DEATH PENALTYI) Background, Pre-1972Murderers and rapists were executed quite frequently in the United States until the 1960s, with the rate of execution peaking at 200 per year during the depression. But in the 1960s, the death penalty faced increased opposition. -Some social scientists argued that the death penalty did not achieve its major purpose- deterrence (prevention) of other murderers. -Studies of execution patterns also indicated that juries did not treat like cases alike; instead, they acted randomly and unreasonably. -Blacks were executed far more often than whites for murder, and almost all those executed for rape were black men accused of

raping a white women.Why was the death penalty being criticized in the 1960’s?

II) Furman v. Georgia (1972).Furman was burglarizing a private home when a family member discovered him. He attempted to flee, and in doing so tripped and fell. The gun that he was carrying went off and killed a resident of the home. He was convicted of murder and sentenced to death. The Court ruled that…

“Yet we know that the discretion of judges and juries in imposing the death penalty enables the penalty to be selectively applied, feeding prejudices against the accused if he is poor and despised, and lacking political clout, or if he is a member of a suspect or unpopular minority, and saving those who by social position may be in a more protected position. A law that stated that anyone making more than $ 50,000 would be exempt from the death penalty would plainly fall, as would a law that in terms said that blacks or those who never went beyond the fifth grade in school or those who were unpopular should be the only people executed. Thus, these discretionary statutes are unconstitutional in their operation. They are pregnant with discrimination and discrimination is implicit in the ban on "cruel and unusual" punishments.

-JUSTICE DOUGLAS

DEATH PENALTY IS PAUSED

Decision: Why was the Death Penalty stopped?

III) Gregg v. Georgia (1976)After a four year moratorium (pause), the Supreme Court revisited the issue of the death penalty. A death sentence was given to a man who robbed two guys, then shot guys and then stole their car.

We address the basic idea that the punishment of death for the crime of murder …

- The use of the death penalty for the crime of murder has a long history of acceptance both in the United States and in England. …

- The clearest indication of society's endorsement of the death penalty for murder is the fact that 35 states passed statutes (laws) to provide for the death penalty…

- In part, capital punishment is an expression of society's moral outrage at particularly offensive conduct. 

- This is essential to an ordered society that asks its citizens to rely on legal processes rather than self-help to vindicate their wrongs.

MR. JUSTICE STEWART.DEATH PENALTY RESUMES

Decision: Why was the Death Penalty resumed?

TASK:You will soon be participating in a debate about the death penalty. Your group should examine the facts and arguments on both sides of this issue.

STEP ONE: COMPLETE THE ARGUMENTS SHEET while looking at the package of documents. (the package of documents is available for download on the http://mrredito.weebly.com/ website). In addition, you may use any other materials/information you have at your disposal. Please make sure that you use legitimate information sources. Make sure you include SPECIFIC information for BOTH sides of the debate. (3 complete sides)

STEP TWO Write a short speech explaining several reasons for ONE side of the debate. Write a speech that can be used for either an opening or closing statement for the debate (1 page, 12 point, times new roman font, double spaced, MAXIMUM). You will be given your position in class.

STEP THREE Classroom debate (your performance in the debate will be graded as part of the project)

Your position: ______________________________

Arguments to KEEP Death Penalty Arguments to END Death Penalty

Argument_____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________Evidence________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Argument_____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________Evidence_______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Argument_____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________Evidence________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Argument_____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________Evidence_______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Argument_____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________Evidence______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Argument_____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________Evidence______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

__________________________________________________________________

__________________________________________________________________

Arguments to KEEP Death Penalty Arguments to END Death Penalty

Argument____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________Evidence_____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Argument____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________Evidence_____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Argument____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________Evidence_____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Argument____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________Evidence_____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Argument____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________Evidence_____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Argument____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________Evidence_____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

DEATH PENALTYRace 1608 - 1972White 41% (5,902)Black 49% (7,084)Native American 2% (353)

Hispanic 2% (295)Total 14,489

The death penalty as then administrated in the United States was cruel and unusual punishment because it was “wantonly “and “freakishly” imposed. Judges and juries had for too much unguided discretion under current state laws, the Court held, leading to “arbitrary and capricious,” or random and unreasonable, death sentences.

