1. Running Head: CAPITAL PUNISHMENT 12
Capital Punishment and How the Court Process Works
Capital punishments have raised several issues, and there is
need to evaluate them in order to assess the practicality and
effectiveness of the punishment. In this perspective, this
research will be able to evaluate all the four aforementioned
issues that relate to the problem of capital punishment in the
courts. To this end, the pros and cons of the capital punishment
will enable a recommendation in order to address the problem
and issues. Critical analysis of all the factors raised will
contribute to better investigation of all the listed factors bearing
on the problem. Through the discussion of the various issues
that affect the capital punishment way of dealing with an
offender of heinous acts, the research paper will enable one to
shed more light on the available courses of action other that
capital punishment in the criminal justice system. Comment by
Antonio: Input the word “a” after the word “is” Comment by
Antonio: Remove the phrase “be able to”… The statement
should read “will evaluate” Comment by Antonio: Delete all
Capital punishment in the United States of America’s criminal
justice system is not only inconsistent with the available laws of
rule of law and order in the country, but it is also in a great way
contribute to violations by this same country that is an
advocator for adherence of the laid down international laws.
This raises one of the main controversies of the laws on capital
punishments in some states in United States as it has great
implications on the rule of law and international standards that
the laws are founded on.
Capital punishment provides a rational way in which the
criminal justice system deters recurrence of some high felony
crimes such as rape, premeditated murder, torture, and any other
serious crimes since the law aims at removing the offender from
the society. These arguments provide that the law should

2. guarantee a safety net in which the law minimizes the chances
of the crimes being committed again by either the offender of
the prospective criminals (Potter & Kappeler, 2002). In this
perspective, the laws that encourage the rule of execution are
supported by this school of thought that the offenders will be
discouraged. However, there are issues of the applicability of
the law in capital punishment and as a law that meets its
agenda. Comment by Antonio: Great argument!
First and foremost, capital punishment is a great violation of the
constitution and other laws that give human beings the right to
life and international law based on the right of a human being.
The Universal Declaration of Human Rights that was adopted by
the United Nations General Assembly in 1948 provides for the
right of every human being to the right of life. By stating that
no one has the authority or mandate to subject one to a torturous
and inhuman punishment and treatment, the universal human
rights by the united nations provides proof that capital
punishment is a violation of human rights of any individual; a
criminal offender or not. In this context, the capital punishment
is a form of punishment that is found to violate this very basic
form of international law that views capital punishment as a
violation of human rights. In addition to this, the rights of a
human being are violated against by the capital punishment as a
result of the psychological implications that the decree on the
punishment is given to an offender.(Peak, 2003). Comment by
Antonio: Good transition Comment by Antonio: Excellent
information/learning tool.
Since criminal justice system is a gradual process that involves
assessment of information and evidence in order to reach the
verdict, it is arguable that the capital punishment does not allow
full application of the law. In some cases, there arises
contradicting proof and evidence in the criminal justice system
that may lead to an acquittal of the convict. The evidence in the
case may arise in later years after the execution of an offender
leading to an unnecessary contradiction of the law of fairness
and justice in the administration of justice (Fields, 1999). In

3. this perspective, it is logical to have other forms of punishment
met on an offender as evaluation of the process and law is
carried out more in the case. Application of fair and just justice
system does not apply to the capital punishment since most of
the offenders who are convicted and executed are mostly those
who are less educated and have little information that they have
regarding possibilities of detection and condemnation to
presume the amount of costs and benefits of the capital
punishment (Potter & Kappeler, 2002). Comment by Antonio:
Re-read this part. You omitted a word. Comment by Antonio:
Explain what happens when new evidence surface.
The other reasoning on the legal misapplication benefits of
capital punishment lies in the costs and expenses that result
from the capital punishment in relation to other forms of
punishment that may be applied. In real sense, capital
punishments requires a lot of costs in relation to attorney fees
and the prosecution, public defenders, judges, legal framework,
and the separation required to keep death row inmates away
from the other inmates with other offences. In addition, there
requires critical psychological help to the officers and other
stakeholders in the process of executing the punishment in order
to carry out the executions without the mental decadence and
effects (Chelimsky & Shadish). In this sense, the legal expenses
may not be implicated in the benefits that the criminal justice
system gets the capital punishment. Comment by Antonio: You
mentioned this within the previous statement. Comment by
Antonio: Excellent Comment by Antonio: Good mental
transition. The word “sense” give the reader the push to think
critically.
Capital punishment is supposed to be effective enough to meet
the threshold of reasons for punishment in the criminal justice
system. In this context, punishment in the criminal justice
system is a way of making the punishment an example to other
offenders on the wrongness of their activities and deters such
actions and inflicts relatively similar pain to the offender. In
this view, the capital punishment by the courts does not make

