The issue with philosophical justice is it shall always attempt to come out equally, most people see this as wrong, but not everyone will believe in such a system as that, while moral justice would be defined by what the majority sees as good or bad, and the majority are the people whom the legal system would apply to, considering they live in the area per which is being defined.
The death penalty is highly controversial subject with extraneous pros an cons. One major con in the death penalty is obviously the killing of innocent peoples. A major flaw in the judicial system leaves thousands of innocent people locked up awaiting death on death row. The use of forensics has helped innocent people be taken off death row in time to escape death, while others were not so lucky and only found innocent after the fact. This raises the argument that the system should not be defined by philosophical or moral justice because the killing of innocent people, regardless if they were convicted of a crime, is morally wrong. Philosophically, letting god sort them out, is just as wrong. God gives and takes life and any event in which a human takes life is morally wrong, and never just. Another immoral reason is since jails and prisons are so overpopulated due to drug offenders and many non violent criminals being thrown into the system, execution is a way to move them through it. Like meat in a grinder, humans are being thrown into the system, processed, and killed. I believe the legal system should be defined by pure justice, without a prefix. Justice needs to be sought out. In a country that claims innocent until proven guilty, the justice system should do everything within its power to prove that someone is guilty before taking it upon themselves to remove them from the earth. The death penalty does not only destroy one life, the every life that person has touched.