Analysis Of On Death Row, But Is He Innocent

During a TED talk, University of Houston Law Professor David R. Dow shared lessons gained from the twenty years during which he protected more than a hundred death row inmates. Professor Dow declared that there are regular elements in the lives of the individuals who are as of now confronting the death penalty. Dow expressed, “If you tell me the name of a death row inmate - doesn't matter what state he's in, doesn't matter if I've ever met him before - I'll write his biography for you. And eight out of ten times, the details of that biography will be more or less accurate…Eighty percent of the people on death row are people who came from some sort of dysfunctional family….Eighty percent of the people on death row are people who had exposure to the juvenile justice system.” Professor Dow asserts that intervention during earlier stages of defendants’ lives might be one of the most effective ways of preventing them from committing violent crimes later on: “People might disagree about whether a murderer should have been executed. But I think everybody would agree that the best possible version…would be a story where no murder ever occurs.” Moreover, Dow explains, “For every $15,000 that we spend intervening in the lives of

This is news report that I saw in my local newspaper a few weeks ago, that I found interesting because it involves Minnesota and Oregon. This news story is about a man named Craig Dennis Bjork who is facing the death penalty in Oregon. Around 35 years ago, Bjork killed two women (one was his girlfriend and the had a history of prostitution arrest) and his two young children ages 1 and 3. He was sentenced to three life terms and 20 years for these crimes. While being incarcerated Bjork has been a problem prisoner. In the mid 90’s he wrote a letter to the warden in Stillwater Prison asking to be moved back to another prison he’d been assigned too, otherwise he threatened to kill someone. The warden declined Bjork’s request. Well a little over a year later he killed a fellow inmate. After this incident Bjork was transferred to the Oregon Department of Corrections, through a program called the Interstate Corrections Compact. In 2013, he killed another inmate in OSP in Salem, Or, and is now facing being sentenced with the death penalty. This is where the controversy comes in

The Alan Gell is an American former death row inmate who was sentenced to death for and later exonerated of the crime of first degree murder. He was freed from death row when it was determined that the prosecution had withheld significant exculpatory evidence and impeachment evidence. While on death row, Gell was given an appeal after his attorney argued that prosecutors withheld key evidence. He alleged that the police withheld eyewitness information from the forensic pathologies. It would have predicted a different death time than stated in the trial. The court was also presented with the fact that during the time the crime was committed Gell had been out of state or arrested for stealing a car and was serving a sentence in jail. He had a

John Plebbins pleaded guilty last week to the first-degree murder of Megan Mike, and is to take the stand beginning on April 5th. The controversy of this trail has left people taking sides, and has even spawned massive uproar. The controversy itself is due to the unclear decision to give a young offender a hefty charge of first-degree murder; thinking that such a charge should only be given to adults.

In 1989, seventeen year old, Kevin Stanford, committed murder, robbery, and sodomy. Stanford stole gas, cigarettes, and cash from a gas station. Along with the robbing he raped and shot the gas station attended on duty, Barbel Poore. After arrest, the juvenile court decided that Stanford will be tried as an adult. This decision was made because of the Kentucky law that states a person who commits a capital offence or is charged if a felony over the age of sixteen is to be tried as an adult. In the Kentucky Supreme Court, Stanford was sentenced to the death penalty and 45 years in prison. His juvenile recorded played a major role in the court’s decision showing the many attempts the state had in trying to set Stanford straight.

It’s better to leave guilty criminals alive than to kill innocent people. I can’t imagine how Bloodsworth and others like him felt in the years that they were in the death row, waiting for their unfair death. According to Bryan Stevenson, the founder and executive director of the Equal Justice Initiative, one in every nine criminals in death row is an innocent person who has been released from death row. One in every nine people could have been wrongly dead. There is no way to tell how many innocent people died before. Almost 1,400 people were executed since 1976 (Brook); I wonder how many of them may have been innocent. Courts do not give attention to claims of innocence once the suspect is dead. Defense attorneys move on to other cases where

Meyer, Ed. “High court hears case of convicts: Lawyers say unused evidence points to innocence in killing.” Knight Ridder Tribune Business News [Washington], 26 Jan. 2006. ProQuest Newstand, search.proquest.com/news/docview/463044845/873A7D0534674A02PQ/2?accountid=15011. Accessed 3 Mar.

