ENGL Final Draft Paper
@5752
ENGL 50
Professor Jacinto Gardea
"The Last Obstacle"
"Justice is never advanced in the taking of a human life," writes activist and civil rights leader Coretta Scott King. Yet to this day, we continue to carry out death sentences. I strongly feel that the death penalty needs to be abolished from the United States because it is costly, ineffective, and outdated. According to the online newspaper, The Guardian, the United States has executed approximately 1,156 people in the time period of 1976 to April 2009. Do not forget to include the 107 people executed from 2009 up until January 2011. In fact, the United States executes a death row convict approximately every 3.5 days (“Is the Penalty” par.4). We, as humans, are prone to make mistakes and this punishment system is capable of leaving irreversible results, so the two should not be intertwined. Many people have been executed either because they were in the minority or because they lacked the appropriate funds to pay for adequate representation in the courts. The Death Penalty Information Center explains that since 1976 there have been eight cases which reveal that the prosecuted persons were innocent after they were executed. That is eight innocent lives among other miscarriages of justice that have been meaninglessly lost due to this unnecessary penalty. In addition, several studies show that the death penalty does not deter, prevent, or reduce crime. Also, there are many circumstances which determine who gets the death penalty and who does not. Why do we continue to pretend that all the wicked will be punished? Even if we did choose to go through all these processes to make sure that the prisoner was one hundred percent guilty, it would bombard our taxpayers with a ridiculous amount of money to pay for the court costs and appeals. Why does the United States continue to waste millions and millions of dollars on this obsolete system? All of the money funding this legalized murder should be put into services that are actually beneficial such as abuse prevention programs, drug treatment programs, education, and public safety programs. Former Los Angeles district attorney Gil Garcetti declares in a Los Angeles Times article:
The money would be far better spent keeping kids in school, keeping teachers and counselors in their schools and giving the juvenile justice system the resources it needs. Spending our tax dollars on actually preventing crimes, instead of pursuing death sentences after [they have] already been committed, will assure us we will have fewer victims. (“California’s Death” par.1)
Not only is capital punishment ineffective but its methods are also subject to cruel and unusual punishment. Pro death penalty advocates will argue that capital punishment is not cruel and unusual punishment but a humane way to murder someone. The Eighth Amendment of the 1787 U.S. Constitution declares that "excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed or cruel and unusual punishments inflicted" (Wikipedia). Someone who has not committed a murder cannot be sentenced to death because they did not kill another human; the punishment has to fit the crime and it must be neither cruel nor unusual. WordNet defines cruel and unusual punishment as punishment prohibited by the 8th Amendment of the U.S. Constitution; this includes torture, degradation, or punishment too severe for the crime committed. Some forms of capital crime punishments are electrocution, firing squad, gas chamber, hanging, and lethal injection. According to infoplease.com, Alabama, Arkansas, Florida, Illinois, Kentucky, South Carolina, Tennessee, and Virginia still use electrocution. Sometimes during electrocution, the prisoner's eyeballs pop out and rest on their cheek. Prisoners often eliminate waste, salivate, urinate, or puke blood during the process. As the temperature rises, the body swells, turns red, and skin stretches. After the execution, the autopsy is postponed until the body cools down because the inmate's body is hot enough to blister if touched. The only states that currently use firing squad are Oklahoma and Utah. During this type of execution, the inmate is tightly bound to a chair, strapped from head to ankles, and has a black hood covering their head. A medical doctor then locates the person's heart and pins a target over it. Five shooters, sometimes marksmen, armed with rifles line up and one out of the five shooters is given blank rounds. All shooters aim at the inmate's indicated heart and then fire. The person dies as a result of blood loss or the ripping of the lungs. If the shooters miss, accidentally or intentionality, the inmate could slowly bleed to death. The next method of execution is the gas chamber which is still available in Arizona, California, Colorado, Maryland, Missouri, and Wyoming. During execution, the person is deprived of oxygen to the brain and it feels almost like a heart attack. Hanging, which is still legal in Washington and New Hampshire, can also lead to a slowly occurring death as a result of asphyxiation, or restriction of air to the brain, if it is administered incorrectly (“Descriptions of Execution Methods”). By far, the most used method of execution is lethal injection which is legal in 34 states. In the article, “Study Indicates Lethal Injections May Cause Pain, Suffering” published in 2005 by The Seattle Times newspaper, "An examination of 49 autopsies found that in 43 cases, the concentration of anesthetic in the bloodstream was less than what is required to numb a surgical patient before making an incision” (par.2). In 21 of those cases, the concentration was not sufficient enough to prevent a patient from responding to a spoken demand. Therefore, the prisoners were still in a state of awareness because the drug levels administered were lower than required (par.3). An example would the case of Angel Nieves Diaz's, who was executed on December 13, 2006 via lethal injection. The workers incorrectly injected the poisons, which were carried by needles, into Diaz. The chemicals surged not into his veins as intended, but into his soft tissue. When a second set of needles was inserted Diaz began to struggle in agony for over 30 minutes. After the execution, examiners found chemical burns which measured twelve inches deep inside both of Diaz's arms (“5 Reasons” par.22). The result of this “botched execution” was an executive order led by death penalty supporter and ex-governor of Florida Jeb Bush to halt all executions in the state (par.21). Before his execution, Diaz left a final statement which said, "The death penalty is not only a form of vengeance, but also a cowardly act by humans" (Wikipedia).
Capital punishment is retributive justice. Therefore, it cannot stop the vicious cycle of violence. Retribution is defined as the act of punishing or taking vengeance for wrongdoing, sin, or injury. Like Angel Diaz said, capital punishment is fueled more by vengeance rather than by justice. Catholic archbishop of Washington Cardinal McCarrick writes, “The death penalty diminishes all of us, increases disrespect for human life, and offers the tragic illusion that we can teach that killing is wrong by killing [others]" (White par.5). Death penalty opponent Brian Evans points out that the 2008 FBI crime report shows that the number of death sentences and executions declined slightly as well as the murder rates in 2008. This has been an ongoing rate for a while now. Generally speaking, the Southern states contain the highest murder rates ("Homicide Rates" par.1). Consequently, states that do not use capital punishment usually have lower murder rates. "In fact all but one of the 14 states with no death penalty [...] had murder rates below the national rate of 5.4 per 100,000 [people]" ("Homicide Rates" par.2). Many criminologists agree that the death penalty does not pertain to solving this issue. According to The Death Penalty Information Center, a survey asked the country's most prestigious criminological associations if capital punishment executions reduced homicide rates. 5 percent agreed that the death penalty was effective. 7 percent of the criminologists had no opinion. However, 88 percent strongly rejected the idea that the death penalty resulted in lower homicide rates ("Facts About" 3). Although the death penalty tries to teach us not to kill, ultimately it is backwardly killing people, which could be sending off the wrong message. Regardless, violence is still prominent in almost every aspect of our culture: “in music, movies, television shows, video games, literature, political attitudes, and abuse towards children, domestic partners, and prisoners. This past century has been the most violent in human history,” so it is no surprise why the death penalty still remains (Williams 124). Lawyer Clarence Darrow points out that states continue to execute victims not so much to protect society itself but to satisfy the people’s strong emotions of hatred and revenge (Williams 121). Murderers do deserve a punishment because they have violated other human beings’ fundamental right to live. However, there are other alternatives to punish the criminal. Life imprisonment with parole, life imprisonment without parole, and life without parole and restitution are all effective punishments in place of the death penalty.
When we support capital punishment we assume that the convicted criminals are unable to recover. Who is to say that all criminals are unable to be rehabilitated? Pro death penalty advocates argue that these murderers should die instead of clogging our already overcrowded prisons to house them, and they believe that all the wicked are unable to recover. Though, if our retributive justice system were replaced by a restorative justice system not only would costs go down but so would the amount of returning prisoners. The way the U.S. system currently works does not give enough focus on recuperating offenders. First of all, prisons should be reserved for those who commit truly heinous crimes, such as mass murders, homicide attempts, rape, and so on. However, the vast majority of prisoners in the U.S. were convicted on drug related crimes. According to One Day at a Time magazine, approximately 80 percent of America's prisoners committed crimes because they needed the money for drugs, violated alcohol or drug laws, were on drugs while committing the crime, have a history of drug abuse and addiction, or a few of these traits combined ("Overcrowded prisons" par.9). A 2008 report, conducted by PEW's Center on the States, found that in the beginning of 2008 the amount of adult inmates totaled to 2,319,258 and one in every 99.1 adults were incarceration on drug charges ("Overcrowded prisons" par.9). That means the United States holds the highest amount of incarcerated drug related felons in the world. While that is an amazing feat, approximately two out of three inmates end up back in prison years after being released on new charges or on violations. Metaphorically, our system is broken but not beyond repair. We must not hastily push the execution switch, but we must replace our current punitive, failed and costly system of mass incarceration with a more cost-effective criminal justice approach that is based on reconciliation, restoration, healing and rehabilitation ("Restorative Voice" par.1).
The United States is the last democratic industrialized nation that still practices capital punishment. According to some statistics from antideathpenalty.org, the U.S. ranks as the fifth highest nation with the most annual executions, executing 177 in 2010. Due to several circumstances, China, Iran, Iraq, and Saudi Arabia have more executions than the United States. Amnesty International revealed that 37 nations got rid of the death penalty all together. Another 86 nations have abolished the death penalty for all crimes. 73 nations still maintain the death penalty; however, the number of practicing nations is much smaller. On the other hand, the list of abolition nations is broad and impressive. The list of abolitionist nations includes Iceland, Austria, Sweden, Finland, Poland, Portugal, Denmark, Norway, Luxembourg, Nicaragua, the Netherlands, Australia, New Zealand, Ireland, Switzerland, Greece, Italy, Spain, and Belgium. British newspaper The Guardian points out that since 1990, 40 countries have abolished capital punishment including Armenia, Canada, Cyprus, Greece, Mexico, Samoa, Senegal, and Serbia. The number of abolitionist countries is increasing, while the number of executing countries is decreasing as shown in recent data. The peak of executing countries in the last two decades was in 1995 with 41 countries each executing prisoners that year. In recent years, for example 2009, the number of executing countries has sharply declined. Only 19 countries executed prisoners in 2009 (Guardian par.2). That is 22 less executing countries in a little over ten years. Are other countries finally realizing that the death penalty conflicts with basic human rights?