4. the offenders afraid of the consequences as revealed by
researchers in the criminal corrections facilities. For instance, a
recent research in 2000 showed that the number of murders in
states that does not apply death penalties decreased while the
half of the states that have death penalties showed rates that are
higher. In this sense, the capital punishment does not serve the
purpose of the law that is, being deterrent to the activities that
literary result to this form of punishment (Hagan, 2000).
Comment by Antonio: Awesome example
From the perspective of the laws that govern the criminal
justice system, capital punishment acts as a controversial form
of correction and is contradictory to other laws found in the
constitution. The capital punishment is also against the
international laws of human rights and does not seem to get the
legal results that are required from the criminal justice system.
Since the costs of applying this form of punishment do not serve
justice to the victims of the criminal activities by the offenders,
it is irrational to argue that the capital punishment will meet the
required criminal justice system results. Thus, the capital
punishment by the criminal justice system is not in any sense in
line with the rule of law required in the criminal justice system
(Peak, 2003). Comment by Antonio: Remove Comment by
Antonio: Absolutely!
Many supporters of the death penalty have argued that the
capital punishment is a great way of enhancing social morality
and serving human rights to the lawful society by elimination of
offenders of heinous acts in the society. In this view, the
argument is that since offenders are eliminated from the society,
chances of re-offending are eliminated as the people who
commit the heinous acts usually have psychological tendencies
to continue with the acts when released back to the society. In
addition, capital punishment is viewed as a way of
compensating the victims of the criminal activities by way of
eliminating the person from the public domain and execution to
prevent misery to the people. In this sense, there are arguments
against capital punishment based on the same category of

5. human rights of all people, morality in the society and the
social justice that is aimed to be achieved in the criminal justice
system (Houston & Parsons, 1998). Comment by Antonio:
Remove, do not utilize the same transitional phrase repeatedly.
On one end, the religious beliefs of the society do not support
any form of incarceration based on beliefs of people in the guilt
of other people since all religions provides that their supreme
being is the determiner of life and death and so, no one should
take that mandate that is enshrined in holy books to take away
life from another human being. Taking away life by way of
capital punishment only creates another wrong that cannot be a
reprieve or solution of the offence that was committed by the
offender. It is only the supreme beings who are aware of the
pain that is felt by an offender when sentenced to death since no
proper technology or machinery can be able to assess the effects
of death penalty on a human being. In this context, it is morally
insufficient and wrong for another human being to take the life
of a human in order to satisfy or compensate for an act that the
person has committed. For a safe and moral society under the
intuitions of the religious beliefs founded on the religions of
most people in the society, reliance on other forms of
punishment is better than capital punishment (Cole & Gertz,
2002). Comment by Antonio: Remove
The United nations have for many years raised issues of human
rights relating to the issue of capital punishment that is met on
offenders while still calling for the abolition of death penalties
by member states. The rationale of this calling is that the capital
punishment goes against the established human rights that
provide for every human being to have the right to life and
dignity in the public domain. It is, for this reason, inconsistent
with the human rights principle to incarcerate a human being
whether in the form of protection or application of justice. The
capital punishment never satisfies all the parties in the criminal
justice system. It is irrational to assume that when capital
punishment is applied, it will be deterrent to re-offences and act
as a fair justice to the victims of the activities of the offenders.

