Death Penalty: Curse or
Cause
It
was still dark on the prison ground of Kajang Prison in the twilight of
November 2, 2001 but several executioners and guards were standing by, looking
grim. Cold wind snapped at their ankle and wind rustled the trees nearby making
eerie sounds as they were getting ready to execute 3 people responsible for the
death of a state assamblyman[sic], Mazlan Idris. Yet the three convicts
appeared calm and composed; a complete opposite of the executioners. Mona
Fandey smiles as they covered her head with a black sack. “I will not die,” she
said as they placed the noose around her neck. Moments later she was dead,
sentenced to death by hanging for murder (BBC, 2001).
The
death of Mona Fandey, pop artist turned shaman (bomoh), raised some questions
about the relevancy of death penalty in the minds of Malaysian. Hers and two of
her accomplices’ highly publicised trial and execution drew public attention
from all over the world including several international bodies such as Amnesty
International who voiced their opposition to the execution of the trio (Amnesty
International, 2001) Although it was to no avail, the execution of Mona Fandey
has certainly planted the seed of doubt about death penalty in our mind. It
certainly made us ask whether it is a curse or it’s a justified cause to peace
sanctity.
Death
Penalty or Capital Punishment has been in practice in virtually every society.
From the crucifixion of Jesus to the hanging of Ali Hassan Abd al-Majid or
“Chemical Ali” on 25 January 2010, the method and the crimes punishable by capital
punishment varies largely from society to society. Whether it is for justice or
petty revenge or grudges we should not dismiss the fact that of those who were
executed some were in fact innocence. This has no doubt raised some questions
about the practice of death penalty. In a poll conducted by Newsweek, in United States of America,
82 percent of those who responded believed that “at least a few innocent people
have been executed since the ‘70s”. In 1999, Ronald Williamson was released
after spending eleven years on death row for a crime he did not commit. He was
convicted of “raping, strangling, and mutilating a 21-year old waitress, Debra
Sue Carter, in Oklahoma, US, in 1982” based on testimony by Glenn Gore and on
strands of hair found at the crime scene. In 1997, DNA sampling determined that
the hair came from Glenn Gore himself, proving Ronald’s innocence (Gottfried,
2002, p. 13).
The
questions now, of the estimated 441 inmates currently on death row in Malaysia
as of 2011 (Amnesty International, 2012, p. 248-249), how many of them are
innocent? Is it justified that we execute innocent people? Or does that make us
the same as the murderers who were executed? Is death penalty a legalized
murder, murder conducted by the ones in power hiding behind the Law? So in the
end, again, is death penalty a curse that we bestowed upon the convicted or is
it a justified cause to protect public life and interests.
Condemned to Death
Capital
punishment can be curse that is branded on the convicts. We have been taught
since young that every precious little life is sacred; be it an immobile tree
or a pestering cockroach, taking the life of others is something that we should
not take lightly. The death of a life has its consequences. Whether it brings
grieves to those close and dear or brings war to the one who take the life,
death is something that will affect us one way or another especially if it is taken
by force and abruptly.
The
ancient lex talionist or the law of
retribution say that “only certain persons deserve to be punished harshly,
namely those responsible and blameworthy for knowingly and seriously harming
others” (Kay, 2005, p. 10) Hence blood must be repay by blood, and henceforth
the birth of death penalty.
Being
in practice for thousands of years, tracing its origin from China to Africa,
Middle East to America, capital punishment was used to punish crime and to
suppress political dissent. According to Malaysia penal code (2006), for
example, capital punishment is reserved for those who: wage war against Yang
di-Pertuan Agong; offences against a Ruler; abetting mutiny (armed forces);
abetment of suicide, attempt by life convict to commit murder, if hurt is
caused; kidnapping or abducting in order to murder; hostage taking; gang
robbery with murder; drug trafficking; possession of firearm; and especially
murder. Before the revision of Criminal law of China in 1997, even the killing
of is punishable by death (Zhou, 2011).
