Paul position on Capital Punishment
Paul, by his own admission, has changed his position on capital punishment and is now opposed to the death penalty, chiefly out of fear than an innocent person may be sentenced to death.
“Do not be involved with the state in executing criminals or in any way approve the carrying out of the death penalty....
... Believers in the omnipotence of state military power are
enthusiastic supporters of the death penalty. It’s strange to me that
those who champion best the rights of pre-born are generally the
strongest supporters of the death penalty and preventive, that is,
aggressive, war. Ironically, those who find the death penalty an affront
to life are usually the strongest supporters of abortion. I grant that
there certainly is a difference in the life being protected; one is
totally innocent—the unborn—and the other usually a person convicted of a
horrible crime, like murder or rape. The difference of opinion is
usually along the lines of conservative versus liberal.
This is one issue in which my views have shifted in recent years,
especially since being elected to Congress. There was a time I simply
stated that I supported the death penalty. Now my views are not so
clearly defined. I do not support the federal death penalty, but
constitutionally I cannot, as a federal official, interfere with the
individual states that impose it.
After years spent in Washington, I have become more aware than ever of
the government’s ineptness and the likelihood of its making mistakes. I
no longer trust the U.S. government to invoke and carry out a death
sentence under any conditions. Too many convictions, not necessarily
federal, have been found to be in error, but only after years of
incarcerating innocent people who later were released on DNA evidence.
Rich people when guilty are rarely found guilty and sentenced to death.
Most people believe O. J. Simpson was guilty of murder but went free.
This leads to a situation where innocent people without enough money are
more likely to get the death penalty while the guilty rich people with
good lawyers get off. For me it’s much easier just to eliminate the
ultimate penalty and incarcerate the guilty for life—in case later
evidence proves a mistaken conviction. The cost of incarceration is
likely less than it is for death penalty appeals drawn out not for years
but for decades.”
Paul on the Death Penalty
“You know over the years, I’ve held pretty rigid to all my beliefs but I’ve changed my opinion about the death penalty. For federal purposes, I no longer believe in the death penalty. I believed it has been issued unjustly. If you are rich you get away with it. If you’re poor and you’re from the inner city, you’re more likely to be prosecuted and convicted. And today, with the DNA evidences there’s been too many mistakes so I am now opposed to the federal death penalty.”
There have been 1,226 executions spread over the 36 death penalty states
between 1976 to 2010; the highest among developed nations.
Essentially, the proponents of capital punishment argue that it reduces the risks of future deaths by taking the perpetrator out from society, as well as creating a deterrent effect for would-be murderers. They also hold to the position that without the threat of an ‘eye for an eye’, the fabric of society itself will fall apart. While there is an element of risk of punishing an innocent, the benefits outweigh the very rare incidents of wrong prosecution.
Opponents, meanwhile, contend that there is no empiric data supporting the argument that capital punishment reduces or prevents future deaths. In addition, they argue that rehabilitation is a more humane method of punishment, a reflection on our higher sense of morals. But most of all, there is a tendency to prosecute and convict under-privileged minorities, indicated from the disproportionate ratio in comparison to our national demographics. Opponents also like to point out the fact that 98% of the district attorneys in death penalty states are white (Jeffrey Pokorak, Cornell Law Review, 1998).
Essentially, the proponents of capital punishment argue that it reduces the risks of future deaths by taking the perpetrator out from society, as well as creating a deterrent effect for would-be murderers. They also hold to the position that without the threat of an ‘eye for an eye’, the fabric of society itself will fall apart. While there is an element of risk of punishing an innocent, the benefits outweigh the very rare incidents of wrong prosecution.
Opponents, meanwhile, contend that there is no empiric data supporting the argument that capital punishment reduces or prevents future deaths. In addition, they argue that rehabilitation is a more humane method of punishment, a reflection on our higher sense of morals. But most of all, there is a tendency to prosecute and convict under-privileged minorities, indicated from the disproportionate ratio in comparison to our national demographics. Opponents also like to point out the fact that 98% of the district attorneys in death penalty states are white (Jeffrey Pokorak, Cornell Law Review, 1998).
| How many innocent people has the US executed? |
|
As a report reveals the innocence of a man put to death in Texas in 1989, we examine the US' use of capital punishment.
More than two decades after the US state of Texas executed Carlos DeLuna, an investigative study has revealed that he was in fact
innocent. DeLuna was put to death in 1989 for stabbing and killing a petrol station cashier, Wanda Lopez, in 1983.
Carlos DeLuna (left) and Carlos Hernandez
"There was no DNA that was ever found or used in this case. [The] team went to Corpus Christi in 2003 to try to get the physical evidence from the case to run a DNA analysis but that physical evidence had been checked out of the prosecutor's office and lost." - Shawn Crowley, the co-author of Los Tocayos Carlos "If I was to rewrite the laws I would add many procedural safeguards against the possibility of making [an] error, like requiring DNA, changing the standard of proof from beyond a reasonable doubt to any doubt whatsoever and requiring a [competent] defence lawyer…." - Bruce Fein, a constitutional lawyer Over the last two decades support for capital punishment in the US has been on the decline. Nonetheless, despite the work of many groups that have raised questions about the fairness of the American justice system, around 60 per cent are still in favour of the death penalty. Today, there are more than 3,200 people on death row. So far this year, 18 people have been executed. But the number of death sentences is dropping every year, and more than a dozen US states have now abolished capital punishment. Over the last 40 years, more than 130 have been released from death row. Nate Fields is among exonerated inmates. In 2009, he was acquitted of a double murder after spending almost 20 years in prison, including more than 11 years on death row. "The main reason why the death penalty should be abolished is because of the human factor and that is going to continue to play out as long as we have the death penalty. As humans we are going to make mistakes. Just because there are 12 people in the jury doesn't mean they can't get it wrong, they can …because of the human factor …. With the death penalty you can't bring a man back from the graveyard." Nate Fields THE DEATH PENALTY IN THE US:
|
No comments:
Post a Comment