studies showing otherwise:
a.) Based on economics, and complete logic of the rise in cost of an action leads to less of that—not really thinking about that probably, and only 1 in 300 are sentenced to death, also so many factors contributing to the results, hard to isolate as the death penalty, lack of data (16,000 homicides, 153 death sentences, 65 executions in 2003), correlation does not equal causation
Alternatives
A.) Life without Parole:
1.) Faster, rarely appealed, less expensive
2.) Many murder victim family members agree this is a positive alternative to the long, drawn-out death penalty process
3.) Overturning the ruling is a more realistic possibility-death is permanent
4.) Also guarantees no more future crimes
B.) Educational programs in prisons:
1.) 65% of the people on death row had previous felonies, so if there was more work done to make them contributing members of society and prevent further crime the first time around
C.) More funds given to policing to prevent crimes as well
D.) Money given to schools, which will also decrease crime
E.) Other social services
Cost
A.) Legal costs add up to more than the cost of life in prison
B.) Add to that the cost of keeping someone in jail for many years while the appeals and other processes go on
1.) Average time in 2007 was almost 13 years, with the trend moving upwards in essentially solitary confinement conditions and uncertainty, as psychologically damaging as torture (Soering in European Human Rights Court)
C.) Legislative efforts will continue endlessly with the intent of solving these problems, at more costs
D.) Emotional costs for victim’s family, jurors, defendant’s family, etc.
E.) Counties manage these costs by decreasing budgets for highways and police and increasing taxes
F.) If the money was instead used on policing, maybe more murders would be prevented—police themselves believe this is a better way of preventing crime than the threat of the death penalty
G.) Statistics:
1.) $2million for death penalty vs. $900,000 for life without parole
2.) California:
a.) Costs $90,000 more per year to incarcerate someone on death row rather than a lifetime without parole inmate in a maximum security prison
b.) Cost of current death penalty system per year: $137mil
c.) Cost of a fair death penalty system per year: $232.7mil
d.) Cost of a system with maximum sentence of lifetime without parole: $11.5mil
e.) Costs $114mil per year
f.) 1988 study: would save $90mil per year if death penalty was abolished, $78mil of which occurring at the trial, not incarceration, appeal, or execution levels
g.) average of $250mil per carried out execution
h.) only 1% of those sentenced have been executed
i.) 690 total inmates, only 13 executions since 1976
j.) single trial has cost as much as $10.9mil
k.) executing the individuals on death row will cost $4bil more than incarcerating them for life and waiting for them to die of natural causes
3.) Maryland average cost of reaching a single death sentence ruling is $1.9-$3mil more than non-death penalty cases
a.) $37mil per execution
4.) Average cost of defending a trial in a federal death penalty case is $621,000, eight times that of non-death penalty cases
5.) New Jersey spent $253mil on a death penalty system that executed no one in 23 years, about $11mil per year
6.) 48% more costly in Tennessee
7.) Death sentence trials in Kansas last an average of 34 days, as opposed to 9 in non-death sentence trials
8.) One man was in prison for 33 years before set free
威懾效果
A.) 許多實際調查統計顯示死刑的存在並沒有明確威懾的作用
1.) 自從加拿大廢除死刑以來，犯罪率趨於下降，而謀殺率的走勢其實只是反映美國的影響
B.) 基於玉成提出的論點，就算判了死刑，卻不肯執刑
1.) 例如說，加州1976年以後判了703個死刑犯，但在這34年之間，只有13個被執刑
2.) 因此，在目前的司法制度之下，死刑無法起到它原來該起的威懾效果
經費
A.) 至於經費，依據政府支出與預算，光在判決的程序中，死刑案的費用已經超過了終身監禁不得假釋所有的費用
1.) 根據1994年的調查，在德州死刑案件平均要花納稅人的230萬美金，相當於將一個人關在監獄裡頭40年的3倍
B.) 再加上，美國平均執刑前而坐牢的時間將近13年，每年把死刑犯關在監獄裡面的花費比普通的無期徒刑犯貴9萬美金
C.) 一般來說政府怎麼負起死刑體制費用的重任呢？常常這些預算是來自於治安和公共設施的預算以及提高稅率
D.) 那如果社會要付出這麼高昂的代價來保留死刑，那不違背理性嗎？
E.) 警方表示若死刑多餘的費用被轉移到治安其他的項目上，則會作出更佳的妨礙作用
F.) 在降低犯罪率方面，提高定罪率要比加重刑罰來的有效
G.) #政府為了解決死刑體制的問題，必定付出更多的費用
H.) #加州:
1.) 目前死刑制度的費用已經達到了1億3700萬美金
2.) 要是根據州政府提出的報告而進行改善，那每年的經費便會激增到2億3270萬美金
3.) 反之，一個以終身監禁不得假釋為最高刑罰的制度，每年只要花公帑的1150萬美金
I.) ＃死刑由判決到執刑平均耗資高達200萬美金，而終身監禁不得假釋只要90萬美金
替代方案
A.) 那有甚麼足夠的配套措施來取代死刑呢？
B.) 無期徒刑終身監禁不可假釋跟死刑實質上對社會起的作用是一致的
1.) 被關在監獄裡以後，罪犯就不能對公民造成傷害
2.) 而且終身監禁不可假釋的案件辦得更快並且節省公帑
3.) 這也會縮短被害者眷屬的痛苦時期
4.) 終身監禁的案件萬一出現誤判，是可以彌補的，不像死刑那麼有終結性
C.) ＃也可以用一部分花費放在監獄裡的教化和社會化的政策上面，來避免罪犯將犯更嚴重的罪，因為65％死刑犯曾經坐過牢──教育跟犯罪是息息相關的