The Grim Reaper’s Considerations: The Death Penalty
Just weeks ago on March 14, 2017, the grim reaper took James Bigby’s life because of the death penalty. Bigby was put to death for killing a man and his 4 month-old son on Christmas Eve in 1987 (CBS). This marks the sixth execution this year in the United States (DPIC).
The death penalty is the execution of someone sentenced to death by a court of law for a criminal offense. The death penalty was first used in the 1700s in the United States and has evolved over time with changing methods and policies surrounding it. There are many controversies today surrounding the death penalty, its constitutionality, its morality and the sentencing process. Despite the large controversy about many aspects of this practice, it is still used in a majority of the states as it has proven to keep citizens safe from the most dangerous criminals. It is very important sentence criminals to death fairly, therefore it is imperative to keep the person’s mental health, background and the gravity of the crime in mind when deciding their sentence.
In 2006, a study found that more than 50% of all inmates on death row nationally suffer from mental health problems (The Intercept). Most inmates suffered from these illnesses before they committed a crime meaning their mental issues may have affected their decision-making abilities. For those who do not come to death row with a mental illness the confinement and isolation they face in prison often lead to mental health problems (NYT).
Most condemned inmates spend an average of 15 years on death row. The cells are cramped and they get one hour a day outside of their cell if they are lucky. While there are 40 beds for mentally ill inmates in California’s San Quentin prison, that is not nearly enough for the over 700 inmates, part of the largest death row population in the United States. Inmates describe the conditions as horrible and overcrowded and say that the biggest challenge is maintaining their sanity (Kron 4).
If a mental illness drove someone to commit a crime, is it fair to execute them if they did not know what they were doing at the time? Many mental illnesses lead to inmates to not understand what is going on or why they are being executed.
Despite the 2007 Supreme Court ruling that says an inmate must have some rational understanding of the basis for their execution, the competency threshold is easily being overlooked. For example, Scott Panetti, death row inmate in Texas who murdered his in-laws in 1992, is schizophrenic. He was deemed competent enough to act as his own defense counsel at trial, at which he wore a purple cowboy outfit and called Jesus Christ and Anne Bancroft, along with over 200 others, to testify in his defense. He has long believed that the state wants to kill him for preaching “the gospel of the Lord King.” (NYT). This man obviously does not understand his crime or why he is being punished yet the state of Texas is still pushing to execute him. If someone like this is being executed, even when they clearly do not comprehend the situation, is the death penalty punishment or torture?
Similarly, it is also important to keep the criminals background in mind and what pushed them to commit the crime. Having a hard life doesn’t make the crime okay, but it may explain what motives the criminal had and must play a role in determining if they should face the death penalty or not. A person with a low income or impoverished life is more likely to commit a crime out of desperation (Procon.org). People who were abused, abandoned, neglected as children are more likely to commit a crime as well (NYT).
It is a common idea that executing a killer will bring peace of mind to the victim’s family and friends, however, that is not always the case. James Rhodes robbed a store and killed the employee, Shelby Farah, in Florida in 2013. Rhodes was abused and neglected as a child, surrounded by drugs and violence, and was in and out of foster homes where he was sexually assaulted by other boys (NYT). When Farah’s mother heard this story, she began to understand what caused him to do this, he needed the money and had learned as a child that violence was okay. Farah thinks that the death penalty is not the just punishment for James Rhodes due to his childhood and background. She also feels that her daughter would not have wanted Rhodes put to death and she does not think that it would help her family feel any better about losing a loved one.
The gravity of the crime is important to consider to see if there is a better punishment option. The death penalty is supposed to be punishment for “worst of the worst,” wrote Justice David Souter (NYT), however criminals like James Rhodes are being considered for the death penalty when, comparatively, his actions are not as severe as others. This punishment is reserved for criminals who commit the most heinous crimes such as first-degree murder, genocide, espionage, or murder related to rape or child molestation, among about 40 other crimes deemed “the worst of the worst”.
Recently, the discussion has grown about the cost of executing people and if it is really the most effective use of citizens tax dollars. The cost of a capital case is a lot more than a normal case, there are at least two trials with more experts, more attorneys, more appeals and the jurors are selected more carefully. This whole process takes longer and consumes lots of money years before the execution even happens. The drug used in lethal injection executions is also becoming harder and harder to get ahold of, therefore more expensive (Procon.org).
Another option to punish these criminals is life in prison, which is less expensive. Experts estimate that the death penalty process costs about $2 million while life without parole in prison is half that for 50 years (NYT). Many citizens are not happy to hear that so many of their tax dollars are being used to executed a criminal whose crime does not fully deserve the death penalty. The death penalty should be reserved for the worst crimes and, depending on the gravity of the crime, other options such as life in prison without parole should be looked at as possible alternatives.
The death penalty is important to keep our society safe from the most dangerous criminals, however, it isn’t always the most appropriate kind of punishment. Capital punishment should be used only used for the worst criminals, and always sentenced fairly. When sentencing a criminal to death it is important to consider the stability of the inmate’s mental health and make sure they are competent enough to understand why they are being punished. Also important to look into is the background and early life of the criminal and the gravity or the crime committed to ensure fair punishment.
While the controversy continues on the morality and constitutionality behind the Death Penalty, the most important thing is to keep these important considerations in mind to ensure the justest outcome as possible.