Bearing
all these in mind, capital punishment which was once utilised against crimes
that pose heavy threat to community such as murder, espionage and treason has
now extended to crimes which only benefit certain community especially the ones
in holding of power all “for the benefit of public”. Where is the law of
retribution now when capital punishment is extended to crimes committed by
convicts that can be rehabilitated back into society?
The
evolution of capital punishment from one that based on the ancient lex talionis to the one practiced now is
quite astounding. In Europe and Middle East, for example, murder was not always
seen as a public offence. In pre-Christian Europe, tribal group regarded
murder, adultery, theft, slender, and assault as private affairs to be settled
by the clan. Only a few actions were considered true social threat – incest,
sorcery, sacrilege, treason. Any crime committed by a clan involving the clan
itself would be solve within the clan itself bearing in mind the need of the
victim and victimizer. Clans also developed ways to limit damage from
reciprocal blood feuds one being restitution to families, such as Germanic and
Anglo Saxon system of wergild (Kay,
2005, p. 10) and Islam’s system of diyah.
It
was not until the establishment of kingship did the view on “public crimes” and
“capital crimes” changes in the European continent. Private wrong which was
once adjudicated by the clan redefined as “crimes against the crown” and “in
breach of public tranquillity”. In this system, the victims now took backseat
to redress to the king. The system of restitution to the families withered
away; now fines went into king’s coffers, not the family (Kay, 2005, p. 11).
Known
as the “Bloody Code” the king sees any crimes that posed a threat to his
kingship as a crime that should be punish by death. At its height the criminal
law included some 220 crimes punishable by death to the extent that it delivers
people to the scaffold for stealing turnips and poaching (Christoph, 1962). Sir
Samuel Romilly, speaking to the House of Commons on capital punishment in 1810,
declared that "…(there is) no country on the face of the earth in which
there [have] been so many different offences according to law to be punished
with death as in England" (Bailey, 2000).
Looking
back, there are not that many differences that distinguish the Law we practice
today with the Bloody Code back then. Leaving behind the travesty crimes
punishable by death, the Law today places the need of immediate victims behind
and put the “public need” first in punishing convicts. This is to the point
where victims who oppose capital punishment to be treated as “second-class
victims” or even “denied of the status victim” (Kay, 2005, p. xiv) It blindly
assumed victims will have closure when the victimizer is punished “justly” and
“harshly”. Especially with crimes such as murder, the chain will not end with
the death of the perpetrator in fact it only just begun.
Curse
of Death Penalty
Capital
punishment loses its significant when it fails to act as a deterrent and when
it is abused to instil unnecessary fear; it is a curse when it is executed in
manner that is void of any humane value. A death sentence without proper and
just trial strips the convicted from his or her human right. A system that does
not recognize forgiveness and redemption, one that condemned any of those
sentenced with death penalty to certain death without a fair opportunity for
appeal is not fit as a criminal law. Such system reprobate convicts; condemn
and exclude them from society forever.
Yes, it is true that some crimes are so
heinous that they deserve the punishment inflicted upon them. But if one
expresses deep regret with one’s action and shows positive reaction toward
rehabilitation one deserves some sort compassion and mercy. Take the case of
Karla Faye Tucker who confessed to two killings. Ms. Tucker converted to
Christianity while on death-row and had married the prison chaplain and went on
to become a model inmate. In the eye of the Evangelical Christians she was
regarded as “proof of the transforming power of God”. She appeared on TV shows
and asked to be spared from her fate. She managed to garner attention from all
over the world including the pope as well as other religious leaders of many
faiths asking for her execution to be halted. Nevertheless, the then Governor
Bush allowed the execution to proceed. How it is not a curse when one is denied
from compassion or at least lightening of sentence? (Gottfried, 2002. p. 19).
