The Death Penalty : A Critical Review of Effectiveness and Equity

Since the execution of Captain George Kendall in 1608, the death penalty has been one of the most debated political issues in contemporary United States history. The capital punishment debate often centers on the usefulness to society. A recurring and pressing question in this debate is; how to best measure the effectiveness of the death penalty and its impact on society? Obviously, if the ultimate goal is to put a person to death then the death penalty, once carried out, is quite effective. However, one would reasonably assume that punishing criminals will have other benefits and even drawbacks. For example, capital punishment may serve as an effective deterrence to future acts of violence or decrease the cost of punishing criminals. Another issue which arises in this debate is the criteria used to select candidates for the death penalty. Obviously, there are clear and well defined criteria used to determine eligibility for the death penalty as prescribed by state laws. The problem here is that the death penalty, far too often, is sought in capital murder cases against defendants from poorer and often politically and socially marginalized sectors of society than more affluent ones. This clearly raises the issue of equity in administration. Finally, one can not negate the fact that once administered the death penalty can not be revoked. Corrective actions can not be taken when and if information surfaces which exonerates an individual of a crime. The purpose of this assessment is to determine the effectiveness of the death penalty. This evaluation will focus primarily on data from Michigan and Texas and will center on cost effectiveness, deterrence, equity in the candidacy process and finally will revisit the constitutionality debate