Is Capital Punishment Really Effective in Deterrence?
The capital punishment is a major contemporary issue in the criminal justice system and has been a subject of significant political discourse. Capital punishment, also known as the death penalty, is the act of taking someone’s life as a form of punishment for a crime committed. There have been many arguments for and against the use of capital punishment in the United States. On the one hand, some people believe that the use of capital punishment is necessary and has had a significant impact on deterring violent crimes within our society. On the other hand, some people make arguments that it does not deter crime but violates human rights. This paper delves into the issue of capital punishment. The paper argues that capital punishment has not been successful in curbing criminal activity in society, but it has had significant consequences, which include violation of constitutional rights, specifically the 8th amendment’s prohibition of cruel and unusual punishment, it has led to the risk of loss of innocent lives to the death penalty, and finally, it is racially biased. Ultimately, the paper will illustrate the extent to which capital punishment fails society by not only failing to deter crime but also contributing to racial disparities in the face of the law and loss of innocent lives.
Capital Punishment: Theoretical Viewpoints Overview
Due Process Model
The due process model focuses on creating a just and fair criminal justice system that emphasizes the constitutional rights of the offenders (Sanchez, 2023). The due process model provides significant support for the argument because it emphasizes that Law Enforcement Officers (LEO) should adhere to the law and that the accused should be given a fair trial per their constitutional rights. In the context of capital punishment, it places a significant emphasis on preventing constitutional violations and wrongful executions.
The Crime Control Model
The crime control model, in accordance with Sanchez (2023), emphasizes the need for an effective system with a focus on reducing and managing crime in order to make society safe. Therefore, this approach prioritizes crime prevention over personal liberties and rights. It promotes prompt and severe punishment for crimes committed, where the guilty are given the proper, heavy punishments in the criminal justice system when the courts determine their guilt.
Capital Punishment Fails in Deterring Crime
This paper acknowledges a typical argument in this political discourse: the death penalty is essential in deterring criminal behavior. Proponents argue that the fear of facing the ultimate punishment should discourage individuals from committing heinous crimes. However, the evidence supporting this claim is inconclusive at best. Lamperti (2010) aggregates all the quantitative studies that address this claim and concludes that despite years of trying, this claim cannot be empirically substantiated. One of the major evidence used to support this assertion is Ehrlich, who concluded that executions deterred homicide. This was, however, challenged due to some assumptions made within the study.
In contrast, there have been some cases that have shown the opposite effect. For example, an Oklahoma truck driver was blown in half with a shotgun by a man who claimed was tired of living (Lamperti, 2010). Also, when there is a witness for a crime with a risk of capital punishment, it creates an incentive for the offender to murder the witness. There is also evidence showing an increase in homicides as the capital punishments increase. Suffice it to say that it is hard to create a mathematical model predicting the deterrence effect of capital punishment. However, the fact that a nation such as China, which has many cases of capital punishment and continues to do so, calls into question how effective it can be as a deterrent.
Furthermore, psychological studies have indicated that potential criminals do not always rationally weigh the consequences of their actions, especially when committing violent crimes in the heat of the moment. In such cases, the prospect of receiving the death penalty may have little or no deterrent effect. Instead, impulsive behavior, mental health issues, and substance abuse often play a more significant role in criminal acts, making the death penalty an ineffective deterrent. In addition, the ideal deterrent should be constitutional, should not punish the innocent and should be equitable. By violating the 8th Amendment, executing the innocent and increasing racial disparity, the effectiveness of capital punishment as a detergent is hampered. The following is a candid analysis of the same.
Violation of Human Rights: The Eighth Amendment’s Prohibition of Cruel and Unusual Punishment
The 8th Amendment to the US Constitution states, “Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted.” This Amendment explicitly prohibits the federal government from imposing cruel and unusual punishment. The US Supreme Court has grappled with the interpretation of this amendment in the context of capital punishment cases. This is because the US Constitution fails to define what is meant by cruel or unusual punishment (Stevenson & Stinneford, 2023). The central question is usually whether to judge cruelty and unusualness by contemporary public opinion or by the standards set in 1791 when the Eighth Amendment was adopted (Stevenson & Stinneford, 2023). Other questions arising from the application of the 8th Amendment are whether the cruelty and unusualness are in the method of execution or execution itself. This raises the question, does the Cruel and Unusual Punishments Clause prohibit the death penalty? This paper argues that it does.
Inhumane Treatment of Human Life (Cruelty) and How it Might Increase Crime
The concept of human dignity is centered around the belief that every human being has a special value that is inherent in them and is tied solely to their humanity. Every human being, therefore, regardless of their crime, deserves to be treated with dignity. However, the methods of execution used in capital punishment have raised serious constitutional questions. In history, capital punishment has been executed through methods such as the electric chair, gas chamber, and firing squad, which have been criticized for their inhumane nature. In recent decades, the lethal injection has been perceived as more humane. However, one has to acknowledge that it has seen its share of botched executions, causing undue pain and suffering to the condemned.
Botched executions add to human suffering. According to experts, lethal injections, which are deemed the most humane, have the most botched executions (Death Penalty Information Center, 2022). An autopsy report review by more than 200 individuals who were executed through this method shows that in about 84% of the cases, the individuals show pulmonary edema, a fluid build-up in the lungs creating a feeling of suffocation (Death Penalty Information Center, 2022). Apart from death through internal drowning, the injection often prolongs human suffering. For example, in 2014, Joseph Wood was injected with the dose fifteen times over a period of two hours because the usual dose in ten minutes was insufficient to kill him (Dart, 2018). These two sources of evidence illustrate excruciating physical pain, not to mention the mental anguish associated with the impending death. While the 8th Amendment fails to define cruelty, a strong argument can be made that being executed for two hours or drowning internally is cruel and violates the 8th Amendment. Furthermore, some offenders have been forced to help the executioners find the veins so that they can be executed faster.
The concept of human dignity is the foundation of many human rights, including the right to life and freedom from torture and other forms of cruelty (Bessler, 2022, pp. 209-263). Infringing on human dignity, therefore, exposes society to more violations of human rights, which often lead to more suffering, violating the 8th Amendment. The late US Supreme Court Justice William Brennan once said, “The infliction of a severe punishment by the State cannot comport with human dignity when it is nothing more than the pointless infliction of suffering.” The death penalty is, therefore, dehumanizing and a violation of the 8th Amendment due to the level of cruelty. The emphasis on swift and severe punishment in the crime control model often leads to individuals overlooking the cruelty of the practice and may inadvertently support the violation of constitutional rights. Instead of deterring crime, this cruelty can increase crime due to hardening off and the belief that since death is assured, there is nothing to lose.
Comparison with other Nations (Unusualness)
Apart from cruelty, violation of the 8th Amendment can be proven if the death penalty is unusual. Research shows that more than 70% of the nations have abolished capital punishment in law or practice (World Population Review, 2023). According to the World Population Review (2023), the nations with the most capital punishment in 2021 were China with over 1000, Iran with over 314, Egypt with over 83, Saudi Arabia, Syria, Somalia, Iraq, Yemen, USA and South Sudan. Looking at this list, one has to see that the United States is in an unusual place. These nations have all been accused of gross violations of human rights, especially in war. The United States, along with other nations, on the other hand, prides itself on its pursuit of human rights and the treatment of all individuals with dignity. Its presence in this list, therefore, seems counter-intuitive and proves that the punishment is unusual. The US often compares itself against other Western nations, such as Canada and members of the European Union, all of which have abolished capital punishment (World Population Review, 2023). The capital punishment is, therefore, both cruel and unusual for a nation of the US’ global status, making it a violation of the 8th Amendment of the US Constitution.
Evidence of Ineffectiveness
Comparative international data reveals that many countries that have abolished the death penalty exhibit lower homicide rates than those that retain it. For example, European countries, which have largely abolished the death penalty, tend to have significantly lower homicide rates than the United States. If capital punishment were a highly effective deterrent, one would expect to see the opposite trend. These international comparisons raise serious doubts about the effectiveness of the death penalty in deterring violent crime (Death Penalty Information Center, 2019).