In part, capital punishment is an expression of society’s moral outrage at particularly offensive conduct. This function may be unappealing to many, but it is essential in an ordered society that asks its citizens to rely on legal process rather than self-help to vindicate their wrongs. … The death penalty appears not to be ‘unusual’ considering the three-fourths of the state legislatures created new laws to allow the death penalty since the Furman decision.” --Justice Potter Stewart

In dissent, Justice William Brennan repeated the arguments he made against the death penalty in Furman.

Brennan questioned “whether a society for which the dignity of the individual is the supreme value can, without a fundamental inconsistency, follow the practice of deliberately putting some of its members to death.” “Even the vilest criminal,” said Brennan, “remains a human being possessed of common human dignity.”

FOR AGAINST“The economic argument in favor of the death penalty is The ACLU and other death penalty opponents, including many

rather simple. Economists assume that individuals weigh the expected costs and benefits when deciding to undertake any activity. Thus, rational individuals considering criminal activities would weigh the expected benefits against the expected cost of the criminal endeavor. The expected cost of any given crime is affected by the probability of being detected, the probability of being convicted given detection, and the expected penalty that results from a conviction. Since the death penalty provides a higher cost than alternative punishments, it is expected to generate a larger deterrent effect.”

Supporters of the death penalty, however, say that the possibility of receiving a death sentence is an effective deterrent to crime. They argue that crime rates would be lowered if more people were actually executed as sentenced. Currently, only about 2% of all people on death row are executed each year. Supporters contend that death-row inmates abuse the court system by repeatedly appealing their no-win cases to federal courts in order to postpone their executions. According to death-penalty advocates, making the death penalty more meaningful requires reform of the appeals process and delivering justice more quickly.

Others say that even if a few innocent lives are taken, the deterrent effects of the death penalty excuse those risks. Overall, more potential homicides of innocent victims are prevented by the death penalty, they contend, than the number of innocent people who might be wrongfully executed. The American public apparently agrees. According to a June 1995 Gallup poll, 57% of respondents say they would favor the death penalty, even if one out of 100 people sentenced to death were actually innocent.

Although most advocates of the death penalty agree that sentencing should be blind with regard to factors such as race, they say that disparities should not be presented as reasons to get rid of capital punishment. "The fact that a murderer who gets the death penalty could point to a murderer who didn't, does not make him any less guilty," says Ernest van den Haag, former jurisprudence professor at Fordham University in New York City. Advocates of the death penalty contend that apparent race disparities should not make state-sanctioned executions more rare, just more equal.

Supporters of capital punishment claim that violent crime rates will begin to fall as the powerful deterrent of the death penalty becomes more widespread. Opponents argue, however, that more executions will only multiply the alleged inconsistencies and biases in death-penalty sentencing and may lead to the deaths of innocent people.

religious groups and individuals, and a growing number of prison wardens, maintain that capital punishment constitutes cruel and unusual punishment in violation of the Eighth Amendment. Killing, whether carried out by an individual or the state, is immoral and ought not to be condoned. Furthermore, the death penalty as practiced in the U.S., is arbitrary and racially biased. It has no proven deterrent value. And many miscarriages of justice have been documented over the years in which people have been put to death for crimes they did not commit. ~American Civil Liberties Union

Opponents say that the decision as to whether someone will die or not often depends not on equal justice but on other factors such as geography. They note that eight Southern states (Alabama, Arkansas, Florida, Georgia, Louisiana, North Carolina, Texas and Virginia) plus Missouri account for more than 80% of the executions that have taken place since 1976, even though 38 states nationwide have capital-punishment laws.

In the eyes of death-penalty advocates, the 2% of death row convicts executed each year represents a failure of the system to follow through with justice. Many prosecutors are reluctant to seek the death penalty, they say, because of the difficulty of securing the penalty and making it stick. They point out that for every inmate executed, there are 50 or more sentenced to die, and many more murderers who receive what critics consider meager sentences. Justice does not prevail, they say, because inmates are given excessive opportunities to appeal and file for writs of habeas corpus. Habeas-corpus petitions give state and federal inmates the right to have their cases reviewed by a federal judge, usually when they have lost all their other appeals.