Our government and state holds power over one mankind’s most basic rights, the right to live. Often times, capital punishment is impelled coldly on those who are deemed to die. However, no human being or government entity holds the rightful power to choose who will live and who will die—that power belongs solely to God. New York Times magazine published an article by Clyde Haberman titled "Playing God and Politics with Death" which explains how hastily the death penalty is assigned, especially since there is a possibility that the person is innocent. In one case, suspected murderer Scott Schneiderman was awaiting a decision from the jury to determine whether or not he was guilty. Next, New York district attorney Robert M. Morgenthau would decide if the death penalty should be implemented or not. Morgenthau was described as "personally discomforted" with the death penalty (Haberman par.4). After the grand jury had made their decision, the governor and mayor of New York instantly requested that Schneiderman be executed via lethal injection. "There is, too, a question of how the politicians could be so sure, so fast, that Mr. Schneiderman qualified for death despite having been caught on the spot" (par.7) They have to take account other factors. Does the felon suffer from a mental disorder? Were they intoxicated? Were they mentally stable? All of the questions must be answered critically before the penalty is selected, because capital punishment makes mistakes irreversible once carried out. New York district attorney Charles J. Hynes, who also personally opposes capital punishment agrees, "You're playing God" (par.16). These men are in a difficult situation because they have 120 days for each case to decide whether or not the person is worthy of living; in other words, they are stepping past the boundaries in which humans are supposed to roam. In the article titled "Capital Punishment Cannot Be Justified" by sergeant of the Los Angeles police department Sunil Dutta she explains that one of God’s Ten Commandments, “Thou shalt not kill” technically cannot be taught to us by our state run executioners because it would ridicule the overall message (Williams 42). By inflicting the death penalty on one group while disregarding another, it becomes immoral and unjust.
The Death Penalty Information Center explains that since 1973, 138 inmates from 26 states have been released from death row with evidence of their innocence ("Innocence and the" par.2). Up until October 2010, Florida has exonerated 23, Oklahoma ten, Ohio five, Mississippi three, Kentucky one, Illinois 20, North Carolina seven, New Mexico four, South Carolina two, Maryland one, Texas 12, Pennsylvania six, California three, Indiana two, Nebraska one, Louisiana eight, Alabama five, Massachusetts three, Tennessee two, Nevada one, Arizona eight, Georgia five, Missouri three, Idaho one, Virginia one, and Washington one (“Innocence and the” par.3). The average time spent on death row is approximately 11 years before inmates are finally executed. In comparison, the average amount of time spent in jail before exoneration is approximately 9.8 years. From 1973 until 1999 there was an average of 3.03 exonerations per year. From 2000 through 2007, there has been an average of 5 exonerations per year. In 17 cases, DNA had an important role in proving innocence. The importance of DNA testing is demonstrated in Kirk Bloodsworth's case. In the mid 1980's, Bloodsworth was charged for first degree murder, sexual assault, and rape against a nine year old girl. His sentence was death. Not until eight years after incarceration did they agree to DNA testing. By using both Polymerase chain reaction and DNA testing they concluded that Bloodsworth was not at fault. He became the first in history to be exonerated from death row by the means of DNA testing. Capital punishment should be abolished because it is a system that allows innocent people to die.
At first glance, executing an inmate seems like the cheaper option rather than keeping them in jail for the rest of their life, but in reality, the total costs of death penalty cases are almost four times higher than the cost of life imprisonment cases. The money funding capital punishment cases is taken from taxpayer's pockets, whether they support it or not, to pay for appeals, juries, and specialized attorneys. The article titled "The High Cost of the Death Penalty," written by Death Penalty Focus compares the annual costs of both life imprisonment without parole and capital punishment. According to a 2008 report from the California Commission on the Fair Administration of Justice, it would cost an estimated $94,000 to house a death row inmate annually. The death row population was 670 in 2008, so that would total to up $63.3 million per year ("High Cost" par.6). However if we replaced the death penalty with life imprisonment the cost would decrease to $11.5 million per year, which is dramatically lower (par.10). The report titled "The Hidden Tax" written by ACLU of Northern California reveals that taxpayers pay "$117 million annually for trials before the sought execution of the inmates currently in death row; and it costs California approximately $4 billion more than if they would have just sentenced a criminal to die from disease, injury, or old age inside the prison. Capital Punishment trial costs can amount up to $10.9 million, and in times of economic peril that amount saved could save our sinking and fund-suffering states (par.12). We should move forward and focus on programs such as juvenile and youth crime prevention programs that can help prevent crimes. Revengefully killing the murderer does not and never will bring the victim back to live.
The death penalty has been here as long as man has, but if we want to become a civilized society, we must be rid of it in its entirety. In the past, many people strongly opposed slavery because they saw through the few advantages and into the overall picture. They realized that all people were born equal, so they strove towards abolition which was successfully achieved in 1865. People also strongly opposed monarchy because they realized that a select few should not have the power to dictate everyday lives of the population. Abolition of monarchy was finally reached in 1776. Nowadays, the people of the United States are debating whether or not capital punishment should be kept legal. Its fatal flaws are the millions of dollars are spent annually on excess appeals, insufficient evidence making it an unreliable deterrent and mistakes made are irreversible. How do we know that a quick execution is worse than a lifetime of confinement with haunting reoccurring feelings and thoughts?
Labels: English 50
Take Home Final Essay
Daniel Contreras
ENGL 50
Professor Jacinto Gardea
9 May 2011
Take Home Final Exam
Dear Mr. Gardea,
After I finished reading your play titled Grammar, Punctuation, and Writing: A Punc-Gramma-Drama I realized that the semester was almost over; these four months flew by fast. The ending of the play was very disappointing—and a bit tacky—but I did picture the final scene in my head, so it was mildly effective because it left me curious about Nikki’s condition. Because the ending was so sudden, you should write a part two to the play so we can know what happens. After I had finished reading the play, I looked back at the previous chapters to reflect. Though to be honest, I did not read chapter four completely since it was too long and it looked tedious.
48 pages to finish over spring break will leave a lot of students dreading the assignment—on top of other course work—but maybe if they were to just complete the crucial parts such as the letters and practice quizzes then maybe more students will attempt it. However, I do realize that this is college and simple tasks like reading a chapter are not too outrageous.
Personally, I did like the letters from the play, as they were all interesting to read. At the beginning of the semester, you did warn us that some content may offend some of us. Parts such as the “fake orgasms” in Debra’s letter or the description about Lencho’s desire to kiss Escopeta’s “legs and boobs” could make someone feel uncomfortable. On the other hand, we should all be mature enough to handle things of that nature. A thing I did not like was the lengthy chapters as I may have already explained before. Chapter four is the same length as chapters two and five combined. Maybe in future plays the chapters could be a tad shorter; still, I can’t complain since some professors do assign an entire book to be read in a week. It would also be beneficial if the Table of Contents included the page numbers to Escopeta’s, Benito’s, and Debra’s letters. That way we can locate them without having to turn through countless pages to find them.
The audio files you played for the first couple of chapters slightly threw me off. For example, when they would say the dialogue they would always mention the person’s first name which got irritating quickly. Maybe for next semester—during summer or fall—you could have some students act out scenes from the various chapters so that they can learn while acting it out. Who knows, maybe their reenactments could be humorous? I suggested that because you could record your students performing. They would be able to listen, read, watch, and be a part of the play simultaneously.
Eduvijes, whom was my favorite character, reminds me of my grandmother because of her broken English. Some students may find her parts quite irritating or unnecessary, but I enjoyed her presence in the story. She added a whole different level of realism and believability to the storyline since they were in a class for disadvantaged English speakers. Tencha was probably the most kick back teacher I have ever heard of. I wish I could have her as my English 101A teacher. That is all of the feedback that I have for you Mr. Gardea. It was cool having you as my professor this semester.
Alright, now I will explain to you how I used the things you taught us this semester. Did you notice those dashes that I used in the first paragraph? In the sentence, The ending of the play was very disappointing—and a bit tacky—but I did picture the final scene in my head, so it was mildly effective because it left me curious about Nikki’s condition, I used a dash after disappointing because the thought, and a bit tacky, interrupted the sentence. The dash’s main duty is to separate a certain idea, informational piece, or thought from the rest of the sentence. Another thing that I learned this semester was relative pronouns.
I bet you found one in the last paragraph of my letter were I said, Eduvijes, whom was my favorite character, reminds me of my grandmother because of her broken English. The word whom is the relative pronoun in that sentence. The main purpose of relative pronouns is to connect a relative clause to a larger clause. Speaking of clauses, I used a lot of them in my letter. For example, Chapter four is the same length as chapters two and five combined is a clause because it has a subject (Chapter four) and a verb (is). All independent clauses must have at least one subject and one verb. Independent clauses can also stand alone as proper sentences. Dependent clauses, on the other hand, cannot alone be finished sentences. Often times we connect dependent clauses with commas, but we sometimes connect them with conjunctive adverbs or coordinating conjunctions. Here is an example of a dependent clause that I wrote in my letter: After I had finished reading the play, I looked back at the previous chapters to reflect. The last part of that sentence, I looked back at the previous chapters to reflect, can stand alone as a sentence because it has a subject (I) and a verb (looked). After I had finished reading the play cannot be an independent clause because the word after acts as a subordinating conjunction.
Subordinating conjunctions, such as although, before, and while, connect two clauses. However, one of those clauses must be a dependent clause while the other is the main or the independent clause. Though to be honest, I did not read chapter four completely since it was too long and it looked tedious contains the subordinating conjunction though. There are a handful of other ways to punctuate a sentence. One is by using coordinating conjunctions, also known as FANBOYS. The acronym FANBOYS stands for the seven coordinating conjunctions: for, and, nor, but, or, yet, so. Coordinating conjunctions connect two independent sentences together. In the sentence, Some students may find her parts quite irritating or unnecessary, but I enjoyed her presence in the story, the coordinating conjunction is but because it is connecting the two independent clauses together—and there must always be a comma before the coordinating conjunction if we are connecting two independent clauses.
