Resolved the death penalty process should be significantly shortened. ( on the federal level)
Debate Rounds (3)
This is a topic I feel very strongly about and have some strong views on.
The government pampers these people on death row who have been there for over ten years most of them.
My plan is that the offender if he strongly believes that he did not commit the crime that he will be able to hire a private investigator to research the crime. there will be a 5 year period where the investigator will have time to compile evidence at the end of those 5 years there will be another court date to decide the result of all the evidence. If in the event he did not commit the crime the government will reemberse him and he will be set free.
1) Appeals process.
Every case that results in a death penalty then begins to go through a number of appeals by the defendants lawyers demanding mandatory reviews to the sentencing, reviews to old evidence, appeals to higher courts, etc. All this takes quite sometime because in death penalty cases the attorneys must prove that the person about to be put on death row is 100% guilty and deserves to die, not just present enough evidence that implies the person in question is guilty and eligible for the death penalty....
As all of these appeals go on nature then takes its toll. Witnesses begin to lose details, evidence becomes lost, a new shard of evidence suggesting innocence may arise and cause the whole thing to start over, a lot can go awry. One of the biggest reasons that time spent on death row lasts so long is so that the law can go through all the hurdles and speed-bumps needed to prove 100% that the person on death row deserves to be there. Speeding up the process may eliminate the possibility of a truly innocent person being found innocent by a court and freed from jail.
2) New Evidence found
As I stated before, sometimes during the lengthy appeals process new technologies develop that may then turn up evidence suggesting that a person on death row is truly innocent. It could be anything from old camera footage to new DNA evidence that could show a person on death row may be innocent because then all the witnesses accounts have to be re-evaluated and arguments over how-did-that-get-there-if-he-was-here significantly extend the process of deciding the fate of a person on death row. New evidence doesnt guarantee the person is innocent, but the lawyers for the inmate will fight like Hell to prove that it does.
3) Materials needed for the killing
Its a minor issue in only some cases but it does extend the process. A majority of death row inmates are executed in ways that are not cheap. Its not like we can just toss a radio into a bathtub with water while the inmate is in it, the execution process requires the manufacturing of certain materials and chemicals that will be used in the process from private drug companies.
There was a recent episode in Texas where the recession forced a drug company to outsource overseas, the company's primary product they manufactured was the chemicals used in lethal injection in Texas death penalty's. The company outsourced to a plant in Italy, a country that is against the drug company. It was only until after the plant began functioning that the Italian government realized the purpose of the plant, so it was immediately shut down. Texas was left without the supplies needed for some of its executions and thus the time that inmates spent on death row were extended.
Several others sources showing that there is a shortage of chemicals used in lethal injections, and that these shortages extend time spent on death row
Lastly I will address the Pro's plan and the flaws it carries,
1) Almost all prisoners affirm that they are innocent so they will all do anything to try to avoid being on death row
2) Who pays for the investigator? The state or the prisoner? If its the state then taxpayer dollars are being wasted and if its the prisoner and he does not have enough funds then he wont get a voice at all
3) In 5 years some of the "evidence" that a single investigator has found may become compromised, lost, etc.
4) A private investigator, if corrupted enough, may try to plant evidence which in 5 years would certainly have to be examined
5) Would it be just one court date? just one? how could a single court date go through all the evidence and witness accounts and decide over the sentencing? the jury may die from boredom from how long that would take
6) Prisoners on death row are often found guilty of multiple haneous crimes and if they are found to be not guilty on the capital offense but are still guilty over other crimes then why would they be set free?
7) Why hire a private investigator to go through all the evidence found in the case? That would be inefficient because there would already be detectives and witnesses who found the evidence, presented it, defended it, etc. A private investigator would start from square one and the system would end up just going in circles instead of making process
8) What if this private investigator is inexperienced and ends up destroying evidence found and preserved a long time ago? a guilty man may end up going free
9) What if new technology comes out in the future that reveals evidence that DOES prove a mans guilt, but he has already been freed?
Ill end on this
The system takes a long time to execute criminals on death row because while they are waiting the courts are constantly re-evaluating evidence and testimony to guarantee if the man is guilty or innocent. Speeding up the process could potentially allow a guilty man to go free or an innocent man to be killed, so that is why the death penalty process should not be shortened.
Calmer621 forfeited this round.
Calmer621 forfeited this round.
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by Chrysippus 4 years ago
|Agreed with before the debate:||-||-||0 points|
|Agreed with after the debate:||-||-||0 points|
|Who had better conduct:||-||-||1 point|
|Had better spelling and grammar:||-||-||1 point|
|Made more convincing arguments:||-||-||3 points|
|Used the most reliable sources:||-||-||2 points|
|Total points awarded:||0||4|
Reasons for voting decision: Good arguments, Con. You're scaring away the new members...
You are not eligible to vote on this debate
This debate has been configured to only allow voters who meet the requirements set by the debaters. This debate either has an Elo score requirement or is to be voted on by a select panel of judges.