Although
to be realistic we do not condone that murderers should be set free but if they
do show changes such as Ms. Tucker, they have the right to be given mercy and
be spared from the gallows and instead to life-sentence, at most. We should
first understand that killer or murderer does not spawn out of nowhere; and
that not all murders are premeditated, some are done in the heat of emotion or temporary
insanity (Gottfried, 2002).
Misconception of the
Penalty
One
of main reasons that people are fighting against the abolishment of capital
punishment is the misconception of the penalty. Too often we hear the story that
blood should be paid with blood. Fire must be fought with fire in this unkind
reality and those who speak and act otherwise are weak and soft-hearted; not
fit to live in this harsh world. We also
hear that capital punishment is fundamental for victim’s family to reach
closure, a word that may mean various things (and nothing with reaching peace
in a situation) but basically means “putting an end to the nightmare of the
crime responsible for their loss” (Gottfried, 2002. p. 44).
Capital
punishment, harsh as it may be, is not passed out lightly. In America, of
death-eligible cases that go to trial “Juries impose the death penalty in only
about 10% of capital cases…” (Kay, 2005, p. xiv) and only about 1 to 2 percent
of all murderers actually receive a death sentence, since not all homicide
cases make it to trial (Ostapiak, 2001). This may due to several factors such
as insufficient credible evidence and cost (Kay, 2005, p. xxi).
So
what happen to families when there is no offender caught and when a death
sentence is overturned, or the person convicted and serving time on death row
is later exonerated and released, leaving the actual murderer still unidentified
and at large? Will these families forever live in their nightmare never to
experience the “closure” and “miraculous effect” death sentencing supposed to
bring? What happened then when the one executed is innocent and the “closure”
the family seek is not meted out? What of those who wants to tell a different
story? Of the “second-class victims” (Cushing & Sheffer, 2002, p. 8) who oppose capital punishment?
If it is really for the public what of those who wants an alternative, those
who says that violence is not the answer to their fate?
It
is true that not every victim family wants to see the person who takes away the
ones they love being sentence to death. “I stand firmly and unequivocally
opposed to the death penalty for those convicted of capital offenses. An evil
deed is not redeemed by an evil deed of retaliation. Justice is never advanced
in the taking of a human life. Morality is never upheld by a legalized murder,”
said Coretta Scott King, whose mother-in-law and whose husband, Reverend Dr.
Martin Luther King Jr., were both murder victim (Gottfried, 2002, p. 26). Those
that stand to oppose death penalty believe that every life is precious and no
matter who is in charge and in what name, killing is wrong. Anti-death penalty
activist stands on the basic principle: “thou shalt not kill”.
The Painless Death
Death
penalty has long been dubbed as the painless death, convict will feel little or
no pain and that the execution is done quickly and humanely but how true is
this? Looking back at the history, painless death is not always the objective
of death penalty. Suffering and torment dogged the sentence with its
excruciating, painful and bizarre execution methods. In ancient Rome, criminals
were nailed to crosses and left to die slowly in public, scorned and humiliated
by the society. Rome was also famous for executing their war criminals in the Coliseums
by letting them face wild animals. In Mongols, criminals were punished by
quartering; criminals were tied to four horses and were pulled apart.
Although
by the end of eighteenth century beheading by axe was a preferred method, too
often the executioner’s aim was off and the execution was botched (Gottfried,
2002, p. 102). This end up having the criminal being hacked to death like
animal in slaughter house if not worse. This prompted a French physician named
Joseph-Ignace Guillotin to develop a machine intended make an execution a
“quick and painless” process. Called the Guillotine, it involves inserting a
heavy-weighted blade between two grooved post and a board at the bottom, which
was moulded to hold to fit the criminal’s head. But this too proved ineffective
as more often than not the flat blade wobbled or the mould doesn’t fit the
criminal’s neck properly causing the execution to be a very gruesome and messy
“experience”.