Colons and semicolons also play a great role in punctuation. For example my sentence, After I finished reading your play titled Grammar, Punctuation, and Writing: A Punc-Gramma-Drama I realized that the semester was almost over; these four months flew by fast, includes both a colon and a semicolon. The colon plays an amazing array of roles:
- Separates the parts in a multipart title.
- Introduces a list.
- Presents an example or explanation.
Semicolons can act as replacements for the words “also” and “but.” In the sentence the semicolon connects the two independent clauses.
It is very easy to make grammatical errors, especially while using unfamiliar words and phrases. Some of the things we must avoid are comma splices, fused sentences, and sentence fragments. Comma splices occur when two independent clauses are combined solely with a comma (e.g. I love cereal, I also love candy). In order to prevent comma splices from infiltrating our papers we must also take precaution and decide whether or not the sentence has two independent clauses. Afterwards, you could add either a coordinating conjunction (FANBOYS) or a conjunctive adverb. The result should look like: I love cereal, but I also love candy. Similar to comma splices, fused sentences combined two independent clauses together; this time, however, there is no punctuation in between the clauses. Comma splices can be fixed by: including a period between clauses, using a semicolon, or using a coordinating conjunction. Last but not least, sentence fragments are clauses or phrases that are capitalized and punctuated as a sentence but does not create a complete proper sentence. We can usually connect these fragments easily to the rest of the sentence.
Sentence fragment: Joe likes to talk on the phone. Because it is fun.
Correct: Joe likes to talk on the phone because it is fun.
Well I think I just about covered everything in my letter. I hope you enjoyed it!
- Daniel
Labels: English 50
Death Penalty Paper Rough Draft
@5752
ENGL P050 CRN 32356
Professor Jacinto Gardea
27 April 2011
"Capital Punishment: A Blemish on the Face of Justice"
(Intro)
"Justice is never advanced in the taking of a human life," writes activist and civil rights leader Coretta Scott King. Yet to this day we continue to carry out death sentences. I strongly feel that the death penalty needs to be abolished from the United States because it is costly, ineffective, and outdated. According to the online newspaper The Guardian, the United States has executed approximately 1,156 people in the time period of 1976 to April 2009. Do not forget to include the 107 people executed from 2009 up until January 2011. In fact, the United States executes a death row convict approximately every 3.5 days (“Is the Penalty” par.4). We, as humans, are prone to make mistakes, and this punishment system is capable of leaving irreversible results, so the two should not be intertwined. Many people have been executed either because they were in the minority or because they lacked the appropriate funds to pay for adequate representation in the courts. The Death Penalty Information Center explains that since 1976 there have been eight cases which reveal that the prosecuted persons were innocent after they were executed. That is eight innocent lives among other miscarriages of justice that have been meaninglessly lost due to this unnecessary penalty. In addition, several studies show that that the death penalty does not deter, prevent, or reduce crime. Also, there are many circumstances which determine who gets the death penalty and who does not. So why continue to pretend that all the wicked will be punished? Even if we did choose to go through all these processes to make sure that the prisoner was one hundred percent guilty, it would bombard our taxpayers with a ridiculous amount of money to pay for the court costs and appeals. So why does the United States continue to waste millions and millions of dollars on this obsolete system? All of the money funding this legalized murder should be put into services that are actually beneficial such as abuse prevention programs, drug treatment programs, education, and public safety programs. Former Los Angeles district attorney Gil Garcetti declares in a Los Angeles Times article:
The money would be far better spent keeping kids in school, keeping teachers and counselors in their schools and giving the juvenile justice system the resources it needs. Spending our tax dollars on actually preventing crimes, instead of pursuing death sentences after [they have] already been committed, will assure us we will have fewer victims. (“New Voices” par.1)
(Body 1. Cruel and Unusual)
Not only is capital punishment ineffective but its methods are also subject to cruel and unusual punishment. Pro death penalty advocates will argue that capital punishment is not cruel and unusual punishment but a humane way to murder someone. The Eighth Amendment to the 1787 U.S. Constitution declares that "excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed or cruel and unusual punishments inflicted" (Wikipedia). Someone who has not committed a murder cannot be sentenced to death because they did not kill another human; the punishment has to fit the crime and it must be neither cruel nor unusual. WordNet defines cruel and unusual punishment as punishment prohibited by the 8th amendment to the U.S. Constitution; this includes torture, degradation, or punishment too severe for the crime committed. Some capital crime punishments are electrocution, firing squad, gas chamber, hanging, and lethal injection. Alabama, Arkansas, Florida, Illinois, Kentucky, South Carolina, Tennessee, and Virginia still use electrocution. Sometimes during electrocution, the prisoner's eyeballs pop out and rest on their cheek. Often times prisoners defecate, drool, urinate, or vomit blood. As the temperature rises, the body swells and turns red while the skin stretches. After the execution, the autopsy is postponed until the body is cooled down because the inmate's body is hot enough to blister if touched. Oklahoma and Utah are the only states that use firing squad. During firing squad, the inmate is tightly bound to a chair, strapped from head to ankles, and has a black hood covering their head. A medical doctor then locates the person's heart and pins a target over it. Five shooters, sometimes marksmen, armed with .30 caliber rifles line up about 20 feet away. Only one of the five shooters is given blank rounds. All shooters aim at the inmate's indicated heart and then fire. The person dies as a result of blood loss or the ripping of the lungs. If the shooters miss, accidentally or intentionality, the inmate could bleed to death slowly. The gas chamber is still legal in Arizona, California, Colorado, Maryland, Missouri, and Wyoming. During execution, the person is deprived of oxygen to the brain which feels almost like a heart attack. Hanging, which is still legal in Washington and New Hampshire, can also lead to a slowly occurring death as a result of asphyxiation, or restriction of air to the brain, if it is administered incorrectly. By far the most used method of execution is lethal injection which is legal in 34 states. In the article “Study Indicates Lethal Injections May Cause Pain, Suffering” published in 2005 by The Seattle Times newspaper it explains, "An examination of 49 autopsies found that in 43 cases, the concentration of anesthetic in the bloodstream was less than what is required to numb a surgical patient before making an incision” (par.2) In 21 of those cases, the concentration was not sufficient enough to prevent a patient from responding to a spoken demand. Therefore, the prisoners were still in a state of awareness because the drug levels administered were lower than required (par.3). An example would the case of Angel Nieves Diaz's, who was executed on December 13, 2006 via lethal injection. The workers incorrectly injected the poisons, which were carried by needles, into Diaz. The chemicals surged not into his veins as intended, but into his soft tissue. When a second set of needles was inserted Diaz began to struggle in agony for over 30 minutes. After the execution, examiners found chemical burns which measured twelve inches deep inside both of Diaz's arms (“5 Reasons” par.22). The result of this misconstrued execution was an executive order led by death penalty supporter and ex-governor of Florida Jeb Bush to halt all executions in the state (par.21). Before his execution, Diaz left a final statement which said, "The death penalty is not only a form of vengeance, but also a cowardly act by humans" (Wikipedia).
(Body 2. Retributive Justice)
Capital punishment is retributive justice; therefore, it cannot stop the vicious cycle of violence. Retribution is defined as the act of punishing or taking vengeance for wrongdoing, sin, or injury. And like Angel Diaz said, capital punishment is fueled more by vengeance rather than by justice. Catholic archbishop of Washington Cardinal McCarrick writes, “The death penalty diminishes all of us, increases disrespect for human life, and offers the tragic illusion that we can teach that killing is wrong by killing [others]." In the article "Capital Punishment Exacerbates Violence," attorney and formal judge Robert Grant says, "Violence begets more violence" (Williams 123). Death penalty opponent Brian Evans points out that the 2008 FBI crime report shows that the number of death sentences and executions declined slightly as well as the murder rates in 2008. This has been an ongoing rate for a while now. Generally speaking, the Southern states contain the highest murder rates ("Homicide Rates" par.1). Consequently, states that do not use capital punishment usually have lower murder rates. "In fact all but one of the 14 states with no death penalty [...] had murder rates below the national rate of 5.4 per 100,000 [people]" ("Homicide Rates" par.2). Many criminologists agree that the death penalty does not pertain to solving this issue. According to The Death Penalty Information Center, a survey asked the country's most prestigious criminological associations if capital punishment executions reduced homicide rates. 5 percent agreed that the death penalty was effective. 7 percent of the criminologists had no opinion. However, 88 percent strongly rejected the idea that the death penalty resulted in lower homicide rates ("Facts About" 3). Although the death penalty tries to teach us not to kill, ultimately it is backwardly killing people, which could be sending off the wrong message. Regardless, violence is still prominent in almost every aspect of our culture: in music, movies, television shows, video games, literature, political attitudes, and abuse towards children, domestic partners, and prisoners. This past century has been the most violent in human history so it is no surprise why the death penalty still remains (Williams 124). Lawyer Clarence Darrow points out that states continue to execute victims not so much to protect society itself but to satisfy the people’s strong emotions of hatred and revenge (Williams 121). Murderers do deserve a punishment because they have violated other human beings’ fundamental right to live. However, there are other alternatives to punish the criminal. Life imprisonment with parole, life imprisonment without parole, and life without parole and restitution are all effective punishments in place of the death penalty.