Wrongful Execution of Innocent Individuals and Its Impact on Effective Deterrence
The wrongful execution of innocent individuals is perhaps the most distressing and yet real aspect of capital punishment. It shakes the very foundations of the US justice system, which is designed to protect the innocent and hold the guilty accountable. The reality of the matter is that execution is terminal, and when a mistake has been made in any part of the criminal justice system leading to wrongful execution, it cannot be undone (Amnesty International, 2021). One must acknowledge that the criminal justice system in the US, like in any other part of the nation, is marred by corruption, incompetence, abuses of due process, and inconsistencies in how prisoners are treated at various stages of the criminal justice system (Bartley, 2023; Hoyle & Lehrfreund, 2019; Zeidman, 2015).
This means that numerous flaws happen, and an execution closes an opportunity for retraction and restoration of justice. This can be discussed further under major areas where the justice system fails to safeguard the innocent, raising ethical concerns. This realization significantly undermines the credibility of the death penalty as an effective deterrent. Moreover, the high number of wrongful convictions and botched executions suggests that the threat of capital punishment does not serve as a foolproof deterrent. The irreversibility of this punishment underscores its limitations as a means to prevent violent crimes.
False Confessions, Coercion
There have been many convictions in the US based on coerced testimonies and confessions gained through psychological manipulation. Gudjónsson (2021) writes that police officers often use “coercive” questioning techniques and psychological vulnerabilities to elicit a confession. The author establishes that three pathways lead to wrongful convictions: misclassification, coercion, and contamination. According to Gudjónsson (2021), there is continued resistance from the judiciary to accept the mistakes and develop solutions.
These mistakes in the criminal justice system have led to the loss of life. An example is the case of Troy Davis, executed by the state of Georgia in 2011 after being on death row since 1991. This execution came even after there had been recantations and changed testimonies in a case that majorly relied on witnesses (Amnesty International, 2021). One of the major reasons for the changed testimonies and recantations was police coercion. In another example, Cameron Todd Willingham was wrongfully convicted and executed in Texas in 2004. The late Mr. Willingham was convicted for allegedly setting a fire that killed his three young daughters 13 years earlier. However, an official report on the investigation by the Texas Forensic Science Commission later revealed his innocence. In both these cases, the dual process was not followed because the individual’s right to life and liberty was infringed upon due to mistakes and coercion by the investigating team. The victims paid the ultimate price for these mistakes. The mistakes made by the investigating team can be attributed to the crime control model, which may inadvertently lead to hasty decisions, increasing the risk of wrongful executions.
Lack of Competent Legal Representation
It must be noted that a legal right means nothing without a competent lawyer. Many inmates are facing the death penalty who lack the resources to secure competent legal counsel, increasing the likelihood of errors in their defense. Gorn (2018) exemplifies this by highlighting The U.S. Supreme Court’s 2017 ruling in Buck v. Davis. In this case, the lawyer failed to object to a line of questioning that led to the defense witnesses testifying that there is an overrepresentation of Blacks among the violent offenders and that the defendant’s race made him more likely to be dangerous in the future. This is very important in the ruling of a death sentence since it proves future dangerousness. Buck was sentenced to death in 1997 as a result. It is worth noting that the same lawyer who represented Buck has a track record of twenty former clients sentenced to death (Gorn, 2018). The significance of a competent attorney can, therefore, not be understated. Many deaths can be attributed to attorney incompetence. An effective deterrent should be free from unfair treatment due to a lack of competent legal representation.
Influence of the Media and the Society
The contemporary society pays much attention to the media, especially social media platforms such as Twitter, Facebook, and Instagram, among others. Regardless of the professional competence, this influences the course of justice. This can be illustrated by the case of George Floyd, whose case was hugely publicized. It can also be exemplified in the case of the exonerated five. In this case, the teenagers were accused of the attempted murder of Trisha Meilli in Central Park, New York (Bartley, 2023). The teenagers were later exonerated of any wrongdoing. According to Bartley (2023), the individuals cite the media’s influence on the case as a major course of the poor outcome. They claim that over four hundred articles were written about them, calling them “#Wolfpack #Wilding #Superpredator.” This is another instance in which the crime control model calling for swift and severe punishment leads to errors in the prosecution process, contributing to injustices. In the context of capital crimes, this shows that the media, an incompetent attorney, and unethical investigations can lead to undue death sentences.