Nowadays,
several methods are preferred over the rest namely death by hanging, firing
squad and lethal injection to name a few. But none of these guarantee to give a
quick and painless execution. Hanging, for example, is considered “a painful
and inhumane method of execution”, even by the pro-death penalty because some of
cases where the convicted neck did not break and caused the person to be slowly
being strangled to death by the noose (Pro-death Penalty, 2001). Firing squad,
as with the decapitation by axe, poses problem when the shots missed the vital
points causing the criminals to be showered with rounds of artillery.
Although
lethal injection is considered as the most humane, painless and “clean” method
there is, recent cases suggest that this is not so. Some people react
differently with drugs especially those with underlying health problem such as
asthmatics and diabetics. In particular, those with a history of drug use
complicate the insertion of the tubes into the veins. The U.S. Court of Appeals
has observed that there is evidence that “lethal injection poses a serious risk
of cruel, protracted death,” adding that “even a slight error in dosage or
administration can leave a prisoner conscious but paralyzed while dying, a…
witness of his or her own asphyxiation” (Bedeau, 2011).
Physical
pain is not the only pain that these death-row inmates suffer from. From the
day they were sentenced to the day the sentence is carried out they suffer from
constant psychological torture. The death-row experience of hope and
disappointment, the end anticipated and then postponed only to be rescheduled
is a mental torture that ordinary people cannot imagine. And they are not the
only one who suffers.
The
long time lapse between the day of sentencing and the day of being sentenced,
family member suffer from “prolonged period of anticipatory grieving”. They
know that their loved ones will be executed and yet after years and decades
they can still visit them watch how they grow only to see they die later. And
to make matter worse, they have to live with the shame that their loved ones
“have been formally cast out of society and judged to be unworthy to live” (Gottfried,
2002, p. 50-53).
A Justified Cause
But,
amidst all the arguments, we should not forget why there was a death penalty at
all; suum cuique tribue – to give to
everyone what he deserves – is as sound a reason as any. Everything that we do
deserves the same amount of ‘reward’. If we demand a good reward for every good
deed that we done, why can’t the same be true for every ‘bad deed’, every
unlawful act that we commit?
Death
penalty is a justified cause to protect and saves innocent lives. It is inherent
in preserving justice and to maintain peace. Amidst what was said against it,
the fact that most people agree that death penalty should be enforced is
undeniable. Our need to receive or take something of equal value is embedded
deep within our gene. We do not see a man cheated from his bargain being happy
about it nor do we see a man sold a valuable below its original price bragging
about it. We will not, also, be satisfied if criminals were let go with a
lenient punishment nor do we condone a prolong torture. No matter what the
situation is, that need to be even, to be fair and just, is apparent in all of
us.
“If
anyone kills person… it would be as if he killed all people. And if anyone
saves a life, it would be as if he saved the life of all people” (Qur’an, 5:32), such is value of a life. Does
a life time in prison, living off taxpayer’s money, justifies such value? No.
No matter how we look at it a life time in prison does not makes any difference
in a murderer’s life. In fact, it is a common knowledge that prison usually
brings out the worse in people and those that enter them ended up worse after
incarceration. And a life time imprisonment without parole is, in fact, a long
and as cruel as death penalty if not worse.
Convicts
sentenced to life-time imprisonment are sometimes placed in solitary
confinement alone with no human contact except correction officers and his
lawyers. They are only allowed few hours (or usually an hour a day) to exercise
in the open yard, alone (Demer, 2009). Advocates against death penalty said
that life-time imprisonment is a more humane solution but does stripping one of
its freedom humane? Such treatment is nothing but a long torture to convicts’
psych; it is a “cruel and unusual treatment”, the very reason the anti-death
penalty based their arguments on. It is no wonder that those on death row and
in life sentence ends up dead, not naturally or by execution, but by suicide
(Furillo, 2008).
And
that is not all. Murderers in life imprisonment are not only a threat to
themselves but a threat to the prison community as well. In March 2000, Robert
Lynn Pruett – a murderer serving life sentence in Texas - was charged with the
murder of a prison guard, Daniel Nagle. It is alleged that he held the down the
guard while another prisoner fatally stabbed him with a sharpened steel rod. If
death penalty was carried out will such things happen? Death penalty not only
deters others from committing homicide, it prevents criminal such as Robert
from committing the same crime again (Gottfried, 2002, p. 40).
