But how can you quantify it that simply, does the killers child deserve to grow up with out any hope of ever knowing their father or mother? Everyone’s childhood is unique, just because someone has a suspected murder for a son or daughter does that mean that they’re in that position today solely because of there up bringing. This person may have been raised by foster parents in care for part of their life. There will always be those who are emotionally attached no matter what. It’s called unconditional love. In any case there is no way of being certain that a person is 100% responsible for the crimes they are suspected of. There have been many documented cases of very recent sentences being over turned in both the UK and US which have been over turned on appeal. There was a case not so long ago where a mother was acquitted of killing her child because she had two children die of cot death and a supposed expert in the field of paediatrics give evidence suggesting that it was nearly statistically implausible for two children on the one family to die of cot death when there was no substantive evidence to suggest that this is the case, also look at the Gilford four and the Birmingham six they where imprisoned of membership of the IRA and carrying out bombs in England even though both where completely fabricated charges in both case and in the case of the Birmingham six the authorities where well aware of who committed the atrocity, well before they where released.
The fact is that law is not infallible, (there’s no way of us ever knowing if a person is indeed guilty of the crime they’ve committed) and that any type of compensation to the family after the state has wrongfully convicted and subsequently killed their loved one, will ever replace the life they took, all shows how the death penalty has no beneficial purpose in society.

Vincent

That’s what you believe you whould do but the wonderful thing about our ability to reason things out is that we do not always come out with the same answers. The family of a convicted murder have every right to believe their relation is innocent and does not deserve death, nobody has the right to tell them they can’t grieve the death of their loved one, and when we are in apposition where we know very little about the case, who’s to argue hat their wrong?

As Louise has already stated there is no such thing as being 100% sure that you’ve got the right person, people can give confessions for a number of reasons, wishing to protect their families, under threat of the real perpetrator or maybe the confession was gained under conditions of torture. Both instances are far from implausible.

And in any case the people who are placed on death row may be suspected of terrible crimes but what about white collar crime? When Nestlé sold their defective baby milk powder to so called ‘developing’ countries (as their baby milk powder was rejected for sale in Europe and America as it was substandard). It resulted in the deaths of thousands of infants, al because Nestlé wanted to make more money.
Nestlé knowingly give out free baby milk power to mothers in hospital, but not when. Feeding the babies the mixture meant that they where more likely to reject Brest milk (which Nestle were well aware of) when they left hospital ands once they did this Nestles ‘generosity’ stopped and families where force to spend upwards of 50% of their income on milk powder.
Nestle know that not only would the mothers now have to by their milk powder but that mixing it with contaminated hospital could put their babies lives seriously a risk and thousands of babies did die.
Was anyone convicted of this crime? Handed out life sentences or put on Death row for making their callous heartless decision? No.
Don’t get me wrong all murder is wrong but the law is skewed towards apprehending a certain type of criminal, the ones who commit the visible crime, which yes is awful but lets a who other type of criminal off Scot free.
My point in the Death penalty is issued discriminately to a particular class of criminal, so if you have enough money to pay out for the best lawyers then you’ll have a greater chance of getting a lighter sentence for what in a sense is a the same type of crime, murder. More people from the poorer sectors of American society are represented on death row that any other, which is highly discriminatory.
Capital punishment is not issued indiscriminately and in any case the state does not have the right to decide who should be given the right to life. It’s something which should be guaranteed by our human rights. But the fact that our laws can be abused in this way only goes to highlight the inequalities of our society. Visible crime only accounts for a tiny proportion of all the crime out there, which in many cases the courts chose to be blissfully unaware of.

Vincent

What is then? And are you suggesting that people who are mentally unbalanced should be treated similarly to those who commit meditative murders? Rehabilitation (IMHO) has to be our last great hope, If we believe that people are simply evil to the core then is there really any hope for the rest of us. Crime is never that clear cut if we simply put it down to someone being unbalanced or a person simply being bad or rotten to the core, we’ll never get to the rot causes of violent crime. Even if a person has carried out a heinous crime there is still a chance that they can see the error of their ways and contribute to society, they may never be let out , and rightly so, but that still doesn’t mean they can’t do things that will some way pay back a debt to society, educate themselves, help other prisoners see the error of their ways, make something of their life inside prison by doing something to benefit their families, even if it is simply sending a card to a son or daughter who will be growing up denied a father or mother figure. Re-habitation works, even of the end goal will not result in prisoners being releases. If they are treated as if their life no longer has any meaning who will that benefit, vengeance has an extremely short life span once it’s acted out upon.

Vincent

No it’s not. People who are put on death row go through a lengthy period of appeals after appeals so that the state can be seen to make sure they are not sending an innocent man or woman to their death. (which is in any case a futile practice IMHO) The litigation costs during this period far out way what it would cost to keep and rehabilitate someone. And in any case not killing someone can have emotional benefits for the people who love them and give long term criminals the opportunity to give something back to society.