The use of the death penalty is often the subject of intense debate. Numerous convicted criminals throughout the United States have been sentenced to execution for the crimes that they committed. Many individuals support the use of capital punishment without fully understanding the problems that are associated with this criminal sentence. 

 

 

The public often maintains the belief that employing the death penalty is the only way to effectively neutralize the threat that is posed by dangerous criminals.

 

 

Generally, individuals are not familiar with many of the complications that capital punishment presents. Though the sentence of capital punishment may be warranted in some instances, it is important for society to understand all aspects of the death penalty before they support or oppose its use.

 

 

Background

 

 

Capital punishment is not a recent institution. Since the beginning of human civilization, individuals who were responsible for breaking government, societal, moral, and religious laws have received the death penalty for their actions. These individuals have been killed due to the behavior that they took part in. 

 

 

The death penalty is still used today in countries and by cultures throughout the world. Some countries continue to use inhumane methods of execution and will murder people for taking part in minor offenses. In underdeveloped countries, these executions often occur without any formal judicial process in which the offender can defend themselves against these accusations. 

 

 

In the United States, the death penalty is only exacted after a thorough judicial process. The accused must be given the chance to defend themselves and there must be evidence that indicates that the perpetrator is responsible for vicious crimes and that they have no regard for the sanctity of human life.

 

 

Crimes that Possibly Warrant It

 

 

There is a great deal of debate regarding what crimes should be punished by the death penalty. Capital punishment is an extremely serious and irreversible sentence. The use of capital punishment has decreased a great deal in recent years in favor of a sentence of life in prison. Many individuals feel that the death penalty should not be used at all. In most cases, capital punishment is exacted when an offender is responsible for the murder of another person. 

 

 

Some individuals argue that there are various different crimes that warrant the use of the death penalty even if murder does not occur. These crimes are vicious and heinous in nature and often lead to severe and extensive physical injuries to the individuals who are the victims of these crimes. 

 

 

However, the Supreme Court has ruled that the use of the death penalty for crimes other than murder violates the decree that prohibits the used of cruel or unusual punishment. Therefore, the punishment for a crime must be proportional to the severity of the criminal activity that occurred. Because of this, the death penalty has not been used to punish crimes other than murder since it was reestablished.

 

 

Political/Social Debate

 

 

Capital punishment has been the cause of a great deal of debate since the American colonies were formed in the 1600s, and long before that in other areas of the world. Individuals have found both beneficial and detrimental aspects of capital punishment which may be used to support the death penalty or to condemn it. 

 

 

Individuals who argue for the use of capital punishment explain that it is the only completely effective way of keeping society safe from dangerous criminals. It is also used to deter individuals from committing similar crimes. However, the effectiveness of the death penalty in these matters is often called into question by individuals who oppose the death penalty. 

 

 

They cite many complications that are associated with capital punishment and they believe that the detrimental and potentially horrific consequences of the death penalty outweigh the benefits that capital punishment may posses. Humans are capable of error and human judgment is not always correct. 

 

 

Therefore, it is possible for awful and irreversible mistakes to be made. The only sure way to avoid these mistakes is to abolish the death penalty in the United States. 

 

 

Wrongful Convictions and Capital Punishment

 

 

Capital offenses are extremely serious crimes that deserve extremely severe punishments. In cases of capital offenses, the

 

 

State is often under a great deal of pressure to find, convict, and sentence the individual who is responsible for committing the crime in question. 

 

 

The public and the jury are often eager to see the individual who is responsible for heinous crimes receive penalties for their activities and behavior. In many instances, the legal process is compromised or important evidence and information is omitted from the case. In instances such as this, it is possible for an individual who is innocent of a crime to be wrongly convicted of a capital offense. 

 

 

It happens much more frequently than most people believe, and it is one of the primary reasons that advocates argue against the death penalty.

 

 

Since DNA technology has provided criminal investigators with new and viable evidence, many individuals who were awaiting execution on death row have been released from prison because the evidence proved that they were not guilty of the crime in question. It is extremely disturbing to know that if this technology was not available, innocent individuals would be executed for a crime that they did not commit. 