(Body 3. Retributive vs. Restorative Justice)
When we support capital punishment we assume that the convicted criminals are unable to recover. Who is to say that all criminals are unable to be rehabilitated? Pro death penalty advocates argue that these murderers should die instead of clogging our already overcrowded prisons to house them, and they believe that all the wicked are unable to recover. Though, if our retributive justice system were replaced by a restorative justice system not only would costs go down but so would the amount of returning prisoners. The way the U.S. system currently works does not give enough focus on recuperating offenders. First of all, prisons should be reserved for those who commit truly heinous crimes, such as mass murders, homicide attempts, rape, and so on. However, the vast majority of prisoners in the U.S. were convicted on drug related crimes. According to One Day at a Time magazine, approximately 80 percent of America's prisoners committed crimes because they needed the money for drugs, violated alcohol or drug laws, were on drugs while committing the crime, have a history of drug abuse and addiction, or a few of these traits combined ("Overcrowded prisons" par.9). A 2008 report, conducted by PEW's Center on the States, found that in the beginning of 2008 the amount of adult inmates totaled to 2,319,258 and one in every 99.1 adults were incarceration on drug charges ("Overcrowded prisons" par.9). That means the United States holds the highest amount of incarcerated drug related felons in the world. While that is an amazing feat, approximately two out of three inmates end up back in prison years after being released on new charges or on violations. Metaphorically, our system is broken but not beyond repair. We must not hastily push the execution switch, but we must replace our current punitive, failed and costly system of mass incarceration with a more cost-effective criminal justice approach that is based on reconciliation, restoration, healing and rehabilitation ("Restorative Voice" par.1).
(Body 4. Comparison with other countries)
The United States is the last democratic industrialized nation that still practices capital punishment. According to some statistics from antideathpenalty.org, the U.S. ranks as the fifth highest nation with the most annual executions, executing 177 in 2010. Due to several circumstances, China, Iran, Iraq, and Saudi Arabia have more executions than the United States. Amnesty International revealed that 37 nations got rid of the death penalty all together. Another 86 nations have abolished the death penalty for all crimes. 73 nations still maintain the death penalty; however, the number of practicing nations is much smaller. On the other hand, the list of abolition nations is broad and impressive. The list of abolitionist nations includes Iceland, Austria, Sweden, Finland, Poland, Portugal, Denmark, Norway, Luxembourg, Nicaragua, the Netherlands, Australia, New Zealand, Ireland, Switzerland, Greece, Italy, Spain, and Belgium. British newspaper The Guardian points out that since 1990, 40 countries have abolished capital punishment including Armenia, Canada, Cyprus, Greece, Mexico, Samoa, Senegal, and Serbia. The number of abolitionist countries is increasing, while the number of executing countries is decreasing as shown in recent data. The peak of executing countries in the last two decades was in 1995 with 41 countries each executing prisoners that year. In recent years, for example 2009, the number of executing countries has sharply declined. Only 19 countries executed prisoners in 2009 (Guardian par.2). That is 22 less executing countries in a little over ten years. Are other countries finally realizing that the death penalty conflicts with basic human rights?
(Body 5. Playing God)
Our government and state holds power over one mankind’s most basic rights, the right to live. Often times, capital punishment is impelled coldly on those who are deemed to die. However, no human being or government entity holds the rightful power to choose who will live and who will die—that power belongs solely to God. New York Times magazine published an article by Clyde Haberman titled "Playing God And Politics With Death" which explains how hastily the death penalty is assigned, especially since there is a possibility that the person is innocent. In one case, suspected murderer Scott Schneiderman was awaiting a decision from the jury to determine whether or not he was guilty. Next, New York district attorney Robert M. Morgenthau would decide if the death penalty should be implemented or not. Morgenthau was described as "personally discomforted" with the death penalty (Haberman par.4). After the grand jury had made their decision, the governor and mayor of New York instantly requested that Schneiderman be executed via lethal injection. "There is, too, a question of how the politicians could be so sure, so fast, that Mr. Schneiderman qualified for death despite having been caught on the spot" (par.7) They have to take account other factors. Does the felon suffer from a mental disorder? Were they intoxicated? Were they mentally stable? All of the questions must be answered critically before the penalty is selected, because capital punishment makes mistakes irreversible once carried out. New York district attorney Charles J. Hynes, who also personally opposes capital punishment agrees, "You're playing God" (par.16). These men are in a predicament because they have 120 days for each case to decide whether or not a person is worthy of living, in other words stepping past the boundaries of which humans are supposed to roam. In the article titled "Capital Punishment Cannot Be Justified" by sergeant of the Los Angeles police department Sunil Dutta she explains that one of God’s Ten Commandments, “Thou shalt not kill” technically cannot be taught to us by our state run executioners because it would ridicule the overall message (Williams 42). By inflicting the death penalty on one group while disregarding another, it becomes immoral and unjust.
(Body 6. Innocence)
The Death Penalty Information Center explains that since 1973, 138 people in 26 states have been released from death row with evidence of their innocence ("Innocence" par.2). Up until October 2010, Florida has exonerated 23, Oklahoma 10, Ohio 5, Mississippi 3, Kentucky 1, Illinois 20, North Carolina 7, New Mexico 4, South Carolina 2, Maryland 1, Texas 12, Pennsylvania 6, California 3, Indiana 2, Nebraska 1, Louisiana 8, Alabama 5, Massachusetts 3, Tennessee 2, Nevada 1, Arizona 8, Georgia 5, Missouri 3, Idaho 1, Virginia 1, and Washington 1. The average time spent on death row is approximately 11 years before inmates are finally executed. In comparison, the average amount of time spent in jail before exoneration is approximately 9.8 years. From 1973 until 1999 there was an average of 3.03 exonerations per year. From 2000 through 2007, there has been an average of 5 exonerations per year. In 17 cases, DNA had an important role in proving innocence. The importance of DNA testing is demonstrated in Kirk Bloodsworth's case. In the mid 1980's, Bloodsworth was charged for first degree murder, sexual assault, and rape against a nine year old girl. His sentence was death. Not until eight years after incarceration did they agree to DNA testing. By using both Polymerase chain reaction and DNA testing they concluded that Bloodsworth was not at fault. He became the first in history to be exonerated from death row by the means of DNA testing. Capital punishment should be abolished because it is a system that allows innocent people to die.
(Body 7. Comparing Costs)
At first glance, executing an inmate seems like the cheaper option rather than keeping them in jail for the rest of their life. In reality, the total cost of death penalty cases are almost four times higher than the cost of life imprisonment cases. The money funding capital punishment cases is taken from taxpayer's pockets, whether they support it or not, to pay for appeals, juries, and specialized attorneys. The article titled "The High Cost of the Death Penalty," written by Death Penalty Focus, it compares the annual costs of both life imprisonment without parole and capital punishment. According to a 2008 report from the California Commission on the Fair Administration of Justice, it would cost an estimated $94,000 to house a death row inmate annually. The death row population was 670 in 2008, so that would total to up $63.3 million per year ("High Cost" par.6). However if we replaced the death penalty with life imprisonment the cost would decrease to $11.5 million per year, which is dramatically lower (par.10). The report titled "The Hidden Tax" written by ACLU of Northern California reveals that taxpayers pay "$117 million annually for trials before the sought execution of the inmates currently in death row; and it costs California approximately $4 billion more than if they would have just sentenced a criminal to die from disease, injury, or old age inside the prison. Capital Punishment trial costs can amount up to $10.9 million, and in times of economic peril that amount saved could save our sinking and fund-suffering states (par.12). We should move forward and focus on programs such as juvenile and youth crime prevention programs that can help prevent crimes. Revengefully killing the murderer does not and never will bring the victim back to live.
(Body 8. Conclusion)
Penalty of death has existed as long as man has; however, if we want to become a civilized society we must get rid of it in its entirety. For example, in the past, many people strongly opposed slavery because they saw through the few advantages and into the overall picture. They realized all people were born equal and they strove towards abolition, which was successfully achieved in 1865. A lot of people strongly opposed monarchy because they realized that a select few should not have the power to dictate everyday lives of the population. Abolition was reached in 1776 after several centuries. In modern times, the people of the United States debate whether or not capital punishment should be kept legal. In conclusion, the dozens of negatives outweigh the few benefits of the death penalty. The millions of dollars spent annually on excess appeals, the insufficient evidence that it is a reliable deterrent, and that mistakes made are irreversible are ultimately its fatal flaws. Is being quickly executed after a few years really worse than being imprisoned for a lifetime while haunting feelings and thoughts reoccur?
Labels: English 50
Death Penalty Paper - Body #2
@5752
ENGL P050 CRN 32356
Professor Jacinto Gardea
11 April 2011
"Justice is never advanced in the taking of a human life," writes Coretta Scott King. Yet to this day we continue to carry out death sentences. I believe that the death penalty needs to be abolished from the United States because it is costly, ineffective, and outdated. According to the online newspaper The Guardian, the United States has executed approximately 1,156 people in the time period of 1976 to April 2009 (Rogers). Do not forget to include the 107 people executed from 2009 up until January 2011. In addition, the United States executes a death row convict approximately every 3.5 days (Barry par.4). We, as humans, are prone to make mistakes and this punishment system is capable of leaving irreversible results, so the two should not intertwine. Many innocent people have been executed either because they were in the minority or they lacked funds to pay for adequate representation. The Death Penalty Information Center explains that since 1976 there have been eight cases which reveal that the prosecuted persons were innocent after they were executed. Even if we choose to go through processes to make sure that the person was one hundred percent guilty it would bombard our taxpayers with a ridiculous amount of money to pay for the court costs. Why does the United States continue to waste millions of dollars on this obsolete system? All of this money should be put into more beneficial services, such as abuse prevention programs, education, and public safety programs. Former Los Angeles district attorney Gil Garcetti declares in Los Angeles Times article:
The money would be far better spent keeping kids in school, keeping teachers and counselors in their schools and giving the juvenile justice system the resources it needs. Spending our tax dollars on actually preventing crimes, instead of pursuing death sentences after [they have] already been committed, will assure us we will have fewer victims (California's Death Penalty).