To protect the peace
Fear
has long been the essence of life, particularly the fear of death. Whether it
is consciously or unconsciously our life is govern primarily by fear of death.
We eat and drink, we exercise and work, we avoid plane and we smoke less, all
for fear of our life. And we even kill for fear of death; to kill or being
killed, survival of the fittest.
Without
the fear of death, one will walk through life cruising through one life threatening
situation after another. It is not a problem when the only life concerned is
one own, such as the acts of dare-devils, but when it involves others it is
another matter altogether. When one does not fear government because death is
not a question, one will rebel. Just look at the coup d'état
that occurred in Thailand, such situation can only occur when fear of death is
not in question.
When
there is rebellion in the government, the needs of the public is sidetracked.
The citizens are divided to camps, one supporting the old government and the
other the rebels. And when that happened protest and war is not a far cry. Will
any of these occur when death is the answer for treason and mutiny? No. No one
in their right mind will oppose the government if swift death is ensures.
Therefore death penalty is important to prevent such event. Without it, in the
worst case scenario, chaos is likely to happen. Death penalty is there for a
reason; to protect the public from such threats.
The “Abolished”
Practice
The
practice of death penalty had once been suspended in United States of America
for 9 years after a series of public protest fuelled by the execution Caryl
Chessman and a 1958 movie, I Want to Live
directed by Robert Wise, depicting the Barbara Graham who was convicted of
murder and facing execution. Following the nationwide release of the movie,
there was a notable decrease in executions the United States. The states’
reluctance to execute death-row prisoners reflected studies showing that “in 1967
public opinion was overwhelmingly opposed to the death penalty” (Gottfried,
2002). But all this was not without a price.
“During
the temporary suspension on capital punishment from 1972-1976, researchers
gathered murder statistics across the country. In 1960, there were 56
executions in the USA and 9,140 murders. By 1964, when there were only 15
executions, the number of murders had risen to 9,250. In 1969, there were no
executions and 14,590 murders, and 1975, after six more years without
executions, 20,510 murders occurred rising to 23,040 in 1980 after only two
executions since 1976. In summary, between 1965 and 1980, the number of annual
murders in the United States skyrocketed from 9,960 to 23,040, a 131 percent
increase. The murder rate -- homicides per 100,000 persons -- doubled from 5.1
to 10.2 (Gottfried, 2002) So the number of murders grew as the number of
executions shrank. Researcher Karl Spence of Texas A&M University said:
"While some [death penalty] abolitionists try to
face down the results of their disastrous experiment and still argue to the
contrary, the... [data] concludes that a substantial deterrent effect has been
observed...In six months, more Americans are murdered than have killed by
execution in this entire century...Until we begin to fight crime in earnest [by
using the death penalty], every person who dies at a criminal's hands is a
victim of our inaction."(Lowe, 2011)
During this time span, poll after poll revealed that
public opinion had shifted dramatically to favour the death penalty.
By
the beginning of 1990s, states that wished to re-impose death penalty had
fought their way through endless appeals and restrictions imposed by courts. In
1991, 14 murderers were executed while 2,500 waited on death row. By 1993 the
figure had risen to 38 executions, then 55 in 1995, and 98 in 1991. At the same
time, murder rates began to plummet – to 9.6 per 100,000 in 1993, 7.7 in 1996,
and 6.4 in 1999, the lowest since 1966. To put matter simply, over the past 40
years, homicides have gone up when executions have gone down and vice versa
(Tucker, 2001).
So
does abolishing death penalty had its desired effect of protecting innocent
lives? Yes it does, say the anti-death penalty. To them none of this proves
anything. The decline might just be coincidence. But is it responsible to
gamble away that prospect; to gamble away innocent lives? According to a study
conducted in U.S. in 2003 each execution deters an average of 18 murders
(Lowe,2011) and it saves at least 5 - 18 innocent lives (Dezhbakhsh & Rubin, 2003). So is it worth it to waste away these
innocent lives for the lives of guilty murders? It is all in a matter of
perspective.