6. In real sense, the trauma that follows the victims on the feeling
of the fact that their pursuit of justice led to the death of other
human beings does not result to fair justice (Mark, Henry, &
Julnes, 2000). Comment by Antonio: Remove
Research into the take that people have regarding the capital
punishment provides data that may be used to show how the
capital punishment goes against the social justice that the
punishment aims to satisfy. In real sense, most people in the
society do not support capital punishment as the best way to
punish an offender of heinous acts. In this context, the capital
punishment does not result in social justice of the public as the
goals of the punishment are not met. Social justice aims to
prevent recurrence of offences through application of the
rightful measures both to the offenders and the victims of
capital punishment (Moore, 1994). Thus, capital punishment is
unnecessary to serve justice. It is also an immoral practice not
founded on logical argument. Comment by Antonio: Remove
Comment by Antonio: Remove
The arguments based on morality, human rights, and the
rule of law in capital punishment is based on the same
principles of fairness of the criminal justice system. The
offenders who are subjected to life sentences always end up
being more served by justice than the capital punishment of the
death of an inmate do not imply justice served to the victims. In
this context, it is immoral both on religious grounds and on
grounds of social, moral beliefs. This issue relating to the
capital punishment raises issues of the practical sense under
which countries around the world still continue to use capital
punishment as a form of punishment to the offenders (Fields,
1999). Comment by Antonio: Again, great arguments!
Comment by Antonio: Remove
There are provisions in the law that requires any punishment
verdict that is reached on an offender to have relativity to the
crimes committed. This allows the judges to assess the give a
verdict that best serves as justice to the victims in order to
inflict pain and suffering on the offender in commensuration of

7. the crimes that they committed. Severe punishments are the
verdicts of higher crimes while simpler sentences and paroles
apply to the offenders who have committed mere offences. In
this perspective, measurability of the punishments is crucial in
helping the criminal justice system to have a clear way of
getting to the verdicts. Additionally, the judges have systems
that are concise and apply the rules of law in reaching a verdict
for an offender. When an offender is not given a fair verdict,
questions arise as to the fairness of justice system, and
confidence in the system usually decreases with feelings of
unfair treatment. To this end, there are proponents of criminal
justice system supporting capital punishment like a good verdict
for heinous crimes in the society. However, issues of its
measurability in relation to the crimes are always a question
that requires assessment (Houston & Parsons, 1998).
Comment by Antonio: What are the provisions?
Comment by Antonio: Revise this sentence. Comment by
Antonio: Why? Comment by Antonio: What type of motions are
filed in the Clerk’s Office? Comment by Antonio: Of course!
Capital punishment is a verdict that cannot be assessed as
a good way of punishing the offenders of heinous acts both to
the fairness to the victims and other prospective offenders.
Psychiatrists and scientists have not yet come up with feelings
that are inflicted on offenders as a result of death. Do the
offenders have the same measurable pain that the victims feel as
a result of the offences? This is question that the criminal
justice systems have not yet answered in relation to capital
punishments. In this context, the essence of people being
subjected to death for crimes committed does not in any sense
act as a fair justice to the victims since they will not be part of
the new life of the offenders to see their suffering
(HancocHorvath, 1999). In fact, it is better to have the
offenders in prisons and hard labor as their verdict since they
will feel the pain and anguish for their actions (Houston &
Parsons, 1998). Comment by Antonio: You mentioned this
statement in the previous paragraph. Comment by Antonio:

8. Not a true statement. Quote the author that has such an opinion,
Comment by Antonio: Revise Comment by Antonio:
Remove
In addition to the fairness of the capital punishment to the
victims, it is also a very unclear way of giving the offenders
punishment for the offences they have committed.
Measurements carried out in the psychology of a dead person or
as a result of the actions that lead to the death of a person do
not in any way provide the extent to which the person feels pain
and the magnitude of the suffering of the person. In this
perspective, there is no proof whether the magnitude of
sufferings by the people who die from natural deaths and the
ones who are incarcerated have the same suffering. Whether it
inflicts more pain to have one person murdered, and less pain
on another person is a question that has never found clear
answers. Since such measurement cannot be articulated, the
extent to which the different offences that are subjected to death
sentences are applied to different people cannot be said to have
the same or different results or suffering (Hagan, 2000).
Comment by Antonio: Check punctuation Comment by
Antonio: Check the spacing Comment by Antonio: Add an
“S” Comment by Antonio: Check grammer
Death sentences usually result in pain and suffering resulting
from trauma to the families of the victims and families of the
offenders. Such suffering cannot be said to serve the right
justice to a person as they go beyond the offender and the
victim. Criminal justice system is supposed to result in
deterrent results where the crimes may not be repeated since the
other prospective criminals usually fear for the verdict.
However, the capital punishment inflicts pain to the families of
the offenders and has more suffering than the offender. A
victim's family is also affected psychologically as they figure
out that the pursuit of justice is the cause of suffering to another
family. To this end, it is clear that the punishment is not a
punishment to the offender but a larger extent, more to the
families of the offender and victim (Cole & Gertz, 2002).

