Callaway 1

Reagan Callaway
Oberg
English 11
15 October 2014
Death Penalty: The Need for a Death Penalty Moratorium
The death penalty has always been a topic of large debate. Some people are pro death
penalty others are against it, and numerous are even undecided or in between. Not only do people
argue over whether it should or should not be allowed, but also many of the details or smaller
topics of the overall theme such as: if life in prison or execution costs more, if the death penalty
deters crime, whether it is constitutional or not, etc. One of the greatly disputed arguments in this
subject is if the death row causes irrevocable mistakes. Although various may argue that the
death penalty does more good than bad, it has created many issues dealing with the innocence or
guilt of a convict, this includes: how many are put on death row and later proved innocent, how
life in prison could lower the amount of irreversible faults, and in what way death row is morally
unjust.
A significant number of those put on death row are later proved innocent because new
evidence or information appears that does not back up the previous conviction. Since the
reinstatement of the modern death penalty, 87 people have been freed from death row because
they were later proven innocent; this means that 87 innocent people could have been put to
death if they had not discovered this evidence until later (Feingold). 1 in 7 of those put on death
row will later be proven innocent. This statistic shows how over 10% of those who, by their

Callaway 2

conviction, are supposed to be put to death are actually suffering for a crime they will later be
proven innocent for. The consequences of the death penalty are life and death and therefore the
decisions cannot be made lightly.
Life in prison is a more efficient and morally acceptable way of dealing with those who
commit crimes in the highest degree. The majority of people do not want to go to prison and the
chance for the sentence of life in a penitentiary would deter most from committing the crimes
that deserve this conviction. Not only would this scare off a high amount of those who were
considering a crime, but it can also help the innocent who may be condemned. When dealing
with death, those making the decisions need to remember that it is a permanent choice and there
is no room for mistakes. The risks that are taken when sentencing those found guilty to death can
be shown by a situation that happened in Illinois: on January 31, 2000, the State of Illinois
suspended executions because 13 people on death row were found to be actually innocent of the
crime for which they were convicted due, in part, to recent developments in DNA testing (New
York State Defenders Association). This time period is a period of constant development, this
includes development in instruments used to find criminals; the technology that is invented now
is not as effective as the technology that will be developed in 10 years. If a man or woman is
sentenced to death and a couple of years later an improvement or creation provides evidence of
their innocence the punishment can be revoked. Individuals that have evidence against them and
are sentenced to life in prison have the chance that if new technology is created that proves their
innocence instead of them already having been executed, the punishment they were given can be
withdrawn.
Because of the death penalty many innocent peoples lives are drastically changed for the
worse, this shows how this sentence is morally intolerable. Not only do those who are innocent

Callaway 3

and convicted of a crime that results in the punishment of execution have to suffer, but also the
loved ones of those who are sentenced. The innocent parties that are wrongly accused have to
live believing that they may be killed for a crime they did not commit. A hypothetical situation
can show how the innocent convict and his or her loved ones could be affected.
A man named Seth has evidence against him for several murders in the 1st degree. Seth hires a
lawyer, insists on his innocence, and does everything in his power for the trial to end with him
declared not guilty, but the end result is the decision is the opposite of what he hoped for. Not
only does Seth now have to deal with the thought of being executed, but now his loved ones do
too. Some of his family and friends believed him, while others looked at the evidence against him
and lost their trust in him. Not only has those who convicted him put an innocent man through
this terrible situation, but they have also put those who love him through the same condition and
caused a guiltless man to lose many of his family and friends because of their conviction. If their
fault is caught in time then Seth could possibly recover from this, not without injury, but the
error could be at least partially reversible. However, if the mistake is not noticed in time and the
man is put to death, then it can never be at all repaired.
Because of the uncertainty of those who are convicted and put on death row the death penalty
moratorium must be implemented. Theres absolutely no margin for error when it comes to the
death penalty and the mistakes that have been made in the past show that at this moment there is
a margin for error, this is more than enough reason for the death penalty to be revoked (Ryan).
The amount of those on death row that are later proved innocent is too high to be sure
that mistakes are not being made, life in prison gives the chance that if evidence comes later
those convicted do not have to finish punishment they do not deserve, and sentencing innocent

Callaway 4

people to death is a great and immoral injustice even if caught before the execution. Although
this topic is widely debated, a moratorium is certainly needed for the death penalty. Those that
are deciding for the lives of others cannot choose to put people to death, even if they appear
guilty at the time, if it is at all unsure considering death is an irrevocable punishment. It is
immoral for the death penalty to be in place with such risk, and therefore, life in prison is the
only choice that this country can have without immoral injustice.

Callaway 5

Sources:
Ryan, George. Democracy Now. December 27, 2000. Speech.
Feingold, Russ. National Death Penalty Moratorium Act of 2000. April 26, 2000. Speech.
The New York State Defenders Association, Board of Directors. Resolution Regarding a
Moratorium on the Death Penalty. July 25, 2002. Print.
The Purdue OWL. Purdue U Writing Lab, 2010. Web. October 23, 2014.
Death Penalty Walking. David Von Drehle. January 14, 2008. Print.