Furman Vs Georgia Case

...

why death penalty violates the 8th amendment by giving juries the right to execute someone, whether is fair or

not.

Although it is true, that occasionally innocent people may be sentenced to death, the new death penalty procedure prevents these sentencing from occurring. These new laws were creating using the Furman vs. Georgia as a precedent to prevent discrimination and arbitrarily. If Furman was to go on trial while these new laws, His chances of getting sentenced to death penalty would be scarce. Because of these new laws innocent

Furman vs Georgia Case 4

people who have been sentenced to death, were not executed. For example in the Gary Beeman trial he was accused of murder. He maintains claiming he was innocent and that the actual killer was an escaped prisoner who testified as the main witness at the first trial. He was sentenced to death but was granted an automatic appeal. “On retrial five witnesses testified that they heard Luizzo confess to the murder and Beeman was acquainted.” This is an example of how automatic appeals can actually clarified false testimonies. In fact it gives the jury a better chance to particularize the criminal and the crime in more depth. With the new laws the death penalty remains constitutional, giving everyone equal treatment when committing a crime.

Opponents of capital punishment find it absurd that society believes there is a solution to the ethical questions of how to enforce capital punishment on incarcerated inmates. The problem reaches far beyond the method of execution. One of the areas of alarm, and that needs to be, addressed is the cost-effectiveness of capital punishment. Those opposed to capital punishment believe that the majority of society would be disgusted to discover how much of their tax dollars is spent to support the death sentence. In a sluggish economy all government programs such as that of capital punishment and the death sentence need to be evaluated to determine if the cost-effective benefits are what they promised to be.

Explanation as to why I agree

I would have to say that I agree with the results of the case after reading and trying to understand the case. McCleskey tried to use the Baldus study as evidence in his appeal. The court took the Baldus study into consideration. The Baldus study basically just takes the cases that have duplicate facts. When the cases have the duplicate facts Baldus tries to turn one into a racial fact. Normally, I would not have agreed but in this case I saw what the justice system was dealing with in facts.

Furman vs Georgia Case 5

Reference

U.S. Supreme Court. (2015). Retrieved from http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/scripts/getcase.pl?

court=US&vol=481&invol=279 on May 29, 2016.