9. Comment by Antonio: True in many cases. Comment by
Antonio: Discard this sentence. Most offenders are very hurt.
Capital punishment is a very irrational way of getting a
balance for both the victim and the offender since the extent to
which the punishment reach is not measurable in magnitude and
extent. There are more better punishments that will not go
overboard other than punish the offenders and thus, the
different forms of punishment that will not attract punishment
to other people such as members of one’s family and victim as
well may be better than death penalty. Since different offences
attract different punishment, then it is arguable that the capital
punishment should not be applied uniformly to similar offences
as they happen in different circumstances and require different
magnitude of punishments. To this end, the issue of
measurability of capital question needs to be focused on in the
debates that are around the world on capital punishments
(Houston & Parsons, 1998). Comment by Antonio: Re-phrase
this Comment by Antonio: Remove Comment by Antonio:
Remove
There exist several issues of discrimination and disparity
that may arise as a result of capital punishment in the criminal
justice system. Issues arise from racial discrimination in the
criminal justice system and the types of offences that result
from the courts as a result of favoritism and other forms of
discrimination. Literature and scientists find alarming
disproportion of the number of people who are convicted of the
death penalty and the relative number of those who have capital
punishment being of minority groups. Issues arise as
suggestions of the verdicts being skewed in a certain direction
are rampant. There are also issues of prosecutors kicking jury
members from minority groups out of the jury resulting in
verdicts that best favor the interests of the whites in the courts.
Such issues in the criminal justice system may affect the
rationality of the verdicts that are reached by jury members
(Cole & Gertz, 2002).
Investigation in the state of Philadelphia revealed the

10. discrepancies and disparities in the course of justice of Black
Americans who were subjected to death penalties. After a large
sample of the murder cases that were eligible for death
sentences between the years 1996 to 1998, researchers
identified that blacks were more likely to get death sentences at
a rate that is three times higher than their non-blacks
counterparts who commits the same crimes. In this perspective,
capital punishment may be used as a discriminative tool against
a certain group of minority people in the society. Though there
are several opposition to the idea of having discriminative
courts system in the United States of America, it is clear that all
the researches that are taken from the states that have execution
laws, disparity in decrees of death sentences is much higher. In
this perspective, it is irrational to continue allowing the capital
punishment in the courts to act as a way of discriminating
against some groups in the society since it is against the
principles of fair justice. There are also some states in the
country where convictions for capital punishment is controlled
through use of the jury and jury selection methods whereby,
members of the jury from the minority groups are discriminated
against result to a jury bench that is uniformly from one major
racial group giving it authority over the decision that will be
reached. In so doing, the prosecution denies the defense a
chance to be represented by fellow members of minority group
that could otherwise view the capital punishment differently
(Fuller & Hickey, 1999). Comment by Antonio: Wow!
Comment by Antonio: True statement. Comment by
Antonio: Remove Comment by Antonio: Remove Comment by
Antonio: Change this transitional statement.
Further evidence of capital punishment being a tool of
discrimination can be identified in the criminal justice system
with the administration of federal death penalty since minority
groups are usually overrepresented at every stage. Stereotypes
and discrimination are also a complaint by many Islamists who
argue that most of the terrorists' convicts to the death penalty
are usually innocent, but subjected to stereotypes of having