Ironically, states that do not use the death penalty usually have lower crime rates than states that do. Not only is capital punishment an ineffective deterrent to crime but its methods are also subject to cruel and unusual punishment. Pro death penalty advocates will argue that capital punishment is not cruel and unusual punishment but a humane way to murder someone. The Eighth Amendment to the 1787 U.S. Constitution declares that "excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted" (Wikipedia). Someone who has not committed a murder can not be sentenced to death because they did not kill another human; the punishment has to fit the deed. The punishment also cannot be neither cruel nor unusual. WordNet defines cruel and unusual punishment as punishment prohibited by the 8th amendment to the U.S. Constitution; this includes torture, degradation, or punishment too severe for the crime committed. In an article published by The Seattle Times newspaper it says, "An examination of 49 autopsies found that in 43 cases, the concentration of anesthetic in the bloodstream was less than what is required to numb a surgical patient before making an incision. In 21 cases, the concentration [was not] sufficient to prevent a patient from responding to a verbal command" (Study Indicates Lethal par.2). Therefore, the prisoners were still in a state of awareness because the drug levels administered were lower than required. Angel Nieves Diaz was executed on December 13, 2006 via lethal injection. However, the workers incorrectly injected the poisons, which were carried by the needles, into Diaz. The chemicals surged not into his veins as intended, but into his soft tissue. When a second set of needles were inserted Diaz began to struggle in agony for over 30 minutes. After the execution, examiners found chemical burns which measured twelve inches deep inside both of Diaz's arms (5 Reasons par.22). The result of this misconstrued execution was an executive order led by death penalty supporter and ex-governor of Florida Jeb Bush to halt all executions in the state (5 Reasons par.21). Before his execution, Diaz left a final statement which said, "The death penalty is not only a form of vengeance, but also a cowardly act by humans."
Capital punishment is retributive justice; therefore, it cannot stop the cycle of violence; it can only redirect it. Retribution is defined as the act of punishing or taking vengeance for wrongdoing, sin, or injury. And like Angel Diaz said, capital punishment is fueled more by vengeance rather than by justice. In the article titled "Capital Punishment Exacerbates Violence" by attorney and formal judge Robert Grant he says that "violence begets more violence" (Grant 123). Although the death penalty tries to teach us not to kill, ultimately it is backwardly killing people, which could be sending out the wrong message. Catholic Archbishop of Washington Cardinal McCarrick writes, “the death penalty diminishes all of us, increases disrespect for human life, and offers the tragic illusion that we can teach that killing is wrong by killing." Either way violence is still prominent in almost every aspect of our culture: in music, movies, television shows, video games, literature, political attitudes, and abuse towards children, domestic partners, and prisoners. This past century has been the most violent in human history so it is no surprise why the death penalty is still remaining (Grant 124). Lawyer Clarence Darrow points out that states continue to execute victims not so much to protect society but to satisfy the people’s emotions of hatred and revenge (Grant 121). The murderers indeed deserve a punishment because they have violated the rights of other human beings. However, there are other ways to punish the criminal. Life imprisonment without the possibility of parole, prison labor, and solitary confinement are effective punishments in place of the death penalty. When we support capital punishment we assume that the convicted people are unable to recover. Who is to say that all criminals are unable to be rehabilitated?
Labels: English 50
Death Penalty Paper - Outline
Thesis: The death penalty is expensive, ineffective, and outdated.
Introduction
1. Include Thesis
2. Introduce some points
I. Opposing Arguments/Debunk
1. Include two opposing arguments
2. Debunk both arguments
II. The DP violates human rights
1. Violates human rights
2. Violates Bill of Rights
3. Methods of execution
III. It is legalized murder
1. Government power
2. Conflicts with religious beliefs
IV. Financial costs
1. Cost of hearings, processes, lawyers, etc
2. Compare cost to life sentencing
V. Ineffective as a deterrent
1. Comparison with countries that banned the DP
2. Compare crime rates between U.S. DP states and non DP states
3. Applied unequally
VI. Personal reasons
1. Families of the victims
2. Families of the convict
3. Racism within the system
4. Pressure from the public
Conclusion
1. My personal Opinion
2. Restate Thesis
3. End with quote
========================================================================
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Introduction
What is the Death Penalty
Statistics on the problem
Human Rights
Violates Bill of Rights
Cruel and Unusual Punishment
Economic Factors
Cost of the death penalty
Difference between life sentencing
Public Opinion
Pressure on the judge
Families
Personal reasons
Religion/Moral Standpoint
Government plays god
Immoral
Hypocritical
Applied Unfairly
Punishes the poor
Racist
Not all criminals are punished
Opposing Arguments
Debunk
My Opinion
Conclusion
Restate
Conclude ideas
Labels: English 50
Death Penalty Paper - Works Cited
Works Cited
5 Reasons to Oppose the Death Penalty. 1. Chicago: CEDP, 2011.
Barry, John. "Is the Death Penalty Cruel and Unusual?" Politics, Activism, Political Issues, Government, and Elections. SpeakOut.com, 3 May 2000. Web. 09 Apr. 2011.
"Carlos DeLuna: Did This Man Die for a Phantom's Crime?" DemocracyInAction | Empowering Small, Progressive Nonprofits with Technology and Support. National Coalition to Abolish the Death Penalty. Web. 10 Apr. 2011.
Carmical, Casey. "The Death Penalty: Morally Defensible?" Casey's Critical Thinking. Web. 09 Apr. 2011.
"Cruel and Unusual Punishment." West's Encyclopedia of American Law, edition 2. 2008. The Gale Group 10 Apr. 2011
"Death Penalty : The High Cost of the Death Penalty." Death Penalty. Web. 25 Apr. 2011.
Dieter, Richard C. "The Death Penalty in Black and White: Who Lives, Who Dies, Who Decides." DPIC: Death Penalty Information Center. Death Penalty Information Center, June 1998. Web. 14 Apr. 2011.
Dutta, Sunil. "Capital Punishment Cannot Be Justified." Capital Punishment. By Mary E. Williams. Farmington Hills: Thomson Gale, 2005. 40-5. Print.
"Executed But Possibly Innocent." Death Penalty Information Center. Web. 06 Apr. 2011.
Grant, Robert. "Capital Punishment Exacerbates Violence." Capital Punishment. By Mary E. Williams. Farmington Hills: Thomson Gale, 2005. 119-25. Print.
Haberman, Clyde. "Playing God And Politics With Death - New York Times." The New York Times - Breaking News, World News & Multimedia. The New York Times Company, 23 May 1997. Web. 16 Apr. 2011.
Home - Restorative V.O.I.C.E. Web. 19 Apr. 2011.
"Innocence and the Death Penalty." Death Penalty Information Center. Death Penalty Information Center. Web. 23 Apr. 2011.
"Innocence Cases: 1984 -1993." Http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org. Death Penalty Information Center. Web. 23 Apr. 2011.
Kaplan, Karen. "Nation & World | Study Indicates Lethal Injections May Cause Pain, Suffering | Seattle Times Newspaper." The Seattle Times | Seattle Times Newspaper. The Seattle Times Company, 15 Apr. 2005. Web. 11 Apr. 2011.
"Methods of Execution Used in Capital Punishment." Infoplease: Encyclopedia, Almanac, Atlas, Biographies, Dictionary, Thesaurus. Free Online Reference, Research & Homework Help. — Infoplease.com. Infoplease.com. Web. 01 May 2011.
"NEW VOICES: Former Los Angeles D.A. States "California's Death Penalty Doesn't Serve Justice"" Death Penalty Information Center. 28 Mar. 2011. Web. 30 Mar. 2011.
"One Answer to the Overcrowded Prisons Problem." Http://www.onedayatatime.com/. One Day at a Time. Web. 19 Apr. 2011.
"Statistics on Capital Punishment | P.a.p.-Blog / Human Rights Etc." P.a.p.-Blog / Human Rights Etc. | This Is a Blog about Human Rights. Wordpress.com. Web. 14 Apr. 2011.
Taylor, Lawrence. "The Death Penalty for DUI?" DUI BLOG : Bad Drunk Driving Laws, False Evidence and a Fading Constitution. Wordpress.com, 6 Nov. 2004. Web. 14 Apr. 2011.
Who, Alan. "Capital Punishment Is More Expensive?" 2011 Jail and Death Penalty. Edublogs.org, 22 Mar. 2011. Web. 18 Apr. 2011.
Wikipedia contributors. "Eighth Amendment to the United States Constitution." Wikipedia, The Free Encyclopedia. Wikipedia, The Free Encyclopedia, 6 Apr. 2011. Web. 10 Apr. 2011.< http://en.wikipedia. org/wiki/Eighth_Amendment_to_the_United_States_Constitution>
Williams, Mary E. Capital Punishment. Farmington Hills, MI: Greenhaven, 2005. Print.
Labels: English 50
Death Penalty Paper - Body #1
@5752
ENGL P050 CRN 32356
Professor Jacinto Gardea
11 April 2011
Killing is Murder
"Justice is never advanced in the taking of a human life," writes Coretta Scott King. Yet to this day we continue to carry out death sentences. I believe that the death penalty needs to be abolished from the United States because it is costly, ineffective, and outdated. According to the online newspaper The Guardian, the United States has executed approximately 1,156 people in the time period of 1976 to April 2009 (Rogers). Do not forget to include the 107 people executed from 2009 up until January 2011. In addition, the United States executes a death row convict approximately every 3.5 days (Barry par.4). We, as humans, are prone to make mistakes and this punishment system is capable of leaving irreversible results, so the two should not intertwine. Many innocent people have been executed either because they were in the minority or they lacked funds to pay for adequate representation. The Death Penalty Information Center explains that since 1976 there have been eight cases which reveal that the prosecuted persons were innocent after they were executed. Even if we choose to go through processes to make sure that the person was one hundred percent guilty it would bombard our taxpayers with a ridiculous amount of money to pay for the court costs. Why does the United States continue to waste millions of dollars on this obsolete system? All of this money should be put into more beneficial services, such as abuse prevention programs, education, and public safety programs. Former Los Angeles district attorney Gil Garcetti declares in Los Angeles Times article:
The money would be far better spent keeping kids in school, keeping teachers and counselors in their schools and giving the juvenile justice system the resources it needs. Spending our tax dollars on actually preventing crimes, instead of pursuing death sentences after [they have] already been committed, will assure us we will have fewer victims (California's Death Penalty).
Ironically, states that do not use the death penalty usually have lower crime rates than states that do.