Racial Bias in the Application of the Death Penalty and How it impacts Deterrence
In contemporary society, it is almost impossible to discuss a major societal issue without addressing the racial aspects. Racial bias is a profoundly entrenched issue in the application of the death penalty. One must acknowledge that the criminal justice system often depends on the impartialness of the major actors. This raises the question: what happens when the principal actors in the criminal justice system are biased? The answer to this question is apparent: the entire criminal justice system become compromised. Systemic discrimination along the lines of racism is a common issue in the contemporary USA. The uneven application of the death penalty and racial bias in sentencing undermines its potential as a deterrent. The likelihood of receiving the death penalty can depend on factors such as the defendant’s race, socioeconomic status, and the quality of legal representation. There have been many efforts that have been taken to improve this, but the country is still far from being free of racism. However, implicit bias within the criminal justice system is yet to be addressed.
Implicit Bias
Implicit bias is a kind of bias that happens involuntarily and often without the knowing it is affecting their judgment, decision or behavior. Implicit bias can influence decisions at various stages of the criminal justice process, from arrest and charging to jury selection and sentencing. Racial stereotypes can unfairly target minority defendants. For example, in court, having a jury that has many ethnic minorities and white people in a case where the defendant is portrayed as entitled could lead to a faulty outcome since the jury could resent the defendant. Also, it could influence the witnesses’ testimony.
It is a fact that people of one ethnic group are poor at recognizing another ethnic group. According to Levin (2000), a cross-race recognition deficit means people concentrate on racial characteristics rather than individual ones. It is, therefore, not a significant leap to say that some witnesses identify the wrong party. Indeed, research shows exoneration often happens due to DNA testing and in 70% of all those cases, the party was convicted due to wrong testimony (Bartley, 2023). A perfect example of the role of implicit bias in real-life police investigations is the five Black and Hispanic teenagers who were wrongly convicted, in part due to racial biases. This case exemplifies how systemic issues can lead to wrongful convictions and disproportionately harsh sentencing. Implicit bias in a police investigation creates a tunnel vision which prevents the officer from finding other evidence. Fixating a specific suspect (bias) leads to a one-sided search of evidence and wrong interpretations of evidence (bias-confirmation) (Weathered, 2014, pp. 5-164). In the case of the five exonerated teenagers, they fit the profile of violent black and Spanish teenagers and the narrative and the prosecution and law enforcement were content. Since the crime control model demands swift punishments, racial minorities who often fit the offenders’ profile, especially in terms of aggression, are often the victims.
Systemic discrimination is apparent in the US. Referring to Buck v. Davis, Buck was sentenced to death; future dangerousness was proven to the jury by claiming that since the defendant was black, he was more likely to offend in the future. In other words, race made him more dangerous (Gorn, 2018). The challenge is that this statement applies to all offenders regardless of demographic, and being black does not make one an offender. Baldus et al. (1983) conducted a study on the death penalty in Georgia in which they found that people accused of killing white victims are four times more likely to be sentenced to death than those who kill black victims. This research was critical in McCleskey v. Kemp where Justice Lewis Powell, who ruled in the case, acknowledged the presence of discrepancies in the judicial process that correlated to race but argued they were “inevitable.” This creates the mentality that some racial discrepancies in the criminal justice system are inevitable. This should not be the case, especially when the stakes are an execution. McCleskey was executed in Georgia on September 25, 1991. Research shows that minorities are disproportionately given a death sentence,16, compared to white people 2 (American Civil Liberties Union, 2005). According to the source, the predominantly white prosecutors, 98%, use elaborate techniques to screen for black jurors.
Conclusion
In conclusion, capital punishment has not been successful in curbing criminal activity in society. Instead, it has had significant consequences, which include violation of constitutional rights, specifically the 8th amendment’s prohibition of cruel and unusual punishment, it has led to the loss of innocent lives to the death penalty, and finally, it contributes to racial disparities. This paper shows that the crime control model, which emphasizes swift and severe punishment for crimes, creates an opportunity for the violation of the 8th Amendment. This is because it encourages mistakes in the criminal justice system. While the due process model is more commendable, it has not been fully applied in the USA since there are many violations of human rights through coercions and psychological manipulation within law enforcement. This is a challenge, especially when there are high stakes, such as capital punishment. The belief that capital punishment is a deterrent to criminal behavior is a fallacy owing to the lack of evidence and the evidence of an opposite effect that is substantiated. The United States, therefore, needs to revert to its rightful place as the advocate of human rights and dignity like other Western nations by abolishing capital punishment.
