On OJ, I think part of the reason for the not guilty was the fact the jury would have been subjected to months more torment of the sentencing phase if they'd found him guilty. After Johnny C. did "If the gloves don;t fit, you must aquit" I did the same thing with my driving gloves.

 

But where's the justice in any of that?

 

The average time spent on death row is close to twelve years, so your scenario is the rare exception not the rule. Most reputable experts on the subject agree that the death penalty is more expensive than life without parole.

 

If evil is the opposite of good, then yes, I believe we have all seen or experienced evil at some point in our lives. Sadly there are some people who are consummately evil and no amount of rehabilitation will change that evil. Those people, though are generally suffering from a psychological disorder and it could be argued, need to be institutionalized.
Like RC Ryder, I've struggled with this issue for years and have never been able to come to terms with the capricious ways various states mete out punishment. I also agree with the person who said, kill a cop and die, kill a kid and die, kill me and get a few years. There are countries who do not kill their criminals. Is there rate of crime any higher than ours???? I think not.

 

I agree with that too. However, I'd note that the uneven application of the death penalty could be as easily fixed by imposing more death sentences as by imposing fewer.

Our supreme court recently ruled that a death penalty could not be imposed for the rape of a minor that did not result in death. Previously it was only rapes of adults that couldn't be punished with death. The recent ruling was perhaps a good step towards giving adults equal rights with children.

I'd also note that other sentences are just as capricious - especially now that the Federal sentencing guidelines have been thrown out. Also, an argument can be made for allowing different states to have different laws: if you object to the death penalty enough, you can at least move to a state without it, and if you really feel a lot safer with it, you can move to a state that has it.

[QUOTE]There are countries who do not kill their criminals.

 

You didn't mention Canada. I believe murder rates in Canada are generally about a third of those in the United States. I believe that if we are to be a "United" country, then capital punishment laws should be more uniform throughout the United States.

 

Murder rates are down substantially in those countries that don't have the death penalty. All democratic countries have abolished the death penalty with the exception of Japan and South Korea. However, its use is far lower than ours.

There is also a disparity here in the US with non DP states. Those 12 states experience murder rates approximately half that of the DP states.

 

It is easy to reach that conclusion if you accept the maintenance of those on death row for an average of 12 years as a requirement. Someone could use the same data to reach the conclusion that prompt execution is economically desireable. One study that I recently reviewed pointed out that few of those convicted and sentenced are actually executed. For example, New Jersey did a study to analyze the high cost of the death penalty in that state. They have not executed anyone in years. So you have all of the extra expense and no relief of the maintenance cost. In that study, the experts concluded that the death penalty costs more than LWOP. Well, of course it does if you don't carry out the sentence.

I'm not saying this issue should be determined on cost, but it is clear to me that the figures lend themselves to support whatever conclusion you like.

 

Not according to most state studies. Just one of many:

"Overall, first-degree murder cases in which the prosecution has filed a
notice to seek the death penalty cost more than life without parole and life
with the possibility of parole cases. Death penalty cases cost more because:

 

The cost of going to trial in a death penalty case is one reason why Gary Ridgway (aka The Green River Killer) was allowed to plea bargin and avoid the death penalty. He pled guilty to 48 murders and says he has killed 71 people. But no death penalty for him.

Hard to understand why somebody else who has killed one or two people then does get the death penalty.