 

 

Statistics

 

 

Statistics related to capital punishment create an alarming picture and raise many questions about the fairness of the death penalty and the sentence of capital punishment. Individuals who support the death penalty argue that capital punishment is the only successful method of ensuring that society is safe from dangerous criminals. 

 

 

They often claim that capital punishment is a fair and fitting penalty reserved only for the most heinous offenders in instances in which there is no other alternative. However, reviewing information and data related to the use of the death penalty individuals may quickly conclude that the death penalty is not fair at all and is, in fact, arbitrary and erratic.

 

 

There are no strict guidelines that determine what capital offenders will be sentenced to life in prison and which ones will be sentenced to death. While the majority of individuals receive a life sentence for capital offenses, a few individuals who have committed similar crimes will be sentenced to the death penalty. Statistics indicate that capital punishment discriminates based on race, ethnicity, socioeconomic status, and geographical location. Until these problems and issues are addressed and resolved, capital punishment cannot be considered to be a fair or ethical system.  

 

 

Cost of Death Penalty

 

 

One of the common concerns regarding the use of the death penalty is the financial burden that it imposes upon the Government and taxpayers. It is a logical assumption that sentencing a criminal to spend the rest of their lives in prison would result in more expensive fees. A life sentence requires the State to provide the offender with food, clothing, and shelter for the rest of their life. The states must also employ individuals for the operation and maintenance of correctional faculties. 

 

 

Once a convict is executed they no longer require necessities that result in Government spending. Although it is a logical determination that the cost of life imprisonment is more than capital punishment, this assumption is incorrect. In order to maintain the death penalty, State governments must spend hundreds of thousands of dollars every year. The cost that is accumulated due to the death penalty is far greater then the cost accumulated due to life sentences. 

 

 

Creation of Death Penalty

 

 

The death penalty is not a new or modern development. Capital punishment has been practiced throughout the world for hundreds of years by various different countries and cultures. Since its advent, the death penalty has undergone major and significant changes in order to become the form of capital punishment that we utilize today.

 

 

Capital punishment was used in the American colonies since they were established in the 1600s. The practice of the death penalty was largely based on capital punishment in Europe. American colonists utilized the death penalty in order to punish criminals and to deter other individuals from taking part in criminal behavior. 

 

 

Often, the behavior that was punishable by death are crimes that would be considered minor crimes by today's standards. For example, in the American colonies an individual who was caught stealing food may have been executed as punishment for their behavior. Since the 1600s, capital punishment has changed and adapted a great deal to fit the times. 

 

 

Religious Arguments

 

 

The use of the death penalty has been the source of a great deal of controversy between individuals, political parties, and organizations. It has been especially controversial within religious denominations. Capital punishment has caused numerous debates amongst religious factions and between individuals within religious denominations. Each religion has different teachings and beliefs regarding the death penalty. Some religions have chosen to take an official stand on the death penalty, while others choose to remain obscure about their views on capital punishment.

 

 

Despite the official stance that has been adopted by religions, capital punishment continues to cause disagreements within religious factions. Some individuals will use incidents that occur in religious scripture to justify and support the use of the death penalty. Other people will argue that capital punishment conflicts with all of the basic and fundamental teachings and beliefs of their faith. Both sides of the argument raise interesting points. However, it is unlikely that this debate will be resolved in the near future. 

 

 

States Disallowing Death Penalty

 

 

A great deal of argument and debate surrounds the use of the death penalty. Individuals who support capital punishment often cite many beneficial aspects of the death penalty. It is very effective in keeping individuals who are believed to be dangerous off of the street, preventing them from causing future harm to society and to innocent individuals. However, there are many problems with the use of capital punishment.

 

 

The death penalty is an irreversible sentence. Therefore, if evidence comes to light after the execution has been carried out the court cannot make amends for the mistake that they have made. Many states recognize the many various complications that are associated with capital punishment. Although the death penalty is still in practice the in majority of states throughout the United States, some states have chosen to abolish the death penalty. As early as 1846, states began to forbid the use of capital punishment on capital offenders. Other states have followed this example, and today thirteen states have chosen to abolish the death penalty.   