Amnesty International, an independent human-rights organization that monitors the use of the death penalty internationally, contends that there is "overwhelming evidence that the death penalty does not provide the solution to violent crime." The organization points to Canada, where the homicide rate has dropped 27% since capital punishment was abolished there in 1976. According to Amnesty, more than half of the world's nations have abolished capital punishment either in laws or in practice (no executions for at least 10 years). The death penalty has been abolished in Mexico, most of South America and in most industrialized democracies, including Germany, France, Spain and Great Britain

Of those prisoners who have been executed since 1976, about 55% were white and 39% were black; that compares with the general population, in which 80% of Americans are white and 12% are black. But most analysts say that these figures are misleading since blacks are also disproportionately convicted for murder. Once convicted of a murder, say many analysts, the race of the defendant is a neutral factor in deciding sentencing.

Eleven States Considered Abolishing Death Penalty,

As Costs Rose in a Time of Economic Crisis

The costs of the death penalty became an increasingly important issue as states faced severe budget deficits. High expenses with no measurable benefits were frequently cited in legislative debates about the death penalty. The costs for pursuing even a single capital case caused some prosecutors to reconsider seeking the death penalty, and may have contributed to the decline in death sentences in 2009.

Eleven states considered legislative proposals to repeal the death penalty in 2009, a considerable increase from previous years. New Mexico became the 15th state to end the death penalty when Gov. Richardson signed the law in March. The Connecticut legislature voted to abolish the death penalty, but the governor vetoed the bill. Legislation to end capital punishment passed one house of the legislature in Colorado and Montana, and came close to passage in Maryland.

High Cost of the Death Penalty Meets the Economic RecessionAs the country faced an economic crisis this year, the death penalty was increasingly seen as an enormously expensive and wasteful program with no clear societal benefits. In a time of painful budget cutbacks resulting in furloughed workers, closed libraries and the early release of prisoners, states were pouring money into a badly flawed system rather than assisting law enforcement in areas that demonstrably increase safety. Many states considered whether maintaining such a costly system was really being smart on crime. In a national poll released in 2009, the nation’s police chiefs ranked the death penalty last in their priorities for effective crime reduction.

Maintaining a system with nearly 3,300 people on death row while continuing to conduct expensive and unpredictable capital trials is becoming increasingly expensive and harder to justify. Many legislators this year concluded that money spent to preserve this failing system could better be directed to effective programs that make society safer.

Year End Report 2009 p. 4California is spending an estimated $137 million per year on a death penalty system that its own state commission labeled "dysfunctional" and "broken." Florida is spending approximately $51 million per year on the death penalty, amounting to a cost of $24 million for each execution it carries out. A recent study in Maryland found that the bill for the death penalty over a twenty-year period will be $186 million, translating into a cost of $37 million per execution. Other states like New York and New Jersey spent well over $100 million on a system that produced no executions, and both recently abandoned the practice.

Innocence Cases Remained ProminentNine men who had been sentenced to death were exonerated and freed in 2009, the second highest number of exonerations since the death penalty was reinstated. The inmates freed this year spent a combined 121 years between their death sentence and exoneration.

In the case of Herman Lindsey, a unanimous Florida Supreme Court held there was insufficient evidence to support his conviction: "The State failed to produce any evidence in this case placing Lindsey at the scene of the crime at the time of the murder. . . . Indeed, we find that the evidence here is equally consistent with a reasonable hypothesis of innocence." Ronald Kitchen (IL), Paul House (TN), Michael Toney (TX), Yancy Douglas (OK), Peris Powell (OK), and Robert Springsteen (TX) had all charges dismissed after their convictions were overturned. (Michael Toney died in a car crash just one month after his release.)

The total number of exonerations since 1973 is now 139. In an important development on the issue of innocence discussed below, the U.S. Supreme Court

granted a stay of execution and an extraordinary evidentiary hearing to Troy Davis of Georgia.

Decline in Death SentencesAccording to DPIC's projections, the annual number of death sentences continued to drop in 2009. The Bureau of Justice Statistics recently released sentencing numbers for 2008 that showed a drop from the previous year. According to BJS, 119 people were sentenced to death in 2007 and 111 in 2008. DPIC's research indicates the number of new death sentences in 2009 will be 106. The decline in death sentences has occurred in all four regions of the country, with close to a 50% drop in each region when the current decade is compared to the 1990s.

