Monday, May 21, 2007
- Two defense counsel required for capital cases
- Far greater investigation and expert testimony costs
- Far more court time (a two-phased trial)
- Greater costs for juries
- Vastly more motions by both sides
- Many more hours in preparation by the D.A.'s office
When we put all of this together, and include (as we should) the costs of all the trials where the death penalty is sought and not, in the end, received, we find that hundreds of millions, perhaps a billion dollars have been spent here in Tennessee on a system that has executed only 3 people in 47 years! Think of what all that money could have done for education, mental health care, or victims' services.
Wrong, anonymous. Despite that we've had no death penalty for murder in my country since 1965, there has been public concern in my country about people convicted of murder who were subsequently pardoned after evidence in their favour came to light. For the sake of example, may I suggest that you go to Wikipedia and do a search on the case of Stefan Kiszko?
Wherever there's no death penalty, the justice system still fails, but at least it fails - safe.
I wrote "such a focus". Of course, people will always care about innocent people. My argument is that the death penalty has brought the issue more to the forefront.
As for healing and reconciliation, that's not what the state should spend money on. At all.
Would there have been a focus on innocence had there been no death penalty, yes, but there is no way that the focus would have been as sharp.
I agree that this is not a principled argument for the death penalty at all, and I never have presented it as such.
Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]
Links to this post :