 

 

Court Process for Death Penalty

 

 

 

The court process that leads to capital punishment is extremely long and detailed. From the time that an offender carries out their crime to the time that they are executed may take many years. It is possible for an innocent person to be sentenced to the death penalty.

 

 

Since DNA technology has been developed, many individuals have been released from death row because new evidence indicated that they were innocent of the crimes with which they were charged. In order to help ensure that a victim is not wrongly accused and executed for a crime that they did not commit, there are various procedures that are carried out during a capital case.

 

 

A capital case occurs in two different phases. First the evidence is presented to the court and the defendant is either found guilt or not guilty of the crime in question. Then the sentencing phase will occur. This phase will determine the fate of the convict. If an individual is sentenced to death, then a lengthy process of appeals begins. This process helps to guarantee that no legal errors were made throughout the course of the trial. These processes, and the procedures that follow, make capital cases not only extremely long, but also very expensive.

 

 

Juvenile Death Penalty

 

 

A great deal of controversy surrounds the sentence of capital punishment for individuals who have committed a capital offense as a juvenile. There have been many valid arguments made by both those supporting and opposing the use of the death sentence for juvenile offenders. Recently, the Supreme Court ruled against the use of the death penalty in cases in which the capital offense was committed when the convict was a juvenile. The Supreme Court considered capital punishment for juvenile offenders to be unconstitutional and a violation of the rights laid out by the United States Constitution. 

 

 

Before the Supreme Court passed this judgment, some states took it upon themselves to outlaw the use of capital punishment on juvenile offenders. Individuals who opposed the use of the death penalty on individuals who were convicted of a crime that was committed when they were a minor argue that individuals who are under the age of eighteen do not posses the cognitive ability to understand their actions and the consequences of their actions. 

 

 

Therefore, imposing capital punishment upon these individuals is unconstitutional. The use of the death penalty on juvenile offenders continues to be a controversial international issue.

 

 

International Death Penalty Issues

 

 

Capital punishment does not only present issues within the United States, but it also raises concerns on an intern

Judges are granted the power and the privilege to exercise discretion over criminal cases. Once a defendant is convicted of a crime by a jury, the judge has the ability to determine the severity of the sentence that the criminal will face, as long as it does not violate the Eighth Amendment to the United States Constitution and impose a form of cruel and unusual punishment.

Cruel and unusual punishments are penalties that are considered to be unsuitable or unsatisfactory due the the physical and emotional pain that they cause the victim. These penalties may be excruciatingly painful or they may be degrading and humiliating.

Cruel and unusual punishments are considered to be unacceptable in the United States. In many cases, a sentence that is handed down to a criminal by a judge will be considered to be a form of cruel and unusual punishment if the punishment is disproportional to the crime that was committed.

The judge has the ability to determine the punishment that a criminal will receive. In some instances, an individual who is responsible for committing a crime will be sentenced to a much more severe punishment than another offender who is responsible for the same crime. Each judge is permitted to use their discretion when deciding on an appropriate punishment for criminals.

Despite the legislation outlawing judges from imposing cruel and unusual punishments upon convicts, many individuals are sentenced to penalties that can be considered to be forms of cruel and unusual punishment.

For example, sentencing an individual to capital punishment for a crime that they committed when they were under the age of eighteen is a type of cruel and unusual punishment. After a great deal of debate, the Supreme Court prohibited the use of the death penalty on juvenile offenders. A current subject of heated debate is the sentence of life in prison without the possibility of parole for juveniles.

Mandatory sentencing laws support forms of cruel and unusual punishments, especially in the case of drug offenses. Data from the Federal Bureau of Investigation indicates that on average, an individual who is charged with a first time drug offense receives a longer prison sentence than a first time offender who is responsible for manslaughter, burglary, assault, or sexual abuse. Individuals who know that a drug offense is taking place and do nothing to stop it may be charged with aiding and abetting, even if they had no part in the crime.

