Don’t call us, we’ll call you

April 8, 2013

Psych. I’m gonna talk about the death penalty again.

I know no one requested a death penalty post, but this NY Times article profiling a case in which a less culpable defendant received the death penalty while his co-conspirators did not was screaming for a share. I think you all know my position: in short, our criminal justice system is far too messy, unfair, and inconsistent to impose an irreversible penalty. This article hit on some of the reasons why.

Does it not give pause when a judge reviews a death sentence and finds it legal, but still feels the need to rebuke the prosecutor for seeking the death penalty for someone who “even under the state’s theory, did not cause the physical death” of the victim? I sure hope so.



  1. Thanks for posting this. Very thought provoking.

    Comment by Emily — April 8, 2013 @ 10:11 pm

  2. One of the reasons I hate engaging intellectually in political and legal issues is that my ideals are so black and white and I struggle with the grey execution of rules and principles (or rules and principles that have become grey themselves). Especially when money becomes entangled. It bothers me that punishment is doled out so inconsistently—that is a sign that principles are not being regarded, or set appropriately. Whether the death penalty is used or not, it should be used consistently and according to strict principles, in my opinion. There is a definite need for reform in this area.

    Comment by Victoria — April 22, 2013 @ 3:01 pm

RSS feed for comments on this post. TrackBack URI

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

Blog at

%d bloggers like this: