Anatomy of the Execution of an Innocent Man:
Should the Death Penalty be Abolished?
By Lucas Duncan, Grade 9
A recent study by a team of legal experts and staticians from Michigan [Pilkington] have uncovered that at least 4.1% of all defendants sentenced to death in the US since the 1970s have been innocent, with one of these people being Carlos DeLuna. Carlos DeLuna was executed in December 1989 for murdering Wanda Lopez in a February 1983 robbery in Corpus Christi [McLaughlin]. But DeLuna did not commit the crime. There was no blood evidence, no DNA match, and almost all physical documentation connected to the case was not used by prosecutors [Cohen]. However, as innocent as DeLuna was, he was still sentences to death and killed. This is a popular case used by many people against capital punishment, which is a very controversial topic, as it shows the flaws in the legal system and the death penalty. With new information coming out showing the flaws of capital punishment, people are wondering – should the death penalty be abolished? I will be looking at that through ethical and ideological perspectives, from three different people. The first, a local perspective, being James S. Liebman, who thoroughly analysed the case of Carlos DeLuna and brought attention to it. The second, a global perspective, being Singapore’s Deputy Prime Minister Teo Chee Hean, who stands firmly with the death penalty, and the third being a personal perspective.
James S. Liebman was the author of the original text proving that Carlos DeLuna wasn’t guilty [Liebman]. He brought lots of attention to a relatively unknown case and it has now become one of the main cases people cite when arguing against the death penalty. Ethically, Liebman is neither clearly for or against capital punishment, judging by this quote [Rifkind] “In some states, costs and frustration levels associated with the death penalty may be so high that a more reliable solution … is to stop using the death penalty altogether. Another option is to limit its use to a small number of offenses as to which there is close to a social consensus that only the death penalty will serve.” Because of this quote I believe Liebman is an ethical relativist, as he isn’t firm on either side of the coin, however, he believes that certain things about the death penalty or capital punishment in general need to be modified. He is more likely towards abolishing death penalty, according to the quote. I think Liebman is also rather altruistic, as he puts others before himself, and if he believes something can be improved (in this case it being the American justice system) he will notify and make people more aware to fix it, as he did with Carlos DeLuna’s case. Ideologically, I think Liebman is politically left, as he is focused on changing traditional orders, such as capital punishment, because he thinks a new system could be better or more powerful. “Now that a range of options are available to respond to the high levels of error in capital sentencing, it is time to either fix it or end it.” He says in the previous article I cited, proving he is liberally minded.
Teo Chee Hean is Singapore’s Deputy Prime Minister, and is extremely opposed against abolishing the death penalty. Even though 104 countries have banned using the death penalty for all crimes [Death Penalty Information Center], most of them being in the past fifty years, Singapore has continued to keep using and supporting capital punishment. I believe Teo Chee Hean is partially ethically absolutist, as he believes that there are moral principles that are always and everywhere applicable, according to this quote [Saad] “Singaporeans understand that the death penalty has been an effective deterrent and an appropriate punishment for very serious offences, and largely support it. As part of our penal framework, it has contributed to keeping crime and the drug situation under control. We suggest other countries to try the same.” I also believe Hean is Utilitarian, as he supports what the majority of people think, as 80% of Singaporeans believe the death penalty should be retained [Rashith]. In fact, Singapore had the highest per capita execution rate between 1994 and 1999, with about 13.6 executions for every million people, according to the latest U.N. report on capital punishment [NBCNews]. The public believes using capital punishment deters criminals from commiting crimes, so Hean also supports this. Ideologically, I believe Hean is extremely right-wing because Singapore focuses heavily on upholding traditional values, and doesn’t often change it’s laws or rules. Singapore has also maintained a social hierarchy and you can clearly see this differences in wealth and power among its citizens. There is an obvious divide in classes.