Not only is capital punishment an ineffective deterrent to crime but its methods are also subject to cruel and unusual punishment. Pro death penalty advocates will argue that capital punishment is not cruel and unusual punishment but a humane way to murder someone. The Eighth Amendment to the 1787 U.S. Constitution declares that "excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted" (Wikipedia). Someone who has not committed a murder can not be sentenced to death because they did not kill another human; the punishment has to fit the deed. The punishment also cannot be neither cruel nor unusual. WordNet defines cruel and unusual punishment as punishment prohibited by the 8th amendment to the U.S. Constitution; this includes torture, degradation, or punishment too severe for the crime committed. In an article published by The Seattle Times newspaper it says, "An examination of 49 autopsies found that in 43 cases, the concentration of anesthetic in the bloodstream was less than what is required to numb a surgical patient before making an incision. In 21 cases, the concentration [was not] sufficient to prevent a patient from responding to a verbal command" (Study Indicates Lethal par.2). Therefore, the prisoners were still in a state of awareness because the drug levels administered were lower than required. Angel Nieves Diaz was executed on December 13, 2006 via lethal injection. However, the workers incorrectly injected the poisons, which were carried by the needles, into Diaz. The chemicals surged not into his veins as intended, but into his soft tissue. When a second set of needles were inserted Diaz began to struggle in agony for over 30 minutes. After the execution, examiners found chemical burns which measured twelve inches deep inside both of Diaz's arms (5 Reasons par.22). The result of this misconstrued execution was an executive order led by death penalty supporter and ex-governor of Florida Jeb Bush to halt all executions in the state (5 Reasons par.21). Before his execution, Diaz left a final statement which said, "The death penalty is not only a form of vengeance, but also a cowardly act by humans."
Labels: English 50
Death Penalty Paper - Introduction
@5752
ENGL P050 CRN 32356
Professor Jacinto Gardea
4 April 2011
"Justice is never advanced in the taking of a human life," said Coretta Scott King. Yet to this day we continue to carry out death executions. In the United States a death row convict is executed every 3.5 days (Barry par.4). I believe that the death penalty needs to be abolished from the United States because it is costly, ineffective, and outdated. According to the online newspaper The Guardian, the United States has executed approximately 1,156 people in the time period of 1976 to April 2009 (Rogers). Do not forget to include the 107 people executed from 2009 up until this year. We, as humans, are prone to make mistakes and this system is capable of causing irreversible results. Many innocent people have been executed because they were in the minority or because they lacked funds to pay for adequate representation. The Death Penalty Information Center explains that since 1976 there have been eight cases which reveal that the prosecuted persons were innocent after they were executed. Even if we do choose to go through processes to make sure that the person was one hundred percent guilty it would still bombard our taxpayers with a ridiculous amount of money to pay for the court costs. Ironically, states that do not use the death penalty often usually have lower crime rates than states that do. The question remains. Why does the United States continue to waste millions of dollars on this obsolete system? All of this money should be put into more beneficial services, such as abuse prevention programs, education, and public safety programs. Former Los Angeles district attorney Gil Garcetti told Los Angeles Times:
The money would be far better spent keeping kids in school, keeping teachers and counselors in their schools and giving the juvenile justice system the resources it needs. Spending our tax dollars on actually preventing crimes, instead of pursuing death sentences after [they have] already been committed, will assure us we will have fewer victims (California's Death Penalty).
Labels: English 50
Sample Notes
Marietta Jaeger, whose 7 year-old daughter Susie was kidnapped and murdered in the US in 1973 said,
"I say there is no amount of retaliatory deaths that would compensate to me the [...] value of my daughter’s life, nor would they restore her to my arms.
To say that the death of any other person would be just retribution is to insult the immeasurable worth of our loved ones who are victims.
We cannot put a price on their lives.
In my case, my own daughter was such a gift of joy and sweetness and beauty, that to kill someone in her name would have been to violate and profane the goodness of her life."
Source: http://listdom.wordpress.com/2009/10/06/quotes-against-capital-punishment
====================================================================================
We no longer burn witches or keep slaves, or have monarchs rule our lives. But we still manage to have the death penalty which is similarly obsolete (Dutta 41).
After adopting the death penalty from British law, we began to apply it. Soon degrees of murder were formed. However, there are still many flaws (Grant 119).
Our opponents say that the death penalty is a deterrent of crime and that it helps prevent some future criminals from committing heinous deeds.
Allow me to use an example. The 9/11 terrorist attack. Do you think hijackers of a plane would consider death penalty as a serious punishment for killing hundreds of people? Do you think that they even acknowledged the death penalty while boarding the planes? In most cases, criminals do not think about the crime because it's usually committed in the "heat of passion" (King 2).
Many violent people end up killing themselves after killing others anyways. This is particular to violent adolescents (Grant 122). Remember the shootings at Columbine High School? The death penalty definitely did not deter the murder of those 15 people.
Every year in the United States there are on average 22,000 homicides, but only 15,000 suspects are arrested. And only 10,000 are convicted. So how is capital punishment applied equally and affectingly? It isn't. And it actually increases the intensity of violence (Grant 122).
And where is capital punishment exercised the most? In the South, most notably Texas. The South alone was responsible for approximately 88 percent of all the executions made in the time period of 1977 through 2002. Is it a coincidence that the most violence occurs in the southern region (Grant 121)?
"Violence begets more violence" (Grant 123). How is backwardly killing people supposed to teach us not to kill? It is completely void if logic to think that way. By supporting the death penalty we become no better than animals closing in for the kill in order to protect or demonstrate vengeance. Every act of violence makes the culprit more violent---no matter what the circumstance (Grant 123).
These last 100 years have been the most violent in human history and it is reflected in our music, movies, television shows, video games, literature, intolerance, political attitudes, and abuse towards prisoners, domestic partners, and children. A paster at a memorial service of an executed Timothy McVeigh said, "Is there another way we can respond to this violence without doing violence ourselves?" (Grant 124).
McVeigh himself was victim of retributive justice. He was an Oklahoma bomber whose execution was filled with television and media coverage. One spectator said that McVeigh deserved to be stoned to death for committed such a deed. Some wanted McVeigh to receive a life sentence. Over 80 percent of the viewers said that he should die a more painful death. Civil liberties and lawyer Clarence Darrow noted, "[The state] continues to kill its victims not so much to defend to society against them...but to appease the mob's emotions of hatred and revenge" (Grant 121).
Media coverage and endless judicial processes turn the criminal into a celebrity while the victim's family seethes with resentment. Not only is the criminal glorified, but the taxpayer-financed court costs are horrendous (Dutta 43).
Families sometime do not seek the penalty. In some cases, families actually much prefer seeking life imprisonment for the criminal. Maria Calderon, ex-girlfriend of Reynaldo Rodriguez found three of her family members killed. Rodriguez, who was responsible, took his own life afterwards. Calderon told Los Angeles Times magazine, "I would have much rather he stayed alive. That was he could face the justice system and live with the fact that he murdered three people, and suffer what we're suffering. Now he took his own life---and he's not suffering anymore" (Dutta 43).
"We cannot be a civilized society while we indulge in hatred and consign forgiveness to the sidelines" (Dutta 45). "Justice is never advanced in the taking of a human life" (King 1). "If we don't find a way to break the cycle of violence we will never be able to end the culture of violence that infects the United States" (Grant 125).
"The only way to break the chain of violence reaction is too practice nonviolence as individuals and collectively through our laws and institutions" (King 2).
Labels: English 50
Article #4
Labels: English 50
Article Summary #3
Summary Here
Labels: English 50
English Summary #2
Daniel Contreras
Professor Jacinto Gardea
ENGL P050 CRN 32356
23 February 2011
The Fatal Mistake
According to an anonymous author, death penalty victim Carlos De Luna was a victim of both false accusation and wrongful execution. He claims that the delayed response shows how crucial the investigation was to the officers. The author asserts that De Luna was in the wrong place at the wrong time. He disagrees with the procedures that the officers made during the investigation. The author explains the store manager could not believe that officers would allow the evidence to be wiped away so early in the investigation. The anonymous author says that De Luna was underneath a vehicle because he had violated his parole, by drinking nearby when the crime occurred. The author also points out that no money was stolen during the crime, so De Luna's punishment was unreasonable and unjust.
The prosecution argues that De Luna was indeed responsible because of three things. First was the victim's 911 phone call that has no visible evidence. Second was the only witness nearby when the crime occurred, but even he was unsure if De Luna was the culprit. Last were the mugshots of De Luna and Carlos Hernandez, which looked very alike. But both men were criminals of very different charges. De Luna was charged on drinking while Hernandez was guilty on crimes using a large knife. The author concludes by saying, "No one has apologized to Carlos De Luna or his family for wrongly taking his life. Nor has anyone apologized to Lopez's family for botching that investigation or to Hernandez's subsequent victims, who would have been safe if police and prosecutors had properly investigated the Lopez murder. And what about the jurors who were led to believe that De Luna was guilty? They too deserve an apology" (6).
Labels: English 50
Carlos De Luna
On December 7, 1989, Texas executed 27-year old Carlos De Luna. Sixteen years later, the Chicago Tribune published a three-part investigative series implicating another man and discrediting the evidence against De Luna. Labels: English 50
In February 1983, Wanda Lopez was stabbed to death during the night shift at a gas station convenience store where she was clerk. Lopez did not have to die. If police had responded to the first of her two 911 calls, she would be alive today, as would De Luna. Instead, police waited to respond until the end of Lopez's second call, after a series of yes or no questions with a dispatcher revealed that a Hispanic male was in the store with a knife and after Lopez screams revealed she had been stabbed. The officers' delay in reaching the scene may explain their haste to complete the investigation, compounding the tragedy by convicting and executing the wrong man.
After a brief manhunt, police found De Luna hiding underneath a pick-up truck. Recently released from prison, De Luna had been violating parole by drinking in public. Police reports say he was staggering and intoxicated. School reports show he was developmentally impaired.
De Luna immediately told police he was innocent and offered to name a man he had seen inside the gas station. Police ignored De Luna. Also ignored was the fact that he didn't have a drop of blood on his body or clothing, even though the knife victim and killer had physically struggled, drenching the crime scene in blood. De Luna was arrested too soon after the crime to have cleaned himself up.
Back at the gas station, police brought Kevan Baker, their single eyewitness to the crime, to the squad car where De Luna was shirtless and handcuffed in the back seat. After police indicated to Baker that De Luna was the killer, he identified De Luna. Baker told the Tribune he was never sure De Luna was the man he had seen and would have been less sure if police had not hinted they had the right man. Baker originally told police the killer wore a moustache, was dressed like a derelict, and ran northwest behind the gas station. Witnesses placed De Luna east of the gas station. He had no moustache and was dressed in a white button-down dress shirt and dress pants.