Murder on a Sunday Morning, an award-winning documentary, effectively relays the events surrounding a murder trial that took place in 2000 in which 15-year-old Brenton Butler was the defendant. In his hometown, Jacksonville, Florida, this young boy did nothing unusual on the day of the murder; he simply woke up, fed his dog, and went to submit a job application. However, his life was about to be drastically changed. Police had already initiated their pursuit of a black man who had robbed and murdered a white tourist just hours earlier. Without any evidence against Butler besides his skin color, the police drove him to the victim’s husband, Mr. Stephens, who positively identified him as the killer. The investigation and interrogation that ensued were proved in court to have been mishandled by police: detectives threatened and physically injured Butler to obtain the confession they needed. Ultimately, the verdict was not guilty on both charges of armed robbery and murder. What originally appeared to be a solid case against Butler was a façade that defense attorneys Ann Finnell and Patrick McGuinness utterly destroyed. Murder on a Sunday Morning impugns the actions of police officers, displays how race affects a case, and demonstrates the effective use of articulate arguments.

Many people believe that capital punishment is morally impermissible. They believe that several forms of punishment other than the capital punishments are available for serious offenders. Debate on the application or award of execution as capital punishment is rooted from the argument by Kant that; capital is sometimes morally permissible and required. Although it is mostly the most effective deterrent method. It suffers some setbacks, especially when the evidence presented is less. Little evidence leads to the execution of innocent people. It is therefore immoral to execute offenders with little and rough evidence (Sheldon, 1936).

Although supporters of capital punishment argue that there has been no proof of an innocent person being executed in the past century, more inmates are being exonerated from the death row (SB). It is evident that the criminal justice system makes mistakes as errors have gone through the process. In “Death Penalty Debates: Is the capital punishment system working?” Kenneth Jost stated that a Texas death row inmate, Anthony Graves, spent nearly two decades in prison for a crime he did not commit, becoming the 139th former death row inmate to have been freed of his alleged crime (AP). Some death row inmates were proven innocent by DNA analysis and some were released based on a reexamination of evidence. “Most of the exonerations, like Graves’,

In 1995 Duane Buck was convicted for the murder of his former girlfriend Debra Gardner and her friend Kenneth Butler. He was sentenced to death in 1997 and his case should definitely not be taken lightly, but Buck was given the death penalty over life in prison because of the fact that he was an African American. A state psychologist in his case, Dr. Quijano, argued that African American criminals are more susceptible to pose a future danger to the public, and this was the key testimony that the prosecutor relied on. Since then, his case has not been reopened. It was later admitted by a district attorney at the time of Buck’s case that African American jurors were routinely dismissed by prosecutors. In 2011, his lawyer argued that he deserved a new sentencing hearing without tainted prejudicial testimony, but his request was ultimately denied and they continued with the set execution date. The death penalty is prejudice and goes against all religious beliefs, but death overall is a cruel and unusual punishment and should not be used as a form of punishment by the government.

In this case you are a young, inexperienced assistant district attorney in a small state prosecutors office. You worked your way through law school, excellent grande and were selected over 10 other applicants for the job. Your boss, the DA is known for her "get tough on crime" prosecutions and was recently reelected on a promise to advocate for victim rights. During your interview you made it clear you did not support Capital punishment (the death penalty) because of its discrimination against minorities and it is against your religious beliefs. Your most recent assignment is to prosecute a brutal, premeditated murder committed by a 22 year old Hispanic male. You are surprised when the DA gave you the case since your opposition to the death

The main plot element in this story surrounds Daniel Robbin’s sentence to capital punishment, and the years leading up to his death. Capital punishment has been fought against for centuries, and is currently illegal in Michigan. In the beginning of the story, the characters, especially Irene Stanley, thought of capital punishment as a quick and effective way to rid the world of its most horrendous monsters- in this case, the man who killed her son. The pain their family experienced and the desire from law enforcement for a speedy trial pushed the case forward without an investigation thorough enough to make such a decision, and soon Daniel Robbin was on death row. But some opposed the decision, including superintendent Mason when he noticed the mild effect the news had on Robbin. He said, “It’s not so much of a punishment if he wants it” (134) and concluded that often prisoners, especially those on death row, experience such severe depression and mental illness that a sentence to death is almost a blessing- especially considering hundreds of prisoners commit suicide each year.

A lot of heat and controversy surrounds capital punishment in today’s society. The death penalty was built into the Texas justice system in 1835 and has retained most of its strength compared to the rest of the states. The famous motto “Don’t Mess with Texas” stands true when concerning the death penalty; In Kenneth William’s article, “Texas: Tough on Murderers or on Fairness?.” Williams states, “No one promotes this message [Don’t Mess with Texas] more than Texas prosecutors with their use of the death penalty. While the nation as a whole has become somewhat ambivalent about capital punishment, Texas prosecutors continue to seek death sentences on a regular basis, and the state

How to Get Away with Murder took America by storm when it premiered last year. The shows addition to “Shondaland” was not disappointing and I’m sure season two will be worth the wait. One of the things that created buzz for the show was the unforgettable sex scenes. From Professor Annalise Keating, played by Emmy Award winning Viola Davis, getting down and dirty with her side piece to Connor, played by Jack Falahee, letting the world know what rimming is all about. How to Get Away with Murder knows how to explore the world of sex.