The charges were essentially trumped up, but Socrates was a controversial figure in the city. Also, his behavior at the trial did not make the jury very happy. The jury first voted on his guilt or innocence, and that vote was pretty close, but the majority voted that he was guilty. Then, he was given an opportunity to suggest a punishment, and his speech at that point apparently angered many of the jurors. Many of those who had initially voted for his innocence now voted for capital punishment.His suggestions for punishment included: being awarded a pension from the government for performing a public service and paying a very small fine.
Michael Rea March 22, 2011 Koch vs. Bruck "Is capital punishment an adequate and necessary form of payback for the crime of murder? And will it prevent the occurrence of future murders? These are the vital issues argued by Edward I. Koch in his article, "The Death Penalty is Justice," and David Bruck's "No Death Penalty." In my opinion, Koch is able to ideally show the need for capital punishment, while Bruck is ineffective at justifying his stance that the death penalty is an unsuitable punishment for the crime of murder." In "Death and Justice: How Capital Punishment Affirms Life", readers view the opinions toward the death penalty in today's world.
In “Just lather, that’s all”, the barber has a lot of chance to kill Captain Torres but he didn’t. This is because he thought if he kills him he will also become cruel like Captain Torres. War is a sad stuff so many people were died in the war. Actually,
Presuppositions • The ideas and values that the author discusses are different from the ideas and values of America; however they are not that much different from that of developing nations. For example, in the Middle East many people are killed as a result of religious and ethnic differences. • In 1792 the murders believed that they were just in killing innocent people under the assumption that they would aid Prussia in the invasion of France. However, I find this questionable because they acted on their assumptions which led to the death of many innocent people. I believe that innocent people with out a fair trial or without valid evidence.
Not only did he take the lives of three innocent people, but he also harmed dozens of others in his terrorizing acts. I believe that Kaczynski deserved the highest possible punishment, which in my opinion is life in prison because spending a lifetime in prison is worse then being killed and taken away from the misery. Kaczynski said he did not want to live a long life and that he “would rather get the death penalty then spend the rest of his life in prison” (“Selected Journalism by Stephen J. Dubner”). Not only do I think life in prison is a worse punishment for the criminal, but I also do not believe in the death penalty because people should not have the right to kill others no matter what the circumstance is. Kaczynski currently remains in the Supermax prison and will go down in history as one of the most terrorizing criminals of all
Johnathan believed his way to earn benefits was reasonable. However, The Securities and Exchange Commission(S.E.C) claims that Johnathan was guilty because of the way he got benefits in stock market broke the law. Johnathan and the SEC settled in the case("2000-125"), and his guilt was therefore never determined. They sued Johnathan for stock fraud (“33-7891”). About this case, There is a argument among
But if surviving family members do not agree on the death penalty? Kathy Garcia an expert on traumatic grief whose nephew was murdered and who founded the Center for Traumatic Grief addresses this problem “When family members have differing views on capital punishment, the introduction of the possibility of a capital charge can split family members at the very time they need each other most. I know families who still do not speak to each other because of the wedge driven between them by fighting over that choice.” Families can be ruined in the time where family is most important. Like the public families have different thoughts on the death penalty dad says yes on the sentence mom says no when dealing with someone life is a very serious choice. Live or die how can anyone choose, the human nature of revenge kicks in and people say that they must die for what they did but on the other some people say if they die how does that make them any
“Different prosecutors in the state have different attitudes,” Tidmarsh said. “The arbitrariness in that sense of the death penalty is, to me, stunning. It’s not the quality of the act [that determines whether someone is put to death] … In many circumstances, it is the quality of the person who decides whether or not to seek the death penalty.” The judicial system deludes all involved to believe they are not responsible for putting someone to death, Tidmarsh
In order to avoid the death penalty, the defense tried to have Chase found guilty of second degree murder, which would result in a life sentence. Their case hinged on Chase's history of mental illness and the lack of planning in his crimes, evidence that they were not premeditated. On May 8 the jury found Chase guilty of six counts of first degree murder. The defense asked for a clemency hearing, in which a judge determined that Chase was not legally insane; Chase was sentenced to die in the gas chamber. Waiting to die, Chase became a feared presence in prison; the other inmates (including several gang members), aware of the graphic and bizarre nature of his crimes, feared him, and according to prison officials, they often tried to convince Chase to commit suicide, too fearful to get close enough to him to kill him themselves.
Death Penalty Policy has been aggressive since it was released. Surely, wrongful executions happen, which definitely arouses the protest of the citizens. But it is unfair to blame any death on an executioner because he is just a person who carries out a death sentence ordered by legal authority. As wrongful execution is a miscarriage of justice, people should calm down and think rationally before committing judging on