Although
it is true that to prove death penalty has direct effect with crime rate is
hard to prove. The only way to obtain a near-conclusive proof would be to
conduct a social experiment but such experiments would be completely unethical.
It is hard to proof this relationship because death penalty is not the only
variable in crime reduction. Other factors such as: difference in legal and
criminal justice systems; rates of crime report and police recording; differences
in the point at which a crime is measured – some countries believes it is the
time when the offense is reported; others only do the recording when a suspect
in identified and the papers are transferred to the prosecutor; differences in
the ruling of which multiple offenses are counted; differences in the lost of
offenses to be included in the whole crime figures; differences in data quality;
affects the data. So do some factors such as race, social status and climate
(Tucker, 2001). To devise a statistical data from all these variable and draw a
conclusion that death penalty affects crime rate is difficult. What is more the
amount of execution carried out as compared to the ones on death row is
marginally huge. And this is another problem all together.
The
long times span in between conviction and execution dampen the effect that
death penalty suppose to bring. A death should be quick and painless; it should
be sudden and unexpected. This is the fact that makes death such a huge fear.
But when it is dragged on for years and decades it dulls the blade. After such
long years, families of the victim will eventually accept their fate and are
ready to forgive and forget and move on with their life, so does the criminals.
The public too will eventually forget the event all together and accept it as
part of their past. So, it is of no wonder that death penalty does not has the
effect that it suppose to bring. It is no of wonder too that there are more and
more people fighting against death penalty and declaring it pointless. Although
it is true that it is fair convicts should be given time to appeal and prove
their case but long trial not only cost death penalty its deterrence effect, it
placed a heavy burden on the judicial system itself.
Guilty Beyond Any Reasonable Doubt: To abolish or
not?
Death penalty is
by itself an effectively proven system practiced since the dawn of
civilization. It has stood the test of time and time and time again proven as a
powerful deterrence. The problem lies not within the system but with the execution
of the system itself. “With great power, there must also come[s] great
responsibility" is the famous quote from all time popular superheroes
comic “Spider-man”. It was uttered and quoted over and over again to remind
those with power that they should exercise caution so as not to succumb to it.
But such is not the case for death penalty. What was once a tool to uphold
justice and equality is now being abused by the ones capable of wielding it; a
tool both to instil unnecessary fear and too catapult one to fame.
The
need to speed up a trial and an incompetent and even weak defence case has
brought death to several convicts over the past few years. It is widely known
that a long case needs a large sum of money and death penalty cases more often
than not can last as long as a decade and more. In a 2005 Los Angeles Times studies found that California spends $250 million
per execution alone (Tempest, 2005). Therefore the need to close a case quickly
has prompted many judges to resorts to actions such as distorting evidence and
weak testimony just to push the case away.
Take
the case of Joseph “Crazy Joe” Spaziano who was convicted of the 1973 murder of
eighteen-year old Laura Lynn Harberts. The only witness against him was sixteen
year old Tony DiLisio who admittedly had a grudge against him because Spaziano
had “…been having a tumultuous affair with DiLisio’s stepmother”. Although at
first DiLisio said he knew nothing about the murders, however under hypnosis he
claimed to have been sown the victim’s body, as well as the body of another
victim, by Spaziano (Lee, 1996).
Meanwhile,
a lie detector test of another suspect, Lynwood Tate, “indicated strongly”,
according to police investigators, that he committed the murder. Tate, however,
was never charged but Spaziano was sentence to death (The Associated Press,
2003).
This
so-called hanging judges, overly zealous district attorneys, lazy and
incompetent defence counsels, biased juries, and politically appointed pardon
and parole boards reflects just how corrupted the justice system is. They are
not devising capital punishment; they have merely dispensed the justice the
‘people’ want, namely those who has nothing to do directly with the case.
