There has been much controversy over capital punishment over the years. Few people in the United States see capital punishment as being wrong. It is said that Canada is way too easy on their criminals because they do not punish the convicts by the death penalty. Canada says that the United States is way to strict on their criminals because they execute their convicts by the death penalty. Should murderers be murdered for their crimes or should they spend the rest of their lives perishing in prison, that question may soon some day be correctly answered but for now it is strictly your own belief, possibly this essay may change your mind if you are for the death penalty. Most Canadians believe that Canada should never reinstate the death penalty. …show more content…
In 1992, a retrial found she was not guilty. In this case Sabrina was able to escape her execution. Another case involving the death penalty took place in 1992; Rodger Keith Coleman was executed in Virginia, even though all evidence pointed to another person as the murderer. The real murderer got away with this crime while an innocent man had to die for a crime he did not commit. In Canada, if we had the death penalty many innocent people here too, would face the death penalty for a crime they did not commit. If Canada had the death penalty an inmate by the name of Steven Truscott would have been put to death for a crime he did not commit. Steven was sentenced to be hung in 1959 (when Canada still had the death penalty), at the young age of 14 for the murder of Lynn Harper, a 12-year old girl that was Steven’s classmate. He was Canada 's youngest ever to be on death row. Forty years later the Courts are now questioning if they had made a mistake and put an innocent man in jail. Partly because of this case, Canadians abolished the death penalty. This innocent man unfortunately had to spend a lot of years in jail for a murder he did not commit. If Canada had not got rid of the death penalty Truscott would have been executed. These are just a few of the people who have been executed. The innocent should not be killed for crimes that they did not
Whereas the Crown concentrated on disproving the defence’s insanity plea finding a contradiction in one of the defence’s psychiatrists, Dr. Clarke’s testimony, as Macmaster found Dr. Clarke had used his description of a criminal to describe the term moral imbecile, used to describe Shortis (Friedland, 1986, p.105). On 3 November 1895, the jury found Valentine Shortis guilty for the murders and was sentenced to death by hanging on 3 January 1896 (Friedland, 1986, p.115-117). Although the sentence was to be carried out, Greenshields made a statement stating, “(T)he only thing we now intend doing is to petition the Minister if Justice for commutation of sentence from the death penalty to imprisonment for life” (Friedland, 1986, p.119). Before the sentence was carried out, George Foster, the defence’s solicitor, went to present the petition in Ottawa to the minister of justice, Sir Charles Hibbert Tupper (Friedland, 1986, p.122). A cabinet meeting was held to discuss the petition of Valentine Shortis, a vote was to be made from ten cabinet members on whether to sentence was to be execution or life in prison.
He killed someone and doing so is against the law. Under the Criminal Code of Canada in section 222 it states, “A person commits homicide when, directly or indirectly, by any means, he causes the death of a human being,” The Criminal Code of Canada does state an exception, “a person does not commit homicide within the meaning of this Act by reason only that he causes the death of a human being by procuring, by false evidence, the conviction and death of that human being by sentence of the law,” which makes Latimer guilty of homicide under the Canadian laws. Consequently, Latimer was sentenced to serve time in prison, with no chance at parole for ten
The False Sentence For The First Woman Executed Mary Surratt shouldn’t have been executed. Her co- conspirators said she was innocent and she might have not known about how much John Wilkes Booth and his partners used her boarding house and tavern. Surratt's co-conspirators said that she had nothing to do with the plan to murder Lincoln.
Editor Anna Quindlen wrote many articles and essays conveying her opinion toward the death penalty. Such as, “Death Penalty Fails to Equal Retribution” and “Public & Private; The High Cost of Death”. Although Anna Quindlen makes many valuable accusations regarding her reasoning to being opposed to the death penalty, she undermines the real purpose of the penalty itself. The Death penalty, is indeed necessary. Many of the accusations Anna proclaims permit to the emotions of the victims families that have been robbed of their loved one by the said killer.
There are many early legal systems although one that should have played a role in this verdict was mosaic law. Mosaic law is one of the greatest influences on Canadian law and it is fixated in the bible and can also be known as the ten commandments. One of the mosaic laws that relates to this case is, “Thou shalt not kill”. Under the mosaic law, it was forbidden to commit murder and those who did would receive a punishment. The Sammy Yatim case should be the same and the charges should follow the mosaic law.
I personally think that the case was all investigated wrong in the first place. The Ontario Provincial Police (OPP) could have investigated more people besides just focusing on Steven Truscott. I think the they maybe ad something against him to begin with and wanted him to get sent to prison because they did not consider any other suspect who were in fact, more likely to have murdered Lynne Harper. In my opinion, I believe that Alexander Kallichuck was the one who killed her because he already had several sexual offense charges against him and he didn’t live far from the tow of Clinton. If the police would have investigated this case very carefully and closely like they should have and payed attention to the bugs found on Lynne Harpers body, they would have most likely been able to rule Steven Truscott as a suspect and find the actual
Should America continue to allow the death penalty? This essay will tell you why America should not be continue the death penalty. For starters, the death penalty is punishment by death; usually resulting after a crime that America calls capital crimes or capital offences. There are many of reasons why the death penalty should not be carried out in America or anywhere “Application of the death penalty tends to be arbitrary and capricious; for similar crimes, some are sentenced to death while others are not.”
One way to solve this may be to do further research and analysis in order to try to prevent more people from killing innocent victims in our society. Furthermore, the question of whether to reinstate the death penalty in Canada is very difficult to answer. But through further analysis, saying no to the death penalty is overall the better decision.
Throughout In Cold Blood, Truman Capote hints at his own opinion of the death penalty, yet lets the readers decide for themselves what they believe Hickock and Smith's punishment should have been. When the murderers are being hanged, a conversation occurs between a reporter and an investigator about what it might feel like to be hanged: "'They don't feel nothing. Drop, snap, and that's it. They don't feel nothing.' ' Are you sure?
Death penalty or capital punishment is a legal procedure carried out by the government of a state which sentences a convicted person to death. Capital punishment has been a matter of controversy in various countries for decades now. In this essay, Coretta Scott King talks about why she is against the death penalty. The main purpose of this critique is to focus on King’s arguments and evaluate their authenticity and credibility.
Reiman opposes capital punishment for several reasons. Reiman rejects the retribution rationale because retribution dehumanizes the person doing the punishing. As an alternative, Reiman advocates for humane punishment that is equal in severity, and that does not reduce deterrence. He stresses the importance of equal severity because a lack of equality will send the wrong message to society. Reiman believes strongly that: “[t]he available research by no means clearly indicates that the death penalty reduces the incidence of homicide more than life imprisonment does.”
Rough Draft Is the death penalty an effective and justified punishment? This is a topic many Americans have discussed for a long time, and has caused much controversy. Both sides have their pros and cons, and they will be discussed. The first point that many people have about capital punishment is that it’s unconstitutional.
Although the death penalty may bring some closure to families of the victims and even the victims themselves it still should be abolished because the negatives outweigh the positives. People could be murdered by the state even if they are innocent. They are taking away any chance these people have at a normal life even though it's a life that they deserve and did nothing to have it taken away. 6. Conclusion
Although political orientations varied among all participants, all concluded that they would not be bothered by the demolition of capital punishment. This study did not test a theory or hypothesis rather research questions were
Capital Punishment is the death penalty for those who commit murder. The thought behind this punishment is a life for a life. There has been debate on if the death penalty is right or wrong. Some poeple want the death penalty to be illegal while others argue it is needed to deter crime. There are many valid arguments regarding the death penalty.