Two years ago, Dylann Roof, a 21-year-old white supremacist, joined a prayer service at the Emanuel African Methodist Episcopal Church. He waited until all 12 people in attendance closed their eyes, and proceeded to shoot, killing nine of them in the heartbreaking case known as the “Charleston shooting”. The federal court took Roof’s case in December 2016 and sentenced him to death on January 10.
I could go on and on about the extensive arguments against the death penalty. I could state that the execution is expensive – according to The Oregonian newspaper, three murder cases cost more than $1.5 million. I could say that it doesn’t deter crime – the Federal Bureau of Investigation data shows that states without death penalty actually have a lower crime rate than the states with capital punishment. Another analysis,by The New York Times, found that the homicide rate in states with the death penalty is actually 48% to 101% higher than in states without the death penalty.
However, this would suggest that I’m only opposed to capital punishment for its low cost-effect value. Capital punishment is not an aspect of a democratic nation. This ultimate application of the “an eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth” rule is not fit for a constitution based on our unalienable, natural rights. It is not fit for a nation that houses the United Nations headquarters to hurt one of the principles of the Universal Declarations of Humans Rights – the right to life.
As of 2016, 32 states still use capital punishment. Among the rest of the world, over 103 countries abolished the death penalty, including almost all countries in Europe, Oceania and South America. The 56 retentionist countries are concentrated in eastern Africa and Asia.
The University of Michigan led a study to estimate the number of wrongful convictions; it determined that at least 4% of people on the death row were and are likely innocent. Since 1976, there are 13 cases with strong evidence of innocence, and the website Save Innocents suggests that the number is upwards of 40 people. Save Innocents is an association that helps promote cases of those sentenced to death who may be innocent. They are currently supporting over 100 prisoners in the USA.
In 1968, James Richardson was sentenced to the death row for poisoning one of his children, supposedly to obtain insurance money. The primary evidence was the statement of two jailhouse snitches, who claimed that Richardson confessed the crime to him. It wasn’t until after Richard’s conviction that the attorneys found out that the neighbor who was taking care of the children had been convicted for homicide in the past. In 1989, almost 21 years later, the court dropped the charges against Richardson.
In the “Charleston shooting” case, Roof confessed and showed no remorse over his acts. He insisted that he’s not mentally ill, nor was he on drugs or alcohol. In his own words, he felt like he “had to do it”. Roof’s actions were simply inhumane and barbaric. But sending a criminal to the death row for homicide doesn’t make our hands any cleaner than the murderer. A government that doesn’t consider itself tyrannic shouldn’t have the power to take the life of individuals.
Before the trial, Roof intended to plead guilty in exchange for life in prison. His offer was rejected, even though relatives of the victims supported it, and his case was taken to trial. This only prolonged the pain of the families, who were forced to face trial for more than a year after shooting. Instead of mourning privately with their loved ones, they were surrounded by daily reminders on the media. They were constantly approached by attorneys. They had to look in the eyes of the man that they wished to forget.
An individual who could so easily take the life of another would hardly see death penalty as a punishment. A crime of revenge doesn’t cancel out a senseless crime of hate. As Wanda Simmons, granddaughter of one of the victims, said: “hate won’t win”.