References
Admin, M. (2022, June 3). David Baldus, author of groundbreaking study on race and the death penalty, dies. Equal Justice Initiative. https://eji.org/news/david-baldus-dies/
American Civil Liberties Union. (2005, September 14). Race and the death Penalty. https://www.aclu.org/documents/race-and-death-penalty
Amnesty International. (2021, June 23). US executes death row prisoner Troy Davis. https://www.amnesty.org/en/latest/press-release/2011/09/us-executes-death-row-prisoner-troy-davis/
Baldus, D. C., Pulaski, C. A., & Woodworth, G. (1983). Comparative Review of Death Sentences: An Empirical study of the Georgia experience. Journal of Criminal Law & Criminology, 74(3), 661. https://doi.org/10.2307/1143133
Bartley, L. V. (2023). “The Jogger and the Wolfpack”: An analysis of the TRANSITIVITY patterns in the global media coverage of the 1989 Central Park Five case. International Journal for the Semiotics of Law – Revue Internationale De Sémiotique Juridique. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11196-023-10026-x
Bessler, J. (2022). Human dignity and the law’s evolution. In Cambridge University Press eBooks(pp. 209–263). https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108980159.006
Dart, T. (2018, October 6). Arizona inmate Joseph Wood was injected 15 times with execution drugs. The Guardian. https://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/aug/02/arizona-inmate-injected-15-times-execution-drugs-joseph-wood
Death Penalty Information Center. (2019, June 6). Study: International data shows declining murder rates after abolition of death penalty. Death Penalty Information Center. https://deathpenaltyinfo.org/news/study-international-data-shows-declining-murder-rates-after-abolition-of-death-penalty
Death Penalty Information Center. (2022, December 12). As Lethal injection turns forty, states botch a record number of executions. Death Penalty Information Center. https://deathpenaltyinfo.org/news/as-lethal-injection-turns-forty-states-botch-a-record-number-of-executions
Gorn, R. R. (2018). Adequate Representation: The Difference Between Life and Death. AMERICAN CRIMINAL LAW REVIEW, 55(463). https://www.law.georgetown.edu/american-criminal-law-review/wp-content/uploads/sites/15/2018/04/55-2-Adequate-Representation-The-Difference-Between-Life-and-Death.pdf
Gudjónsson, G. H. (2021). The Science-Based Pathways to Understanding False Confessions and Wrongful Convictions. Frontiers in Psychology, 12. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2021.633936
Hoyle, C., & Lehrfreund, S. (2019). Contradictions in judicial support for capital punishment in India and Bangladesh: Utilitarian rationales. Asian Journal of Criminology. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11417-019-09304-0
Lamperti, J. (2010). Does capital punishment deter murder. https://math.dartmouth.edu/~lamperti/my%20DP%20paper,%20current%20edit.htm
Levin, D. T. (2000). Race as a visual feature: Using visual search and perceptual discrimination tasks to understand face categories and the cross-race recognition deficit. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 129(4), 559–574. https://doi.org/10.1037/0096-3445.129.4.559
Sanchez, S. (2023). 1.8. The Crime Control and Due Process Models. Pressbooks. https://openoregon.pressbooks.pub/ccj230/chapter/1-8-due-process-and-crime-control-model/
Stevenson, B. A., & Stinneford, J. F. (2023). Interpretation: The Eighth Amendment. National Constitution Center – constitutioncenter.org. https://constitutioncenter.org/the-constitution/amendments/amendment-viii/clauses/103#:~:text=The%20Eighth%20Amendment%20to%20the,as%20the%20price%20for%20obtaining
Weathered, L. M. (2014). Huff Ronald C and Killias Martin (eds) (2013) Wrongful Convictions & Miscarriages of Justice: Causes and Remedies in North American and European Criminal Justice Systems. International Journal for Crime, Justice and Social Democracy, 3(3), 154–156. https://doi.org/10.5204/ijcjsd.v3i3.190
World Population Review. (2023). Countries with Death Penalty 2023. https://worldpopulationreview.com/country-rankings/countries-with-death-penalty
Zeidman, S. (2015, May 5). Due process and the failure of the criminal court. https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2692121
Order Custom Paper
Unlock your academic potential—order your custom paper from an expert today and enjoy a 15% discount on your first order!
Order Now