There is a mandatory minimum sentence for drug violations, in which an individual who is charged with a drug offense will be sentenced to jail time with no chance of parole. The punishment is often disproportional and severe for the crime that was committed. Despite the fact that cruel and unusual punishments are prohibited in the Constitution, many harsh and relentless sentences continue to be handed to offenders

One of the most commonly used criminal defenses is the defense of duress. The term “duress” is defined as coercion through the use of force or the threat of violence. Duress is used as a criminal defense when an individual has committed a crime in order to escape physical or emotional harm or injury.

An individual who can prove that they committed a crime under duress may not be held liable for the criminal activity in which they have taken part. However, there are various factors that must be satisfied in order for a defense of duress to be adequate and effective. 

In order for an offender to successfully utilize the defense that they were under duress, they must have been exposed to the threat or the possibility of severe physical injury or death. The threat of injury that they are being subjected to must be more severe than the damage that they cause as a result of their criminal activity.

In order for the defense of duress to be acceptable, the threatened harm that the offender was experiencing must have been present at the time of the crime and there must have been no other effective way of escaping the threat at the time. Also, it is essential that the offender was not criminally responsible in the situation in which they became involved. 

Therefore, if the defendant took part in some form of illegal activity or behavior that resulted in him experiencing the threat of violence from another individual, the defense that the crime was committed under duress would not be successful.

There are various different ways that an individual may be under duress and there are a variety of crimes that an individual may commit while they are under duress. Duress is often a common defense for individuals who are responsible for violating or breaking a contract. 

If the defendant was coerced into signing a contract through the use of force or through the threat of violence, then the contract may be ruled null and void. As such, the defendant cannot be charged with a crime and will not receive legal repercussions for violating the contract.

However, duress is generally not considered to be an effective defense for murder. If a defendant can prove that they were responsible for a homicide only because they were under duress, then the charges that they face may be decreased to manslaughter, but they will still be held liable for their crimes. 

When an individual is experiencing duress they may be subjected to threats against their physical well-being, threats against their property and their belongings, or threats against their family’s health and well-being.

In most courts throughout the United States, a prisoner who successfully escapes prison may effectively use the defense of duress. A convict who was suffering from threats of severe physical injury or death in the prison in which they were serving their sentence may have believed that escaping the correctional facility was the only option that they had to maintain their health and well-being. 

If the convict turns themselves in to the proper authorities and they can prove that they had no other option and that the authorities in the prison did nothing to protect them from the immediate danger that they were facing, then the escape may not be punished. In instances such as this, the convict will be transferred to another prison to complete their sentence, but will not be given a longer or more severe punishment as a result of their escape.

A defense attorney may utilize the duress defense in order to attempt to justify a wide range of criminal activities. However, it is important to keep in mind that the defense of duress is risky because the defendant is admitting that they did take part in the crime of which they are being accused

The application of criminal law has many different goals and conflicting purposes. As such, criminal sentencing and incarceration have many pros and cons. The intent and the purpose of criminal sentencing also vary a great deal. Often, the function of criminal law varies from one case to the next, and each case may contain its own conflicting purposes for punishments and penalties. 

 

 

Because of these conflicting purposes, punishments often differ to a large degree from one defendant to another, even though the crime committed may be the same.

 

 

Often, penalties are disproportional with one focus on deterrence and rehabilitation. Non-utilitarian punishments, meanwhile, often focus on retribution. According to the doctrine of retribution, an individual who has committed a crime by violating criminal law must be punished for their actions. 

 

 

The sentence that they receive should fit the crime that they have committed so that justice is effectively served. If an individual is responsible for inflicting harm upon another person, then they should be punished so that they too experience the pain that they have caused another individual. In order for justice to be served an offender must be sentenced to a punishment that fits the crime, but not a penalty that is unusually cruel.

 

 

Because there are two different schools of thought regarding the purpose of punishments, there is often controversy and argument surrounding the use of disproportional punishments. Many people feel that the use of disproportional punishments are wrong because individuals are receiving punishments that are much more severe than the crimes that have been committed. Also, disproportional punishments do not maintain the severity of crimes in relation to other crimes. 

 

 

However, people who support utilitarian punishments argue that disproportional punishments are necessary for deterring individuals from committing crime. While proportional punishments may be successful for retribution, they do little to deter criminals and decrease crime rates.