In
January 1999 a nationwide study by the Chicago
Tribune, found that 381 cases in which homicide conviction were set aside
because prosecutors had failed to disclose evidence favourable to the defence
or knowingly presented false evidence. Not a single one of the prosecutors
involved was ever brought to trial for their actions in those cases. Recently
however, three former prosecutors were indicted in Dupage County,, Illinois,
for engaging in an alleged “conspiracy to send a man to death row”.
Improper
defence is another bane in the death penalty system. Many convictions have been
reversed because of court-appointed defence lawyers who came to trial drunk,
fell asleep during testimony, or made no effort to uncover evidence or witness
to prove their client’s innocence (Gottfried, 2002, p 78). Some might blame the
amount of fee required to get a competent and perfect lawyers, but is money a
question in saving life?
Conclusion
In conclusion, capital punishment as it is practiced now is definitely a curse more than a cause but it is surely a necessary cause in maintaining a peaceful society. Death penalty in itself is not an unusual treatment meant to inflict
unnecessary death. It is there to maintain peace and the sanctity of the
public, of us. Many states in America and even Malaysia and Singapore practice
them but do they give out the sentence lightly? The answer is no.
But
why do we fight against it? The answer lies in the execution of the justice
system itself. A system that is void of any humane value, driven by emotion and
desire for power and wealth, neglecting the very job it supposed to do, to
protect the weak and innocence. It is not anymore justice when only certain
class of people can have access to it and the rest, without money has to settle
for the “bad apple”. Is this fair?
Abolishing
it is not the answer. History has proven it that by abolishing death penalty,
crimes with mount high. We should instead find ways to strengthen the judicial
system, restore it to its original purpose. That is to uphold justice.
But
if a country has a corrupted justice system, abolishing death penalty
altogether is a wise decision. Because if it is in practice, imagine the
catastrophe it will bring. Take the case of Monster of Florence in Italy, if death
penalty was in practice at that time, the number of innocent people executed
for motifs such as witchcraft and satanic sect will surely mount. And all these
motifs are speculations created just for the sake of ending the case and to
increase fame and power in the judicial system. They are void of logic and even
concrete prove but innocents people were convicted all the same (Preston &
Spezi, 2008).
References
Amnesty
International (n.d.). Amnesty International report 2012: the state of the
world's human right's. Amnesty International Report 2012, 248-249.
Retrieved from http://files.amnesty.org/air12/air_2012_full_en.pdf.
Amnesty
International (2001, April 4). Imminent Execution. Amnesty
International. Retrieved September 1, 2012, from
http://www.amnesty.org/fr/library/asset/ASA28/004/2001/fr/1d2c7328-fb3a-11dd-9486-a1064e51935d/asa280042001en.pdf
Bailey,
V. (2000). The Shadow of the Gallows: The Death Penalty and the British Labour
Government, 1945-51. Law and History Review, 18(2),
305-350. Retrieved from
http://www.historycooperative.org/journals/lhr/18.2/bailey.html.
BBC
(2001, November 2). BBC News | ASIA-PACIFIC | Malaysia hangs three for
witchcraft murder. BBC News - Home.
Retrieved September 1, 2012, from
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/asia-pacific/1634584.stm
Bedeau,
H. (2011, 1). The Case Against the Death Penalty - Cons, Anti Death Penalty
Arguments | American Civil Liberties Union. American Civil Liberties
Union (ACLU). Retrieved September 1, 2012, from
http://www.aclu.org/library/case_against_death.html
Chicago
Tribune (1999). Trial & Error - chicagotribune.com. Chicago
Tribune: Chicago breaking news, sports, business, entertainment, weather and
traffic - chicagotribune.com. Retrieved September 1, 2012, from
http://www.chicagotribune.com/chi-dptrialerror-special,0,3035446.special
Chirstoph,
J. B. (1962). Capital Punishment and British Politics: The British
Movement to Abolish the Death Penalty 1945-57. Chicago, US: University of
Chicago Press .