11. certain characteristics that similar to terrorist groups. In this
perspective, it may not be service of justice to deal capital
punishment to offenders as this may result to profiling since the
defects in the criminal justice system may result in unfair
application of justice (Fuller & Hickey, 1999). Comment by
Antonio: Remove
Another issue regarding the fairness of the capital punishment
as a form of punishment to offenders of the law relates to more
information that arises after a verdict has been reached at. Law
cases are never conclusive as more and more information may
be available for the defendant to put a case and have a defense
in the criminal justice system that may free him or her. In this
scenario, the law that founded death penalty may become
irreversible dealing a blow to the same system. If a person was
convicted and executed, and after that information surface was
making the verdict inapplicable in the new circumstances, it is
usually irreversible and thus proper justice is not achieved.
Under such circumstances, it is the rationale to show that the
capital punishment is unfair to the defendant as the process
cannot be redone. These cases have always arisen and make the
criminal justice system to appear unfair and not achieve its
intended results (Mark, Henry, & Julnes, 2000). Comment by
Antonio: Remove Comment by Antonio: Remove
In disregard to the laid down measures that encourage countries
to abolish capital punishment in the world, there are still
countries that defend its use as a way of discouraging some
forms of felony crimes in their society by continuing with the
practice. The world’s largest country in population China have
strict laws and regulations for certain forms of criminal
activities that call for execution in order to deter such activities
in their country. It is said that the country executes relatively
more than several thousand souls every year through the use of
different methods employed to kill offenders. United States of
America on the other hand is another major country that has no
strict federal laws that govern against the capital punishment is
criminal justice system and as a result, the practice is still

12. common in some of its states. In these views, regardless of the
efforts that are employed by several world organizations to
discourage the death penalty on individuals, it is still clear that
the practice is yet to be fully abandoned.
Several research that have been carried out in the criminal
justice system analyzing the resultant impact of the capital
punishment as a form of punishment for offenders of heinous
crimes does not focus much on the implications the sentences
have on a broad range of issues in the society and thus,
contributes to shallow recommendations to the body of
knowledge. In addition, the United Nations have never passed a
resolution that requires all member states to be part of the move
to stop the capital punishments. In this view, there are concerns
that the capital punishment may never be fully avoided in the
modern world. People need to focus scientifically on the real
system where there are supportive evidence indicating the
unsuitability of capital punishment in criminal justice system
under any circumstances in the human race. In this light,
assessments of the various issues in the capital punishment are
necessary in enabling stakeholders to focus on the topic and
implement the necessary changes. Comment by Antonio:
Revise this section Comment by Antonio: Remove
Capital punishment is always proposed and defended as the best
way to deal an effective punishment to offenders of heinous
crimes such as murder, rape, torture, and other violent offences.
The proponents argue for the victims of the offences and find
not enough form of punishment other than elimination of the
offenders from the society in order to prevent recurrence of the
offences and deter other criminals from making the same
offences as a result of fear for the verdicts. However, several
issues that affect the criminal justice system require that the
criminal justice system is figured differently. It is clear that the
capital punishments are not consistent with the laws of the rule
of law and international laws that require unalienable right of
life and dignity of every human being. In addition, moral issues
and social justice is never achieved through capital punishment

13. as well as the issue of measurability of the effects of the verdict
on the offender and victim. In these perspectives, capital
punishment is an ineffective way of getting justice in the
criminal justice system and alternative steps, and courses of
action should be sought in order to balance the offences and
punishments to offenders. Comment by Antonio: Remove
always Comment by Antonio: Revise Comment by Antonio:
Remove Comment by Antonio: Remove
The ensuing analysis of the various issues that poses
controversies in the criminal justice system and use of capital
punishment as a way of punishing offenders in some of the
heinous acts is a critical aspect of the criminal justice system
that requires consistent debate in the global and regional legal
arena in order to result to the necessary steps that will help in
getting the rightful frame work and consultations. Such
consultations are vital as they will continue to shape how
people in the society will shape the laws of the country for
posterity and prevent similar issues and contradictions of the
law to continue to affect the delivery of free and fair legal
processes. This research aims to form a basis of enabling such
forums and consultations.