Nationally, the size of death row continued to decline after increasing every year from 1976 until 1999. As of July 1, 2009, there were 3,279 inmates on death row. The federal system, however, grew between 2000 and 2009, particularly during the prior administration, tripling from 19 to 58.

DEATH ROW INMATES BY STATE (July 1, 2009)California 690Florida 403Texas 342Pennsylvania 225Alabama 200Ohio 176N. Carolina 169Arizona 129Georgia 108Tennessee 92Oklahoma 86Louisiana 84Nevada 78S. Carolina 63Mississippi 60U. S. Government 58Missouri 52Arkansas 43Kentucky 36Oregon 33Delaware 19Idaho 18Indiana 17Virginia 16Illinois 15Nebraska 11Connecticut 10Kansas 10Utah 10Washington 9U.S. Military 8Maryland 5Colorado 3South Dakota 3Montana 2New Mexico* 2New Hampshire 1Wyoming 1Total death row 3,279 (8 inmates in the national total received two death sentences in different states.)*Abolished death penalty for future cases.Year End Report 09 p. 6

Supreme Court Cases Hint at Future Directions

Time on Death Row On March 9 the U.S. Supreme Court declined to review a challenge to the excessive time spent on death row by many inmates, but two Justices expressed concerns about the legal issue raised. William Thompson has been on death row in Florida for 32 years. He claimed this excessive time amounted to cruel and unusual punishment under the Eighth Amendment. Justice John Paul Stevens called the treatment of the defendant during his 32 years on death row “dehumanizing,” noting that Thompson “has endured especially severe conditions of confinement, spending up to 23 hours per day in isolation in a 6- by 9-foot cell” and has experienced two stays of execution “only shortly before he was scheduled to be put to death.” He added that neither retribution nor deterrence were served in such a case and “a punishment of death after significant delay is ‘so totally without penological justification that it results in the gratuitous infliction of suffering.’”

-Justice Breyer

Innocence On August 17 the Court ordered a new evidentiary hearing for Georgia death row inmate Troy Davis, whose case has drawn worldwide attention because of new evidence of his possible innocence. For the first time in nearly 50 years, the Court favorably responded to a petition sent directly to them, rather than as an appeal from lower courts. With only two Justices writing in dissent, the Court ordered a lower federal court to hear Davis's evidence: "The District Court should receive testimony and make findings of fact as to whether evidence that could not have been obtained at the time of trial clearly establishes petitioner’s innocence." Since Davis' initial conviction in 1991, at least seven eyewitnesses against him have recanted their testimony, and significant new evidence points to another suspect as the actual killer.

New Voices

Mark White, former governor of Texas "There is a very strong case to be made for a review of our death penalty statutes and even look at the possibility of having life without parole so we don’t look up one day and determine that we as the State of Texas have executed someone who is in fact innocent."

Jason Nemes, Kentucky Administrative Office of the Courts"We've got a system in Kentucky where there's not enough money for public advocates, for prosecutors, for drug courts, family courts, for juvenile services, for rehabilitation programs, and we're using the money we have in a way I think is unwise. Every dollar that goes to our ineffective capital punishment system is a dollar taken away from other needs. . ."

Richard A. Viguerie, Conservative spokesman"The fact is, I don't understand why more conservatives don't oppose the death penalty. . . [It] is, after all, a system set up under laws established by politicians (too many of whom lack principles); enforced by prosecutors (many of whom want to become politicians—perhaps a character flaw?—and who prefer wins over justice); Conservatives have every reason to believe the death penalty system is no different from any politicized, costly, inefficient, bureaucratic, government-run operation, which we conservatives know are rife with injustice."

Rebecca Coleman, Chief of Police, Jackson, Mississippi[I am] "not sure that the average criminal would consider the death penalty before they commit a crime. . . . I would look at more proactive means to serve as a deterrent to crime, as opposed to looking at it [reactively]. . . . [I would put] programs in place to educate our kids to know the benefits of good behavior as opposed to behavior …."