From the moment De Luna was arrested until the night he was executed, he insisted he hid under the truck because he was on parole and got scared when he heard sirens coming. He told the officer who arrested him that he was not guilty but knew who was. At trial De Luna named Carlos Hernandez as the man he saw inside the gas station, across the street from the bar where De Luna had been drinking. As the Tribune investigation revealed, Carlos Hernandez was a well-known Corpus Christi criminal and armed felon. He habitually wore a moustache, dressed like a "hobo" and carried a buck knife like the one found at the Lopez crime scene.
Police ignored De Luna's statements. Moments after Baker identified De Luna, police ended their investigation and turned the crime scene over to a stunned store manager who couldn't believe he was allowed to wash down the store so soon after a major crime. Police photographs of the scene reveal (1) a shoe heel print framed in blood (the victim was barefoot when she was killed; De Luna's shoes had no blood on them); (2) a partially smoked cigarette butt near the location of the stabbing (the assailant brought a Winston cigarette pack to the counter before attacking the victim; Winston was Hernandez's brand); (3) a dark red button (Baker told police the killer was wearing a red flannel shirt; according to friends, Hernandez's "winter uniform" was a red flannel shirt); and (4) the murder weapon, an 8-inch buck knife smeared with blood.
Except for the knife, police seized none of these items. Their photographs show the lead investigator trampling on bloody evidence that was never seized. Only four fingerprints were lifted from the scene, none from the knife, and none matched De Luna. A well-known former Corpus Christi police detective, Eddie Garza, told the Tribune the police investigation was incompetent.
At trial, the prosecution argued that De Luna had stabbed Wanda Lopez during the commission of a robbery. The Tribune's investigation revealed, however, that no money had been taken from the scene. Baker told the police the victim's struggle with the assailant looked like a lover's quarrel. Hernandez's neighbors say he knew Lopez and was romantically interested in her. There is no indication De Luna knew Lopez. The supposed robbery was the only factor elevating the murder to a death-eligible crime.
Absent blood, fingerprints, or other physical links to the crime, prosecutors rested their case against De Luna on three things. First was the 911 audio tape of the brutal killing. The tape incensed the jury but gave no hint of who killed Lopez except that it was a Hispanic male. Second was Kevan Baker's night-time identification of De Luna. Baker was prompted by police and shown only a single suspect, not the line-up that standard procedure required. Mug shots reveal that De Luna and Hernandez look strikingly similar. Both were 5'8" tall, 160 pounds, with wavy black hair. Shown pictures of the two men, relatives of both repeatedly mistook one for the other. The only difference was in the two Carloses' m.o. De Luna had many arrests but was never found to have possessed or used a weapon. Hernandez committed most of his crimes with a large knife.
Third, prosecutors said De Luna was a liar. De Luna identified "Carlos Hernandez" as the killer, but - argued the lead prosecutor - Hernandez was "a phantom." In fact, the untruth was the state's. Hernandez was known and notorious to police and prosecutors. Just two months after Lopez was killed, police arrested Hernandez behind a 7-11 Store at night, a knife in his pocket. Around the same time, police informants told Detective Garza that Hernandez had told them he killed Wanda Lopez. When given this information, the lead detective on the Lopez case ignored it. Still worse, one of the prosecutors at De Luna's trial admitted that he knew Hernandez personally. Only three years earlier, he had interviewed Hernandez on suspicion of knifing a young Hispanic woman to death. When arrested for that crime, Hernandez was carrying a buck knife.
Just as police steered Kevan Baker to identify De Luna, the prosecutor's claim that Hernandez was a phantom prompted the jury to convict DeLuna and sentence him to die. De Luna's attorneys also were misled. Although De Luna's family never wavered in their belief that their Carlos could not have killed Wanda Lopez, the lawyers they hired to help him never went to the courthouse to look up Carlos Hernandez's lengthy record of violent convictions and never otherwise investigated his crime. It was not until a decade and a half after De Luna was executed that the Tribune found five people, including Hernandez's own niece, who heard Hernandez confess to stabbing and killing Lopez. Hernandez repeatedly laughed about his "stupid tocayo" who went to jail for Hernandez's crime. "Tocayo" is the Spanish word for "namesake." All five kept this information to themselves, fearing Hernandez's wrath. Some assumed they would be questioned but never were.
In 1999, ten years after De Luna was executed, Hernandez died in prison of liver cirrhosis. During that decade, Hernandez stabbed another young Hispanic woman nearly to death and accumulated five additional arrests, the last of which, an assault with a knife, landed him in prison for the last time.
When confronted with the evidence of Hernandez's guilt and De Luna's innocence, the De Luna prosecutors admitted they should not have told the jury Hernandez was a phantom. Still, they offered no apologies for their actions. No one has apologized to Carlos De Luna or his family for wrongly taking his life. Nor has anyone apologized to Lopez's family for botching that investigation or to Hernandez's subsequent victims, who would have been safe if police and prosecutors had properly investigated the Lopez murder. And what about the jurors who were led to believe that De Luna was guilty? They too deserve an apology.
Works Cited
"NCADP - The National Coalition to Abolish the Death Penalty." DemocracyInAction | Empowering Small, Progressive Nonprofits with Technology and Support. Web. 17 Feb. 2011.
DID ONE MAN DIE FOR ANOTHER MAN'S CRIME? THE SECRET THAT WASN'T
DID ONE MAN DIE FOR ANOTHER MAN'S CRIME? THE SECRET THAT WASN'T Labels: English 50
Violent felon bragged that he was real killer
By Maurice Possley and Steve Mills
Tribune staff reporters
Published June 27, 2006
CORPUS CHRISTI, Texas -- It was a secret they all shared. Some kept it out of fear. Some because no one ever asked. Whatever their reasons, it was a secret that might have saved Carlos De Luna from the execution chamber.
Twenty-three years after Wanda Lopez was murdered in the gas station where she worked, family members and acquaintances of another man, Carlos Hernandez, have broken their silence to support what De Luna had long asserted: Hernandez, a violent felon, killed Lopez in 1983.
A Tribune investigation has identified five people who say Hernandez told them that he stabbed Lopez and that De Luna, whom he called his "stupid tocayo," or namesake, went to Death Row in his place.
They also say he admitted killing another woman, in 1979, a crime for which he was indicted but never tried.
Although some aspects of De Luna's actions on the night of Lopez's killing remain suspicious, the Tribune uncovered substantial evidence that undermines his conviction. Among the findings:
The only witness who came face to face with the killer at the station after Lopez was stabbed now says he was not positive of his identification of De Luna. He identified De Luna, he said, after police told him they had arrested De Luna hiding under a truck near the scene of the attack--information that eased his uncertainty.
The Tribune's analysis of financial records from the Sigmor gas station also undercuts the state's assertion that the killing took place during a robbery, an aggravating circumstance that elevated the murder to a death penalty case. Newly examined inventory documents suggest no money was taken at all.
The prosecution argued that Hernandez was a "phantom," even though one of the prosecutors knew well of Hernandez but failed to inform De Luna's attorneys--a possible legal error that could have been a reason to overturn his conviction.
And one of Corpus Christi's senior detectives at the time of the crime now says he believes De Luna was wrongly executed. The former detective, Eddie Garza, said tipsters told him that Hernandez killed Lopez, the mother of a 6-year-old girl. Yet it appears those tips were not pursued.
Garza knew both men and said Lopez's slaying was the kind of crime Hernandez would commit, not De Luna.
"I don't think [De Luna] had it in him to do something like this and stab somebody to death," Garza said.
But Hernandez, he added, "was a ruthless criminal. He had a bad heart. I believe he was a killer."
A SECRET NO MORE
After Hernandez died in prison in 1999, word reached Corpus Christi, and people began to talk.
Janie Adrian remembered how Hernandez bragged about stabbing Lopez, how he said Carlos De Luna, the man who shared his first name, was innocent.
"He said, `My stupid tocayo took the blame for it,'" she recalled recently.
Adrian, a neighbor of Hernandez's mother, Fidela, said she always thought someone would ask what she knew. Nobody ever did, so she never told.
"I kept it to myself," she said in her Corpus Christi home. "Maybe I could have said something then."
Dina Ybanez waited because she was afraid. She met Hernandez in 1985, and after he befriended her and her husband, he confided that he killed Lopez.
"He said he was the one that did it, but that they got somebody else--his stupid tocayo--for that one," Ybanez said in an interview. "Carlos would just laugh about it because he got away with it." Like a number of people in Corpus Christi who knew Hernandez, Ybanez said he also admitted committing the 1979 murder of Dahlia Sauceda, a local woman who was strangled and had an "X" carved into her back. Hernandez was questioned in the murder in 1979, then indicted for it in 1986, although prosecutors never took him to trial.
Ybanez said she so feared Hernandez that she never contacted police about his admissions, not even after he cut her from her navel to her sternum during a quarrel. "He said he was going to kill me like he did her," she said.
Beatrice Tapia and Priscilla Jaramillo never spoke about what they knew because they wanted to forget.
Although they had not seen each other in years, they independently recalled the same chilling details from the day they heard Hernandez say he killed Lopez.
Jaramillo is Hernandez's niece, and during the 1980s she lived at his mother's home, where, she said, she was sexually abused by Hernandez.
Not long after Lopez was slain, Jaramillo, then 11, and Tapia, 16, a neighborhood friend, were sitting on the front steps, mostly talking but also listening to Hernandez and his brother Javier, who were on the porch drinking beer.
Carlos told his brother that he had killed the woman at the gas station.
"He was saying he did something wrong and said Wanda's name. He said he killed her," recalled Tapia, who still lives in Corpus Christi. "He said he felt sorry about it."
Jaramillo's recollection is similar. "My Uncle Carlos said that he had hurt somebody--that he had stabbed somebody," said Jaramillo, who now lives elsewhere in Texas. "Javier didn't believe it.
