FREE ESSAY ON CAPITAL PUNISHMENT

CAPITAL PUNISHMENT

Martin Ferretti
3/5/00
Capital Punishment
Capital punishment was established in this country many years ago to punish those 
members of society which have committed horrendous crimes against fellow citizens and in
a 
way to give the family of the victims a sense of peace. Various forms of capital and
corporal 
punishment exist around the world and in most cases are very closely related to the
religion of 
the nation. I believe that capital punishment is an atrocious institution and should only
be used in 
those very few cases where rehabilitation is not an option because it does not help the
criminal 
become a member of society. It should be used only for those who kill just for the act of
killing 
and for no other reason. The killer must be proved guilty beyond a doubt for this
punishment to 
be used, and many times we find people on death row who are totally innocent of the
crimes 
which have sent them to their deaths. Something is wrong with the justice system and it
should 
be changed. 
Around the country there is a serious deficit in funds for our schools and courts which 
obviously shows in the crimes rates around the nation. Lack of funds at schools, leads to
kids
finding a way of living on the streets, by stealing, dealing drugs, and sometimes
killing. Lack of 
funds in the justice system gives us another problem. Many people who are innocent are
sent to 
jail for years suffering for a crime they did not commit, and in the worst cases they are
sent to 
their deaths. The law of this country is that everyone will receive fair and equal
representation. 
Now, when someone is suspected of committing a crime, they are assigned a lawyer so that
they
may have their voice heard in front of the judge and jury and tried fairly. Is it fair
that most of 
these lawyers works over a thousand hours and in most cases get paid only around two
dollars?
What kind of lawyer would work for this amount of money? The justice system is so poorly

funded that it has no choice but to hire lawyers fresh out of college, or lawyers who can
get no 
other case because of reputation, and throw them into the system to defend a poor guy
with no 
other means of representation. Is it fair that the poor get such bad representation while
the rich 
may get away with crimes simply because they can afford to pay for the best lawyers?
Certainly 
not. To illustrate this point we must look at the case of Antonio James. He has been on
death row
at Angola Prison for nearly twenty years waiting for the death when he will walk down the

hallway and enter the death chamber. His death sentence had been previously postponed 
fourteen times and he was up for the next walk to the chamber. Mr. James had been in
trouble 
the law as a young child growing up in the ghettoes of the south, but one day he was with
the
wrong guy and totally not in the control of the situation. Shots were fired and in the
end, two 
people were killed, one two separate occasions. Antonio and two other men were arrested
and
tried for the robberies and murders but only Antonio went to jail for any significant
time and was 
sentenced to death. His partners in crime walked out almost free because they testified
that 
Antonio was the gunman on both occasions. Antonio went to jail and years later he got a
new 
lawyer, who discovered evidence that Antonio had not committed the murders. This kept 
Antonio alive for years until he was finally put to death. We then look at the case of
O.J. 
Simpson. Simpson, also African-American, was a popular football star. One day his ex-wife
and
her friend were murdered just outside of her home. Later Simpson was placed as the only
suspect 
and he gave the police and the American public plenty of evidence that he was guilty of
the 
crime. Simpson was found innocent despite the substantial evidence against him, but only

because he could afford the best lawyers that could be bought. So what are the
differences in the 
two cases? Both men were tried for murder, and both men were African-American, and yet
one 
walked free. The issue here is money. How could a judicial system that can be bought 
possibly be fair to all people? This country was founded on the words that "all men are
created 
equal" and yet we treat this phrase as if only all white men or all rich men are created
equal and 
this is not the case. If the judicial system is to work to its full extent then it should
be color blind; 
especially to the color green. We also find cases where white defendants get away with
crimes
simply because they were white. A good example of this is the recently resolved Diallo
case in 
the Bronx. If all or one of those officers were African-American or Hispanic, I'm not so
certain
the jury would have decided in the same way. Even though much work has been done to stop
racism there is still a long way to go before this country achieves the true equality
which Dr.
Martin Luther King and the civil rights movement dreamed of. Problems of the sort still
persist
throughout the country but in particular in the same. We must remember, however, that
racism
is not only a thing of the South. 
So how do we solve a problem as deep as this? We must find a way to revolutionize the
system. Every year, billions and billions of dollars are spent on military prowess and
flights into 
space, while our education and judicial systems suffer and are worsened. People want
quick 
answers so the government builds jails to get rid of all the "outcasts" of society, but
people don't
realize that this only causes further problems and further expenditure of tax dollars.
The only 
way to fix the judicial system is to start with schools. Properly funded schools with
good 
facilities, faculty, proper maintenance, and proper books have shown to give great
educations, 
but of course it all comes at a price. Institutions like Horace Mann and other prominent
private 
schools spend thousands more per student and it obviously shows in the education of the
child.
Even public schools such as those found in prominent neighborhoods such as Scarsdale, are

much better off than city schools simply because of property tax differences. I propose
that less 
is spent on military and space plans and more on education so that every child in the
country 
may have enough knowledge to compete in the work place. This competition would only
better
the economy in time. With a more educated population, the crime rate would inevitably go

down. The next step would be better funding of the judicial system. It is not fair that
poor 
defendants who cannot afford their own lawyer receive a sentence because their two dollar
an 
hour lawyer fell asleep during the hearings. Proper funding of courts would allow these
poor 
defendants to have a better chance of proving their innocence and that if they are guilty
that it 
may be proved beyond a doubt. Jails are being produced at an incredible rate because of
lack
of funding to schools, but people don't want to change this new institution because it
generates 
jobs in poor towns. We as the American people, must begin to look to the future of our
children
and grandchildren and not just to our own futures. If we do not attempt to change things
now,
how much harder will it be twenty or a hundred years from now to fix everything that has
been 
done. Legislative action should also be taken to ensure that proper procedures are being