Jan 2004 - Harris Poll

More than 2/3 of Americans support capital punishment. 

Are you in favor of the death penalty for a person convicted of murder?

Gallup Poll on Death Penalty 

100TH INNOCENT PRISONER IS FREED BY DNA TESTS

The Innocence Project - a legal clinic at the Benjamin N. Cardozo School of Law in New York that has helped build a national movement to free the wrongfully convicted - announced today that the number of innocent prisoners in the United States who have been exonerated based upon post-conviction DNA testing has reached 100.

The Project will celebrate with the 99th and 100th exonerees - Marvin Anderson of Virginia, and Larry Mayes of Indiana - as members of its national Innocence Network gather for their annual conference at the California Western School of Law in San Diego, January 18-20, 2002.

These 100 cases, say the Project's co-directors, Barry Scheck and Peter Neufeld, mark a "revolution" in this country's criminal justice system over the last decade and have sparked a "new civil rights movement" to reform the system's ills. This has been made possible by the availability of DNA testing that can conclusively establish a prisoner's innocence, allowing advocates in The Innocence Network to prove what they and others have long contended - that a system replete with eyewitness error, official misconduct, and race- and economic-based inequities has resulted in an unconscionable number of wrongful convictions.

Central to this movement, say the Network's members, is to expose the flaws that pervade the justice system as a whole, implement vital reforms, and ensure that claims of innocence do not go unheard. "While we should celebrate the ability of this remarkable DNA technology to establish, beyond a shadow of a doubt, that serious errors have been made in cases where testable physical evidence exists, and to allow us to remedy those wrongs," emphasize Scheck and Neufeld, "we should be equally troubled by what we have learned in these 100 cases about the widespread errors that led to these convictions in the first place.

High Cost of Death Row

September 28, 2009, Editorial, NYTIMES

To the many excellent reasons to abolish the death penalty — it’s immoral, does not deter murder and affects minorities disproportionately — we can add one more. It’s an economic drain on governments with already badly depleted budgets.States waste millions of dollars on winning death penalty verdicts, which require an expensive second trial, new witnesses and long jury selections. Death rows require extra security and maintenance costs.

There is also a 15-to-20-year appeals process, but simply getting rid of it would be undemocratic and would increase the number of innocent people put to death. Besides, the majority of costs are in the pretrial and trial.

According to the organization, keeping inmates on death row in Florida costs taxpayers $51 million a year more than holding them for life without parole. North Carolina has put 43 people to death since 1976 at $2.16 million per execution. The eventual cost to taxpayers in Maryland for pursuing capital cases between 1978 and 1999 is estimated to be $186 million for five executions.

Perhaps the most extreme example is California, whose death row costs taxpayers $114 million a year beyond the cost of imprisoning convicts for life. The state has executed 13 people since 1976 for a total of about $250 million per execution.

The Death Penalty WorldwideAccording to Amnesty International, 137 countries have abolished the death penalty. Argentina, Chile, and Uzbekistan outlawed the death penalty in 2008. During 2007, 24 countries, 88% in China, Iran, Pakistan, Saudi Arabia, and the United States alone, executed 1,252 people compared to 1,591 in 2006. Nearly 3,350 people were sentenced to death in 51 countries. More than 20,000 prisoners are on death row across the world. See also U.S. Figures.Death Penalty Outlawed (year) Death Penalty Permitted

Albania (2000) Andorra (1990) Angola (1992) Argentina (2008) Armenia (2003) Australia (1984) Austria (1950) Azerbaijan (1998) Belgium (1996) Bhutan (2004) Bosnia-Herzegovina

(1997) Bulgaria (1998) Cambodia (1989) Canada (1976) Cape Verde (1981) Chile (2008) Colombia (1910) Cook Islands (2007) Costa Rica (1877) Côte d'Ivoire (2000) Croatia (1990) Cyprus (1983) Czech Republic (1990) Denmark (1933) Djibouti (1995) Dominican Republic

