What we did and how we did it

·     We decided to inform the public about lethal injection in America and to inspire the public to discuss the issue of lethal injection in America.

·     We decided to reflect on the following three issues of lethal injection:

·     Does lethal injection violate the U.S. Constitution’s Eight Amendment ban on “cruel and unusual punishment”? Why or why not?

·     Is lethal injection humane? Why or why not?

·     Why does American society continue to seek more humane methods of execution?

·     We created a blog website to organize the information and to provide a platform for voting and community discussion

·     We individually took responsibility for different areas of information – issue and importance, history, procedure, practice, abolition, retention, discussion, action, reflection/synthesis – and we each posted our information

·     We each took responsibility for project requirements as they came along (e.g. website, video interviews, status updates, pictures, flyers, Powerpoint presentation, paper, Spanish section)

·     We interviewed abolitionist Bryan McCann from Campaign to End the Death Penalty – Austin and retentionist Nicholas Prelosky from the Young Conservatives of Texas – University Chapter about the above issues of lethal injection; we created a video presentation of the interviews; we uploaded the videos to Vimeo.com; and we posted the video on our blog

·     We surveyed 110 UT students about the issues of lethal injection and posted the results on the blog

·     We synthensized the information from an objective P.O.V.

·     We advertised the blog to generate traffic to the site by campus flyers, Facebook event, emails, phone calls, and direct contact; we encouraged community members to comment and vote about the issue at http://utdeathpenalty.wordpress.com/discussion

·     We summarized and translated the site information into Spanish and encouraged Spanish speakers to respond

Due to the verdict of the case, we will likely continue to see the use of lethal injection across the nation.  If it is not unconstitutional, then the states that use lethal injection will probably continue to use it.  Kentucky especially will continue to use it since this case challenged their use of it.

The case however could have future impact on death penalty cases due to the opinion of Justice John Paul Stevens.  He expressed for the first time that he does not support the death penalty.  The more justices that don’t support the death penalty could mean anything. What is the future of the death penalty?

Related article:

http://www.oyez.org/cases/2000-2009/2007/2007_07_5439/

Warren McCleskey, a black man, was convicted of murdering a police officer & two counts of armed robbery in Georgia. He argued that a study proved that the burden of the death penalty in Georgia was to some extent based on the race of the victim & the accused. They study established that black defendants who kill whites are most likely to receive the death penalty in the state. The question aroused was if the study proved that McCleskey’s sentence violated the 8^th and 14^th Amendments. Since the Court could not prove that discrimination had existed in this particular trial, there was no constitutional violation. This trial has been used to show the government’s denial of having equal protection of the laws to all races. The Supreme Court must now show a discriminatory purpose as to why the government used the law in the first place.

Related article: 

http://www.oyez.org/cases/1980-1989/1986/1986_84_6811/

Greetings! Welcome to our blog!

We are a group of five UT Austin student taking a course titled Capital Punishment in America, a  sociology course such topics as ethical theories, the history of capital punishment in America, the practice of capital punishment, arguments for and against, and related U.S. Supreme Court (SCOTUS) cases.

The purpose of this website is to inform the public about lethal injection in America and to inspire the public to reflect on and share their views about the death penalty in America.

We want you to have an informed opinion about lethal injection in America. We also encourage you to engage in lively discussion to understand the nature of capital punishment in America. We hope you find this website helpful.

We invite all to contribute!

Coker v. Georgia challenged the Eighth Amendment, asking whether it was constitutional to sentence someone to the death penalty for rape. While already serving sentences for murder, rape, kidnapping, and aggravated assault, Coker escaped, broke into a woman’s house, raped her and stole her car. When found, he was charged with rape and aggravated robbery. He was given the death penalty for two reasons: the rape was committed by a person with prior convictions for capital felonies and the rape was committed in the course of committing another capital felony—the armed robbery. At the time, the U.S. government largely restricted the death sentence to criminals who killed others. Coker v. Georgia tested the proportionality of the death sentence as an appropriate punishment for other crimes. In this case, the Court noted that nearly all states at that time declined to impose such a harsh penalty, with Georgia being the only state that authorized death for the rape of an adult woman. Because rape did not involve the taking of another human life, the Court found the death penalty excessive “in its severity and revocability.”

Since the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that the punishment of death is “grossly disproportionate” to the crime of rape, it is likely the death penalty will only apply to acts of murder. Even though historically rape has been considered a capital offense, the ruling of Coker v. Georgia implies that the punishment of death is unconstitutional for any crime that does not involve the taking of another human life. Coker v. Georgia is significant because it narrows the death penalty for crimes of death, and establishes the “proportionality” standard of capital sentencing (i.e. “the punishment should be proportional to the crime”).

Related article:

http://www.oyez.org/cases/1970-1979/1976/1976_75_5444/

After a moratorium on executions in the U.S. from the Furman v. Georgia (1972) ruling, which suspended executions in the U.S. because of the “arbitrary, capricious and wonton nature” of its administration, the Supreme Court upheld the death penalty again in the case of Gregg v. Georgia (1976). In this case the U.S. Supreme Court focused on capital-sentencing structure of Georgia, holding that the new Georgia system provided guidance to jurors and appellate review. In this case, the SCOTUS asked, “Is the death penalty in America ‘cruel and unusual’?” and in a 7-2 ruling, held that the death penalty is not unconstitutional (“cruel and unusual”) as long as the Georgia criminal justice system provided guidance to jurors and appellate review, procedures to remedy the arbitrariness of the death penalty administration. Following the ruling, states began administering the death penalty again.

The most immediate implication of Gregg v. Georgia is that the death penalty is constitutional, not “cruel and unusual,” as long as its not administered in an arbitrary manner. Since Gregg v. Georgia, over 1000 condemned prisoners have been executed, and currently 3400 convicts sit on death row in America. Since the ruling, statistics now show that the death penalty does not deter and the death penalty does not serve as a form of retribution for the victims’ families, directly contradicting the reasoning of the majority opinion. Finally, the proportion of non-whites to white on death row has actually risen from 50% in pre-Furman years to approximately 54% today, implying that the system may still be racially biased.

In short, while the ruling of the U.S. Supreme Court in Gregg v. Georgia may have determined the death penalty to be constitutional because of state procedural safeguards to protect individuals against arbitrary administration, social scientific data and personal testimony suggest that the death penalty does not deter crime, does not server as retribution or closure for the victims’ families, and is still class and race biased, suggesting arbitrary administration.

Related article:

http://www.oyez.org/cases/1970-1979/1975/1975_74_6257/