preview

Is It Morally Permissible To Execute An Individual With Little Evidence Analysis

Decent Essays

Is it morally permissible to execute an individual with little evidence?
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).
The literature reveals that if the current body of rough and shallow evidence is not …show more content…

I also believe that, the eventual elimination of errors that characterize many capital punishments in the United States would also lead to decline such punishment for severe punishment.
Do you think it was morally right to execute Todd Willingham? Why or why not? Is this good from a utilitarian point of view?
Cameron Todd Willingham was executed in Texas in 2004 for allegedly setting a fire that killed his three young daughters 13 years earlier. He continuously claimed his innocence until his conviction and thereafter execution. Many legal experts questioned the arson investigation before his execution. I believe that it was morally wrong to execute Todd Willingham
According to Texas Forensic commission, after conviction of Todd Willingham it clearer that training and education of fire investigators is necessary (Caille, 1992).
Utilitarianism demands that the good for the majority be the ruling. In my view, the execution of Todd was not good in the utilitarianism sense (Giannelli,

Get Access