IAC and Death Penalties - Assignment Example

Introduction Death penalties by capital punishment to innocent person due to miscarriage of justice are referred as wrongful conviction or execution. There are controversies and debates all around the world against death penalties given to accused criminals. The main reason behind the controversies is that people should not have the authority to judge and take life of other people without it becomes unethical if the degree of the crime is not equivalent to death sentence. Despite of controversies, capital punishment is enjoyed all over the world. In the United States 65 percent of population support the use of death penalty according to 2009 Gallup poll. There are many reasons behind miscarriage of justice including inadequate legal representation, racial prejudice, mistaken eye witness testimony, prosecutorial misconduct and lack of effective working of police, political and capitalistic influence during judgment. Discussion Death penalties have been a part of human civilization from very beginning. If a person commits any crime he is liable for punishment which may even result to a death sentence based on the degree of crime the person committed. The problem arises when a person is given declared death sentence because of a crime he has not committed or his activity was not so dangerous based on contrary to the sentence he received. People have been opposing death sentences because they have belief that human life is a gift of God and by taking life from someone means to disrespect God and his gift. People who are highly superstitious generally have such kind of faith and they tend to stand against the execution process of human being. There are several other factors that cause people to stand against death penalties. The most important factor is incorrect judgment that causes loss of an innocent’s life (Kaadish 188). There are instances where it has been found that because of incorrect judgment that can be influenced by variety of reasons innocent people are given death sentence which is definitely an unethical stand. In the year 1984, Weiqing Ann, a Chinese citizen was given death sentence by the intermediate People’s court. The citizen was accused for the rape of Kun Liu, a woman who disappeared for a long time. The accused was executed on 3 May 1984 and the investigation and case was closed (McConville 558). Later it was revealed that a different person Tian Yuxiu was the person who had committed the crime and the person who was given the death penalty was actually innocent. After three years from Weiqing Ann’s death he was officially declared as innocent. This instance shows the unethical stand of death penalty. Other people nearby to his place had belief that if an innocent could be penalized for a crime he never committed their lives were also at a dangerous stake. This thought actually makes people to object death penalties. In the year 1952, Mahmood Hussein was carried out for killing of Lily Volpert. There were many evidences that were brought to support the innocence of the accused. The court still decided to punish the convict because there was lack of solid evidence. In the year 1998, court appeal determined that the real case was incorrect and Justice Rose demonstrably flawed during jurisdiction. His family was awarded 725,000 pounds as compensation. For the first time a compensation was given to a family for a member who was wrongfully hanged (Cook 78). This shows the unethical stand of death penalty in U.K. People of United Kingdom were shattered after knowing the real fact. An innocent person receiving a death penalty is obviously a matter of shame for law making persons. Because of these reasons protests continue against death penalty because an individual should not have any right to take life of another person without any reason. An important incident that happened in the year 1950 on Timothy Evans for murder of his baby daughter Geraldine despite of Timothy being innocent made drastic changes in United Kingdom (Ayton 212). Timothy Evans was tried and executed in 1950 however after 16 tears it was realized that Evan’s fellow tenant John Reginald was the actual convict. Reginald was a serial killer and he was responsible for killings of many people including Evan’s wife. This story shook many people’s heart and finally the case encouraged the abolition of capital punishments and executions in 1965. This incident also highlighted that Evans was responsible for responsible for killing of five other women and was punished accordingly. The incident also shows that Evans lost his life unnecessarily being tried under false probation (Samuels 21). Hence this is another unethical stand against death penalties in the world. Cameron Todd Willingham a citizen of United States was executed in February 2004 for killing his three children in Texas. Later on it was derived that Willingham was innocent because the reason behind the tragic incident was fire which had caused naturally. Investigator Gerald Hurst later discovered that the accused was innocent and it was a very unethical step to give the accused death penalty so quickly without checking every detail thoroughly (Lassiter 88). Hence it is true that death penalties should not be given until complete evidence is presented against an accused. Protestors against death penalties complain about the same thing because they understand the value of life of a person and life of a person should not be taken just because of a false perception. No-one in this world has the power of giving life to someone hence they should not order to take life of someone without any appropriate reason. Hence it is a completely unethical stand against humanity. Recommendation From the above discussion it is clear that death penalties are unethical and it can lead to disastrous circumstances if not verified properly. In case of all the death penalties discussed there was one thing in common, due to lack of proper verification innocent people were given death sentence. The most ethical stand that can be taken is that death sentence should be removed like what happened in the United Kingdom. However many people have argued that removal of death sentence would not be helpful because anti-social activities would because of lack of fear from death. Hence there should be a remedial step taken so that inappropriate justice would not hamper life of a person (Siegel 72). It should be made mandatory to verify evidences again and again and if a death sentence is found mandatory Supreme Court should only have the right and permit to provide such important decision. Loss of life of innocent people is a shame for the humanity because it does not make any difference between a person with good motive and a person with bad motives. It has been recorded that about 4 percent of death penalties till date were given to innocent people. The number might look small but it is not ethical to kill someone without a proper reason. Conclusion It is clear that death penalties have been a part of jurisdiction process from a long time however it is also true that death penalties have not helped people who have been killed despite of their innocence. Hence before providing death sentence government should provide special investigation team to check thoroughly weather a death sentence should be given to a person or not based on the degree of crime he has committed. Government should also take a stand to provide special investigation despite of severity of accusation the person is held with. This stand is necessary because a death sentence is very crucial and it should not be given out due to political or capital pressure nor it should be given out due to negligence of police in their job. Hence it can be said that death penalty is an unethical stand and there needs to be special steps taken before it can be implemented. Works Cited Ayton, Mel. Dark Soul of the South. London: Routledge, 2011. Print. Cook, Kimberly. Life after Death Row. London: ProQuest, 2012. Print. Kadish, Sanford. Encyclopedia of Crime and Justice. New York: Springer, 2009. Print. Lassiter, Daniel. Interrogations, Confessions and Entrapment. London: Kogan Page, 2006. Print. McConville, Mike. Criminal Justice in China. New York: Springer, 2011. Print. Samuels, Charles. The Death Penalty in California. New Jersey: Pearson, 2008. Print. Siegel, Larry. Corrections Today. London: Sage, 2013. Print. Read More