The reason for having a death penalty is to provide an approach to justice for the victims of murder. I use the phrase "an approach to justice" because even if a murderer were to be struck dead one second after the murder, that would not provide justice for the victim and the victim's family. The murderer, even when executed, always comes out ahead. The murderer always gets what he wanted. The murderer wanted his victim dead and has gotten what he wanted. He has gotten what he wanted, even though he had no right to murder and his action was forbidden.
THE MURDERER HAD NO RIGHT TO GET WHAT HE WANTED. YET HE GOT WHAT HE WANTED.
The murder victim just wanted to live and did not get what she wanted, even though she had a right to live and society had promised her that she would be allowed to live. Usually she was also providing valuable benefits to society, as well as not harming anyone.
THE MURDER VICTIM HAD EVERY RIGHT TO GET WHAT SHE WANTED. YET SHE DID NOT GET WHAT SHE WANTED.
WHO IS AHEAD AT THIS POINT, THE MURDERER OR THE VICTIM?
Can the victim ever catch up with her murderer?
Is it just for the murderer to be better off than his victim?
Is it fair for the murderer to be better off than his victim?
Should we care about justice and fairness for the dead innocent victim?
Once the murderer kills his victim, does he become more important than his victim?
If not, than why is the murderer always treated better than his victim?
The murderer gains an unfair advantage over his victim the moment he begins to kill her. That is true even if he hasn’t already tortured her or raped her. After the victim dies, every second that the murderer lives, his unfair advantage over the victim is increased. That is the situation in a simple murder where the murder was done in a painless way. In such rare cases the murderer is given at least one fair trial, has appeals heard and then is given spiritual counseling and a last meal of his choice before his merciful execution. The victim had none of those things and has been dead for years before the murderer is executed. But the death penalty does provide the closest available approach to justice. Of course, many cases of capital murder are much worse than that, with the victim or victims being raped (sometimes many times by different rapists) and tortured, sometimes for hours or days, before a painful death. Then the victim's family has to go through a period of not knowing if their loved one is alive or dead. Then the victim's family has to relive the suffering of their loved one several times during the investigation, trial and appeals. If the murderer is not executed, the family members have to go through this for many years as the appeals and parole requests never stop. For an example, if you are mentally tough, go to the website below and read about 4 murders (Heather Muller was one victim) and one attempted murder in the same night. This is a transcript of the preliminary hearing testimony of the woman who survived that night. That woman was also infected with an incurable sexually transmitted disease by one of the murderers and has other permanent scars.
library.flawlesslogic.com/wichita_2.htmWHEN THE MURDERER IS EXECUTED YEARS AFTER THE MURDER, WHO WAS AHEAD AT THAT POINT, THE MURDERER OR THE VICTIM?
Is it good that the murderer’s unfair advantage over the victim has stopped increasing?
Bear in mind that, in many cases, the murderer further benefits over the victim by raping or torturing her or both. The cases of Anita Cobby, Mary Adlay, the Hi-Fi Shop murders and Wendy Offredo are instructive, just as a few of many examples. Those can all be easily found with a search of the web. In those cases, the murderers can repeatedly relive the pleasure of the rapes or torture. He can sit with other rapists and murderers in prison and they can share their fond memories of the pleasure they drew from their victims’ suffering. They can laugh and joke about how the victim begged not to be raped for the fourth or fifth time. They can swap stories about how their victims begged for their lives as they lay broken and bleeding. In one case a rape-murderer obtained the crime scene photographs of his victim to further increase his relived pleasures. Also in other cases, the murderer kills many victims. So, in such cases, the murderer gains even larger advantages over his victim or victims. In no case does the murderer ever suffer as much as his victims. In other cases the murderer hires other killlers from prison to kill others. A LWOP prisioner could hire people to kill witnesses and then appeal his case. If he gets as retrial, he would then go free because of a lack of witnesses.
There are also two beneficial side effects from adequate use of the death penalty; deterrence and prevention. When the death penalty is used, as many as 20 potential murderers are deterred from murdering for each additional execution. When a murderer is executed, he cannot kill again. Thousands of innocent victims have been killed by previously convicted murderers who were not executed for their first murder. No innocent victim has ever been killed by an executed murderer.
The DP also provides a benefit for the murderer, the opportunity for redemption. A murderer facing execution is given the benefit of a powerful incentive to review his past actions and seek the redemption of his soul. This was illustrated by Helen Prejean in her anti-DP book [
i][
Dead Man Walking/i].
I was against the DP for many years. Then I read about what happened to Amy Sue Seitz.
www.wtv-zone.com/LadyMaggie/php/AmySueStory.htmlNow that I have gained knowledge, learned wisdom and developed humility, I am for the death penalty. For justice, deterrence, incapacitation, obedience to God and salvation of the souls of murderers.