followed. It took the civil rights movement years to get their point across, but they
finally did 
when the Supreme Court ordered desegregation of schools, buses, restaurants, etc. If a
state
did not comply, then the National Guard was sent in such as in Little Rock, Arkansas,
when 
the Governor refused to desegregate schools. The federal government tries to let each
state rule
itself as it says in the constitution, but there comes a time when if something is not
done 
correctly then some higher power has to take charge, and in this case that higher power
is the
federal government, and if it takes the army to get the point across then that is what
must be 
done. Heavy taxation policies such as those used when Yonkers refused to integrate its
school 
can also be put into place so that everyone may follow the laws. We call ourselves a
democratic
country but if the people cannot do what is best for the country then the government
should take
action. President John F. Kennedy once said that "the rights of every man are diminished
when 
the rights of one man are threatened". It is the duty of every American and every person
around
the world to look out for his/her neighbor. To quote a famous passage from the
Scriptures: "Am I
my brother's keeper?" The answer is yes. We are all held responsible for the way our
society
works. Especially in a democratic government which is supposed to be run for the people
and by
the people. The statistics show that our society is on a decline and we need to do
something 
soon. We must make America what it was meant to be and if it means making a sacrifice
then
that is what must be done. This is supposed to be the land of the free and the home of
the brave,
but what kind of freedom is there in a society where social mobility is nearly impossible
without
the aid of altruistic sources? For years people have come to America to follow their own
religion
without being persecuted, or to escape some kind of threat to themselves. Isn't it then
our duty 
to protect the weak and weary? America is the land of opportunity but what price must be
paid?
In order to make America truly what it stands for many things must be changed. The 
whole system must be changed from the inside out. More money needs to be dedicated to
educating the children and to provide proper resources to the court system. Police
departments
should be run the way they were meant to be. They should serve and protect, not kill the

innocent. Many holes need to be patched in the system but it requires a change in
attitude around 
the country in regards to race and class. We must stop thinking about finding quick
solutions and
we must begin to think about the long run, and find solutions that solve problems, not
create 
more. We live in a democracy and we have the right to decide where our tax dollars go.
The 
American public needs to make a stand on what's right before it's too late the politics
of the 
system finally cause it to crash. 
As Amadou Diallo's mother mentioned in an interview done by CNN, justice was not 
served in this case. Amadou Diallo was shot at forty-one times by four police officers
right 
outside his home in the Bronx because he seemed to fit the description of a wanted felon.
From 
the interviews I have seen and the articles I have read in newspapers, it seems to me
like this 
shooting was nothing but poor police work on the part of the officers. They claim that
Mr. Diallo 
waved an object that looked like a gun, later discovered to be his wallet, at them and
that act 
forced them to shoot Mr. Diallo. Certainly in the dark things may get distorted and one
might see 
something that is not there but it is the police officers' duty to differentiate between
reality and 
what appears to be and to take every precaution necessary to ensure that a life will not
be 
unnecessarily lost. This officers were part of a special crime unit and therefore that
fact should 
prove that they are especially trained to deal with these types of situations. Another
thing one 
might consider is that if Amadou Diallo's wallet was confused for a gun, how could the
officers 
possibly have any idea whether they had caught the right guy or not. They stated during
the trial 
that Mr. Diallo was standing just outside his door and that it was dark. It is certainly
possible that 
this was not the right man, and in this case it was not. So was racial profiling an issue
in this 
incident?
I don't believe that if one of the four officers were African-American it would have 
mattered in any way. If one of the officers had acted in such a careless manner as these
four did 
then the rest would more than likely have followed with the same reaction, and shot Mr.
Diallo. 
While the fact that all four officers involved were white seems to me irrelevant, it
seems to me 
like there indeed was some sort of racial profiling done. The description of the wanted
felon 
loosely fit that of Mr. Diallo's. What was the description? A tall, thin,
African-American with a 
short haircut? That description fits many people. If the police's job is to serve and
protect than 
police officers should be better trained to recognize criminals and they should be better
trained 
to deal with situations of this sort so that incidents like this don't occur again. Even
if one of 
those officers had been black, I think racial profiling would have occurred because while
Police 
Chief Howard Safir denies the NYPD's use of racial profiling, it seems evident in this
case and 
in many cases around the country that racial profiling is used heavily. 
The NYPD and other police departments around the country should be better instructed 
to deal with these kind of situations. The police officers should make sure that the
subject they 
have caught sight of is the right one. If the subject is in a dark area and can't be
identified, then 
every effort should be made to make that suspect come out and show him/herself. Another 
problem in the Diallo case is that the officers were probably not very psychologically
trained to 
deal with what occurred. Police work is very arduous work and it takes a lot out of a
person. 
Psychological testing should be made available to all officers to ensure their mental
well being 
so that when they have to make a decision very suddenly, that they can make the right
one. The 
NYPD is certainly one of the best in the country at what it does, but as shown in this
case more 
has to be done. Police officers cannot make these mistakes in identifying an suspect.
Shooting 
should be a last resort. If we cannot trust the police department to do their job than
who can we 
trust our lives to? Their responsibility is to serve and to protect, not to shoot
innocent people. 
Every effort should be made to ensure that justice is served and that other officers may
learn 
from this incident.