"Carlos said, `I did.' And he named her, and Javier knew her," Jaramillo said. "He said the name was Wanda."
In addition to the four women who recounted Hernandez's admissions, the Tribune interviewed a Corpus Christi man who told a similar story. Miguel Ortiz, who has a criminal record, said the two were drinking in a park when Hernandez talked about a clerk he had "wasted" at a gas station.
"I just let that go," Ortiz said.
TIPS ON HERNANDEZ
While some in Corpus Christi kept silent about Hernandez, others apparently did not.
Garza, a detective at the time, recalled getting tips just days after De Luna was arrested that someone else was talking about how he had stabbed the gas station clerk.
"We were getting information that Carlos Hernandez was the one that had done the case," said Garza, who now is a private investigator. "Several people were telling us that."
Garza says he passed along the information to the detective leading the investigation, Olivia Escobedo.
Escobedo, now a real estate agent and police consultant in Florida, said she remembers no such tips. "I don't recall anything about a Carlos Hernandez," she said in a recent interview.
"I always followed every lead," added Escobedo, who primarily had investigated sex crimes and handled the De Luna case alone. "I went down rabbit trails when I didn't have to. I followed everything I could think of."
Garza's partner at the time, Paul Rivera, now a captain in the county sheriff's department, also said he doesn't remember the tips.
Garza did not testify at the trial but did at De Luna's sentencing, asserting that the defendant had a "bad" reputation in town. Garza says that by then he assumed the tips had been checked out and determined to be false. Now he believes the tips were ignored.
His recent examination of the case's police reports, at the Tribune's request, renewed his skepticism about De Luna's guilt. Garza concluded the initial crime scene investigation was sloppy and brief.
He noted that none of the blood spattered on the floor of the station was collected for testing, so there was no way to determine whether the attacker's blood was present. The only items sent for blood testing were the knife, De Luna's clothing and a $5 bill.
One police photo shows Escobedo standing in the middle of the spattered blood behind the station counter. The station reopened a few hours after the crime.
"This case wasn't put together right," Garza said.
Noting that investigators found no physical evidence that could be used to identify the attacker, he said, "It probably was there to be found. It was just overlooked."
WITNESS' DOUBTS
With no forensic evidence linking De Luna to the crime, prosecutors relied heavily on two eyewitnesses who said they saw him at the station--one before and one after the murder.
Arrested less than an hour after the attack, De Luna was handcuffed and placed in a patrol car, then driven to the gas station, where an officer shone a light on his face.
Of those witnesses, only Kevan Baker came eye to eye with the killer after Lopez had been stabbed. Now living near Jonesville, Mich., Baker recalls that night vividly.
He had stopped to buy gas and saw Lopez and a man struggling inside the station. When he approached the door to help, the assailant emerged, they locked eyes and the attacker fled.
De Luna and Hernandez were about the same height and looked alike in police mug shot profiles.
Baker identified De Luna but now says he was uncertain. "I wasn't all that sure, but him being Hispanic and all . . . I said, `Yeah, I think it is him,'" Baker recalled recently. "The cops told me they found him hiding under a truck. That led me to believe this is probably the guy."
This form of identification--called a show-up, in which a witness views only one suspect instead of attempting to pick a suspect out of a lineup--can be accurate, but it also can give eyewitnesses a false sense of certainty, according to experts. They say shackling a suspect exacerbates the potential for a mistaken identification.
"Law enforcement figures `we got our guy,' so their whole demeanor, their language, the way they handle the guy suggests to the witness that this is the person," said Gary Wells, a research psychologist at Iowa State University and a leading expert on eyewitness identification issues. "That's a lot of pressure to put on a witness."
The other witness who identified De Luna as he sat in the police car, George Aguirre, declined to be interviewed for this article. At a pretrial hearing, Aguirre was unable to point out De Luna in the courtroom. At trial a month later, though, he did.
Two additional witnesses at the trial, John and Julie Arsuaga, said they caught a glimpse of De Luna's face as he ran slowly through a parking lot east of the station a few minutes after Lopez was attacked.
De Luna told authorities that when he saw Hernandez struggling with Lopez, he fled from the area because he was on parole and didn't want to be spotted by police.
Julie Arsuaga could not be reached for comment. In a recent interview, her former husband said he still believes De Luna was the man he saw down the street.
But he acknowledged he never saw De Luna at the gas station: "I didn't see the man commit a crime."
NOT A ROBBERY?
The discovery of $149 in De Luna's pocket when he was arrested was important to the prosecution's case because it was one more way to tie him to the crime.
But a review of the station's business records show that's a shaky assumption.
De Luna's defense lawyers established that he had cashed a paycheck for $135 the day of the murder and $71 a week earlier. Further, they noted that the $149 was in a neat roll--unlikely if the money had just been snatched from a cash register--and that none of the bills tested positive for blood. Money found scattered in the Sigmor station was bloodstained.
At trial, a district manager for the chain of stations told the jury that an inventory performed the night of the crime showed a shortage of $166. He couldn't say how much of that was merchandise and how much, if any, was cash.
But another Sigmor employee at the time, Robert Stange, never believed any money was taken.
Stange, who said he was never interviewed by police, prosecutors or defense lawyers, worked the day shift at the station before Lopez. In a recent interview, he said he was called back that night after the murder to clean up the blood and conduct the inventory.
He said he found $55 in cash receipts as well as $200 kept at the station to make change for customers.
Lopez, he said, always made sure that when she accumulated $100 in receipts, she immediately put it in the safe and noted the time and the amount of the cash drop in the station's daily log.
A copy of the log shows that Lopez last made a drop of $100 at 7:31 p.m., 38 minutes before she was attacked.
For De Luna's $149 to have been robbery proceeds, Stange explained, Lopez would have had to take in at least that much in the half-hour before the crime occurred, without putting any of it in the safe. Lopez, he said, "would have never kept that kind of money in the drawer without making a drop. She didn't want that kind of money on hand. Nobody did."
At the request of the Tribune, Kevin Stevens, a DePaul University accounting professor, examined the inventory report prosecutors used at trial. Stevens, who coincidentally worked at a gas station while in college, concluded that the Sigmor's bookkeeping system was too haphazard to be accurate.
"They can't know how much cash was missing," Stevens said, "because they can't know how much cash was there."
STILL CONFIDENT
After the Tribune began its investigation, the lead prosecutor in De Luna's trial, Steve Schiwetz, decided to examine the case file.
Troubled by some of the questions being raised, he spent hours at the Nueces County district attorney's office with a reporter poring over the trial exhibits, police reports and other documents in the case, as well as studying documents the Tribune provided.
Now a lawyer in private practice, Schiwetz acknowledged that the case relied heavily on eyewitness testimony. "Sometimes it's reliable. Sometimes it isn't reliable," he said in an interview. "And sometimes, in cases like this, you're not entirely sure how reliable it is."
Schiwetz labeled Hernandez a "phantom" at trial, but said he would not have done so if he'd been informed by a fellow prosecutor that Hernandez had been a suspect in the murder of another woman. Schiwetz also said that if he had been told of reports that Carlos Hernandez was claiming to be Lopez's killer, he would have investigated them.
"Anytime somebody's going around saying they killed somebody, I think it's worth looking at," he said. "But I've heard a lot of people make claims for stuff they did or didn't do that weren't true."
Ultimately, Schiwetz points to several elements of the case that still persuade him the jury convicted the right man. De Luna, he said, lied when he claimed to have talked to two women at a skating rink on the night of the crime and lied when he apparently said he first met Hernandez in jail. De Luna had lost all credibility, Schiwetz said.
"He's lying about the most important story he's ever going to tell in his entire life," he said.
In addition, while De Luna said he lost his shirt while scaling a fence, he gave no explanation for how he lost his shoes, Schiwetz noted. Though the crime lab found no blood or other evidence on them, Schiwetz told the jury that De Luna could have stabbed Lopez without getting blood on his shirt and that any blood on his shoes washed off when he ran through wet grass.
As for Hernandez's history of knife crimes, he said, "Every man in this town has carried a knife. And most of us still do. I carry a knife. I did not kill Wanda Lopez or anybody else."
Schiwetz's co-prosecutor on the De Luna case, Ken Botary, also remains confident the verdict was correct.
"I'm not ready to concede Carlos De Luna was innocent," Botary said.
ANGER AND REGRETS
Wanda Lopez's murder still haunts those who were touched by it.
Her brother, Louis Vargas, no longer is filled with the rage that so consumed him that he imagined sneaking into the prison and killing De Luna himself.
Now, when he thinks about his sister's death, he mainly is filled with horror at how she died. He cannot forget her screams on the 911 tape.
"This is like opening a can of worms," he said. "All this time, we were told it was this one guy. Now do we have to think it was somebody else?"
His parents adopted Wanda's young daughter. Now a mother of four, she is raising a family of her own and still lives in Corpus Christi.
De Luna's sister, Rose Rhoton, has long believed in her brother's innocence. She blames his lawyers for not mounting a more aggressive defense and authorities for not pursuing Hernandez as a suspect.
She has regrets of her own as well.
"If God ever gave me a second chance," Rhoton said, sitting in her Dallas home and beginning to cry, "I would fight harder for Carlos."
When Rhoton departed the death house in Huntsville, having seen her brother for the last time, she left him in the care of a minister, Carroll Pickett.
The death house chaplain, Pickett prayed with De Luna and, as he did with all inmates facing execution, gave De Luna an opportunity to confess and make his peace. De Luna, he said, insisted he was innocent.
De Luna was the 33rd Death Row inmate to whom Pickett ministered, and in the years that followed he would minister to 62 more. But this one stayed with him always: how De Luna claimed he was innocent, how he took longer to die than most inmates, how he tried to raise his head from the gurney and speak to Pickett before the lethal injection left him lifeless.
"When I saw him die," Pickett said, "part of me died too."
The experience forced him to ask a question he says he still can't answer: Do the innocent die differently than the guilty?
Works Cited
Possley, Maurice, and Steve Mills. "Chicago Tribune: EXECUTED TEXAS MAN WAS LIKELY INNOCENT." Death Penalty Information Center. 27 June 2006. Web. 17 Feb. 2011.
Youtube Video