Personally, I am not certain on whether the death penalty should be retained or abolished. I certainly believe that there are problems and high levels of error in capital punishments which need to be fixed. However, I do not believe that it should be completely abolished, as some crimes are unredeemable in my book. Should people who are repeat offenders of rape, murder and assault get a second chance? In my perspective, no. I think the death penalty and capital punishment are powerful forces that can deter criminals from repeating further crimes. I think that DeLuna’s case is more powerful to show the flaws in the legal system, not the death penalty. The fact that DNA evidence was not used, or that most physical documentation was lost is not due to capital punishment, but it was because of the failings of the attorneys, judges, and prosecutors. That being said, I do not believe that people should be sentenced to death for smaller crimes as they often do in Singapore (crimes such as owning drugs or piracy) because people who commit these are usually people who don’t understand what they are doing, and do deserve a second chance. I think I am more ethically relative, as I don’t believe there are certain rules or laws that should be applied everywhere. Each country and culture in different, and there should therefore be different guidelines. I also think I am Altruistic, as I do believe there are changes that do need to be made that benefit others around me. Ideologically, I believe I am ore left-wing, as I don’t believe all tradition need to remain, because many of them can hold society back from progressing. We should take steps to become a better place, not just stay the same.
The Death Penalty is an extremely controversial issue, and will most likely remain one for many years to come. A popular question asked about capital punishment is whether the death penalty is here to serve punishment for people who have committed crimes, or to set an example for others who could act that way in the future? I think it used for both of these things, as justification and a warning to others. But capital punishment is also a double edged sword, as it could be killing innocent people who do not deserve that treatment, which ironically is a crime itself. It is something that we need to stay careful with, and use with judgement. Perhaps it should come back to the age-old statement; “An eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth.” Should people be murdered for murder, full stop, or is it important to look at the ethics and thoughts behind that action? Many people believe that looking at why they did it is just as important as what they did, which I believe is fair. However, murder is still murder. Death is still death. And that question will still be asked, hundreds and hundreds of years into the future, because everyone has a different answer. We all have different perspectives.
Bibliography (In MLA Format):
Cohen, Andrew. “Yes, America, We Have Executed an Innocent Man.” The Atlantic, Atlantic Media Company, 14 May 2012, www.theatlantic.com/national/archive/2012/05/yes-america-we-have-executed-an-innocent-man/257106/.
Pilkington, Ed. “The Wrong Carlos: How Texas Sent an Innocent Man to His Death.” The Guardian, Guardian News and Media, 14 May 2012, www.theguardian.com/world/2012/may/15/carlos-texas-innocent-man-death.
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2012/may/15/carlos-texas-innocent-man-death
McLaughlin, Michael. “Carlos DeLuna Execution: Texas Put To Death An Innocent Man, Columbia University Team Says.” The Huffington Post, TheHuffingtonPost.com, 15 May 2012, www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/05/15/carlos-de-luna-execution-_n_1507003.html.’
Death Penalty Information Center. “A Summary of the Columbia University Study by Prof. James S. Liebman.” A Summary of the Columbia University Study by Prof. James S. Liebman | Death Penalty Information Center, www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/summary-columbia-university-study-prof-james-s-liebman
Rifkind. “James S. Liebman, PhD Biography.” Should the Death Penalty Be Allowed?, https://deathpenalty.procon.org/view.source.php?sourceID=006739
Death Penalty Information Center “Abolitionist and Retentionist Countries.” Abolitionist and Retentionist Countries | Death Penalty Information Center, deathpenaltyinfo.org/abolitionist-and-retentionist-countries
https://deathpenaltyinfo.org/abolitionist-and-retentionist-countries
Saad, Imelda. “Singapore Completes Review of Mandatory Death Penalty Read More at Https://Www.channelnewsasia.com/News/Singapore/Singapore-Completes-Review-of-Mandatory-Death-Penalty-8369356. ” Channel NewsAsia.
Rashith, Rahimah. “80 Per Cent Singaporeans in Reach Survey Say the Death Penalty Should Be Retained.” The Straits Times, 6 Oct. 2016, www.straitstimes.com/singapore/80-per-cent-singaporeans-in-reach-survey-say-the-death-penalty-should-be-retained.
NBCNews. “Singapore Has Highest Death Penalty Rate.” NBCNews.com, NBCUniversal News Group, 14 Jan. 2004, www.nbcnews.com/id/3958717/ns/world_news/t/singapore-has-highest-death-penalty-rate/#.WmQIk5P1Xq0
Liebman, James S. (Contributor), et al. “The Wrong Carlos.” By James S. Liebman, www.goodreads.com/book/show/18847885-the-wrong-carlos.