Cushing,
R. R., & Sheffer, S. (2002). In Dignity Denied: The Experience of
Murder Victims’ Family Members Who Oppose the Death Penalty (p. 8).
Cambridge, US: MA: Murder Victims’ Families for Reconciliation.
Demer,
L. (2009, October 30). Solitary confinement harming murder suspect, attorney
says: Crime | Alaska news at adn.com. Alaska News, Jobs and Advertising
from the Anchorage Daily News | Anchorage, Mat-Su Valley, Kenai Peninsula.
Retrieved September 1, 2012, from http://www.adn.com/2009/10/30/994321/solitary-confinement-harming-murder.html
Dezhbakhsh,
H., & Rubin, P. H. (2003). Does Capital Punishment Have a Deterrent Effect?
New Evidence from Post-moratorium Panel Data. American Law and
Economics Review, 5, 344.
Furillo,
A. (2008, December 16). Sacramento Bee -- Sacto 9-1-1. Sacbee.
Retrieved September 1, 2012, from
http://blogs.sacbee.com/mt/mt-search.cgi?IncludeBlogs=36&search=Child+murderer+commits+suicide+on+death+row&keywords=Child+murderer+commits+suicide+on+death+row&aff=5
Gottfried,
T. (2002). In The death penalty: justice or legalized murder (p. 13).
Connecticut, US: Twenty-first Century Book.
Kay,
J. W. (2005). In Murdering Myths: the story behind the death penalty (p. 10).
Maryland, US: Rowman & Littlefield Publishers Inc.
Lee,
T. J. (1996). Anatomy of a death penalty case. Human Rights, 23(3).
Retrieved from http://www.oranous.com/innocence/spaziano/spaziano.htm.
Lowe,
W. (2011, January 17). Pro Capital Punishment Page. Wesley Lowe - The
Necromancer Wars. Retrieved September 1, 2012, from
http://www.wesleylowe.com/cp.html
Ostapiak,
M. (2001, May). Death Penalty is Racist and Targets the Poor. Socialist
Action. Retrieved September 1, 2012, from
http://www.socialistaction.org/news/200105/death.html
Preston,
D., & Spezi, M. (2008). The Monster of Florence. UK: Hachette
Book Group.
Pro-death
Penalty (2001, November 23). Methods of Execution. Pro-death
penalty.com. Retrieved September 1, 2012, from
http://www.prodeathpenalty.com/methods.htm
Sam
Ruby (n.d.). Amazing Fantasy #15. Amazing Spider-Man .Info.
Retrieved September 1, 2012, from
http://www.samruby.com/AmazingFantasy/amazing_fantasy_15.htm
Tempest,
R. (2005, March 6). Death Row Often Means a Long Life. Los Angeles
Times. Retrieved from http://articles.latimes.com/2005/mar/06/local/me-deathpen6.
The
Associated Press (2003, July 6). For Release Monday, July 7, and Thereafter
Inmates Freed From Death Row at a Glance - from Tampa Bay Online. FADP:
Floridians for Alternatives to the Death Penalty. Retrieved September 1,
2012, from http://www.fadp.org/news/AP_FL_jul-6.htm
The
Commissioner of Law Revision (2006). Laws of Malaysia: Act 574 Penal
Code. Malaysia: Pencetakan Nasional Malaysia BHD.
Tucker,
W. (2001). Capital Punishment Works: The States that Execute Murderers Have
Seen the Most Rapid Decline in Murder Rates. The Weekly Standard, 6(45).
Retrieved from
http://www.weeklystandard.com/Content/Protected/Articles/000/000/000/173atjxy.asp.
Zhou,
Z. (n.d.). The death penalty in China: reforms and its future. Waseda
University. Retrieved September 1, 2012, from
http://www.waseda.jp/wias/achievement/bulletin/data/z_zhou_2011.pdf