(1966) East Timor (1999) Ecuador (1906) Estonia (1998) Finland (1949) France (1981) Georgia (1997) Germany (1949) Greece (1993) Guinea-Bissau (1993) Haiti (1987) Honduras (1956) Hungary (1990) Iceland (1928) Ireland (1990) Italy (1947) Kiribati (1979) Liberia (2005) Liechtenstein (1987) Lithuania (1998) Luxembourg (1979) Macedonia (1991)

Marshall Islands (1986) Mauritius (1995) Mexico (2005) Micronesia (1986) Moldova (1995) Monaco (1962) Montenegro (2002) Mozambique (1990) Namibia (1990) Nepal (1990) Netherlands (1870) New Zealand (1961) Nicaragua (1979) Niue (n.a.) Norway (1905) Palau (n.a.) Panama (1903) Paraguay (1992) Poland (1997) Portugal (1867) Philippines (2006) Romania (1989) Rwanda (2007) Samoa (2004) San Marino (1848) São Tomé and Príncipe

(1990) Senegal (2004) Serbia (2002) Seychelles (1993) Slovak Republic (1990) Slovenia (1989) Solomon Islands (1966) South Africa (1995) Spain (1978) Sweden (1921) Switzerland (1942) Turkey (2002) Turkmenistan (1999) Tuvalu (1978) Ukraine (1999) United Kingdom (1973) Uruguay (1907) Uzbekistan (2008) Vanuatu (1980) Vatican City (1969) Venezuela (1863)

Afghanistan Antigua and

Barbuda Bahamas Bahrain Bangladesh Barbados Belarus Belize Botswana Burundi Cameroon Chad China (People's

Republic) Comoros Congo

(Democratic Republic)

Cuba Dominica Egypt Equatorial Guinea Eritrea Ethiopia Gabon Ghana Guatemala Guinea Guyana India Indonesia Iran Iraq Jamaica Japan Jordan Korea, North Korea, South Kuwait

Laos Lebanon Lesotho Libya Malawi Malaysia Mongolia Nigeria Oman Pakistan Palestinian

Authority Qatar St. Kitts and Nevis St. Lucia St. Vincent and

the Grenadines Saudi Arabia Sierra Leone Singapore Somalia Sudan Swaziland Syria Taiwan Tajikistan Tanzania Thailand Trinidad and

Tobago Uganda United Arab

Emirates United States Vietnam Yemen Zambia Zimbabwe

RACE

Modern studies of the death penalty continue to find a correlation between sentencing and race. The studies consistently show that those who kill white victims are much more likely to receive the death penalty than those who kill black victims. Racial disparities in sentencing and executions suggest that race plays a role in the application of the death penalty.

In 96% of the states where there have been reviews of race and the death penalty, there was a pattern of either race-of-victim or race-of-defendant discrimination or both.

According to the findings of a Governor-commissioned death penalty study conducted by researchers at the University of Maryland, defendants in Maryland are much more likely to be sentenced to death if they have killed a white person.

A report released by the New Jersey Supreme Court found that, "There is unsettling statistical evidence indicating that cases involving killers of white victims are more likely to progress to a penalty phase than cases involving killers of African-American victims." (Asbury Park Press, Aug. 13, 2001).

ECONOMIC ARGUMENT

“The economic argument in favor of the death penalty is rather simple. Economists assume that individuals weigh the expected costs and benefits when deciding to undertake any activity. Thus, rational individuals considering criminal activities would weigh the expected benefits against the expected cost of the criminal endeavor. The expected cost of any given crime is affected by the probability of being detected, the probability of being convicted given detection, and the expected penalty that results from a conviction. Since the death penalty provides a higher cost than alternative punishments, it is expected to generate a larger deterrent effect.”

DETERRANCE

Others say that even if a few innocent lives are taken, the deterrent effects of the death penalty excuse those risks. Overall, more potential homicides of innocent victims are prevented by the death penalty, they contend, than the number of innocent people who might be wrongfully executed. The American public apparently agrees. According to a June 1995 Gallup poll, 57% of respondents say they would favor the death penalty, even if one out of 100 people sentenced to death were actually innocent.

Supporters of capital punishment claim that violent crime rates will begin to fall as the powerful deterrent of the death penalty becomes more widespread. Opponents argue, however, that more executions will only multiply the alleged inconsistencies and biases in death-penalty sentencing and may lead to the deaths of innocent people.