Life sentences are among the most severe punishments that courts can impose on offenders in criminal cases. They are often given to those found guilty of the most heinous crimes, such as murder, and are intended to ensure that they spend the rest of their lives behind bars. However, there is another type of life sentence that is becoming increasingly common in recent years – consecutive life sentences. In this article, we will take a closer look at the definition of consecutive life sentences, and examine some recent popular cases where they have been applied.

What are Consecutive Life Sentences?

A consecutive life sentence is a sentencing option available to courts in some jurisdictions where a defendant is found guilty of multiple offenses that are punishable by life sentences. When a judge determines that the offender deserves more than one life sentence, they may choose to sentence them to consecutive life sentences. In this context, “consecutive” means that the offender must serve each of the life sentences one after another, rather than concurrently.

It is important to note that not all jurisdictions allow for consecutive life sentences and that the specifics of the law vary depending on where the case is being tried. In some states, such as Louisiana and California, mandatory life without parole is a possible sentence for certain crimes, so the use of consecutive life sentences is not as common there. In other jurisdictions, such as Texas and Oklahoma, consecutive life sentences are more prevalent.

Recent Cases

1. Ariel Castro Case

One of the most significant recent cases where consecutive life sentences were applied was the Ariel Castro case. Castro was a former Cleveland school bus driver who kidnapped three young women – Michelle Knight, Amanda Berry, and Gina DeJesus – and held them captive in his home for over a decade. During this time, he repeatedly raped and assaulted the women and forced them to endure horrific living conditions. In 2013, Castro was arrested after one of the women, Amanda Berry, managed to escape and alert the authorities.

Many people question the purpose and the necessity of handing a convict a consecutive life sentence. The term “life imprisonment” implies that a criminal will spend the rest of their life behind bars. As long as they are living, a convict who has been sentenced to life imprisonment will remain captive in a prison cell in order to keep the public safe from any harm that they may present to society.

Therefore, a consecutive life sentence seems unnecessarily redundant. Individuals often wonder as to how a criminal can serve more then one sentence of life imprisonment when the term “life sentence” indicates that a criminal will remain in prison until they die.

In order to understand why judges condemn a criminal to a consecutive life sentence it is important to understand the nature of life imprisonment. A consecutive life sentence occurs when a convict is required to complete a second life sentence after the first life sentence has been concluded. This may seem absurd, but reviewing the information and statistics related to life imprisonment will help an individual to understand the necessity of a consecutive life sentence.

The term “life imprisonment” is often misleading and deceptive. Contrary to popular belief, a life sentence does not necessarily mean that a criminal will spend the rest of their life in jail. When a judge condemns a convict to a life sentence, he/she will also determine whether or not the prisoner will be eligible for parolewithout chance of release.

However, in many instances, a convict will be granted the possibility of receiving parole. Some states, such as Alaska and New Mexico, prohibit a criminal from being sentenced to life without the chance of release. Therefore, it is possible for a murderer to once again walk the streets and pose a threat to individuals in the community. A consecutive life sentence will help to ensure that a dangerous criminal remains behind bars.

In most cases, life imprisonment means that a criminal must serve between fifteen to twenty years of their sentence before they will be considered for parole. If a criminal was handed a consecutive life sentence, then they will need to complete another twenty years before they are eligible for release, making it a total of forty years served before the convict will be considered for parole. Condemning a prisoner to multiple life sentences will ensure that the offenders are not considered for parole and are not released into the community.

In general, an offender will be handed a life sentence for each crime that they have committed that warrants life in prison. Therefore, if a perpetrator is responsible for murdering three people, then the offender may receive three life sentences. Many people believe that giving a convict multiple life sentences helps to console the victim’s family members because the offender has received a punishment for each specific crime that they have committed. In this respect, multiple life sentences are often extremely beneficial and reassuring.

It is possible for a convict to appeal their sentence. If one of the life sentences is overturned during the appeal process, then other life sentences have been passed in order to ensure that the criminal spends a long time in prison. A consecutive life sentence also accentuates the extent and the severity of the crimes that the offender committed.