Claire Griffiths Dr.

Marrone History Grade 10 Due: Wednesday, October 23rd 2013

WH D!D "H# MO$%"O$!&M O' "H# &(# O) C%*!"%+ *&'!(HM#'" H%**#' !' "H# &'!"#D ("%"#( !' 1,-2 %'D WH W%( !" +%"#$ $#!'("%"#D !' 1,-./
!. !ntroduction It might seem surprising to many that the United States, paragon of freedom and equal rights, remains the only western country to still employ capital punishment. Before analysing why the moratorium was instated and later disregarded, one must first define the terms within the question itself. A moratorium is a legally authorized period of delay in the performance of a legal obligation or a waiting period set by an authority. Capital unishment, or the death penalty, is the legally authorized !illing of someone as punishment for a crime. "o answer the thesis question, I will e#amine why capital punishment is so contro$ersial, what caused the moratorium on capital punishment in %&'( in the United States and why in %&') capital punishment was reinstated. Also, I will touch on the first use of capital punishment after the moratorium, which ended with the !illing of *ary *ilmore by the Utah firing squad in %&''. It was difficult to find unbiased sources since many authors construct their boo!s or papers based on their own ideals, where some state that capital punishment is arbitrary murder while others argue that it is necessary. "he reason the moratorium on the use of capital punishment was instated in %&'( was because the Supreme Court found the specific laws, by which capital punishment was applied, to be +cruel and unusual punishment, and unconstitutional. In %&'), capital punishment was reinstated since the Supreme Court found the way the laws were originally written, rather than the actual concept, to be the +cruel and unusual punishment., "he reinstatement of capital punishment was also a direct result of the Gregg v. Georgia case, where *eorgia, "e#as and -lorida proposed new laws gi$ing their courts wider digression in applying the death penalty, which were accepted by the Supreme court. !!. $ele0ant 1ac23round Between %&)' and %&'(, the U.S. had a $oluntary moratorium on e#ecutions as the Supreme Court tac!led the issue. "he public debated and questioned the deterrence, public safety, sentencing equality, the e#ecution of innocents, the high cost, and the arbitrary !illings of capital punishment. "hese differing $iews helped lead the Supreme Court to temporarily abolish capital punishment in %&'(. .ater in %&'), they decided to remo$e the moratorium. An incredibly contro$ersial topic to this day, capital punishment has been abolished in many countries around the world but still remains acti$e in the United States of America. !!!. #0aluation of sources /hile I had a large $ariation of sources that a multifaceted issue requires, one article that I found incredibly helpful was the 0eath enalty Information Center1s +2istory of the 0eath enalty,, originating from the 0eath enalty Information Center website. "he purpose of this article was to demonstrate the long and contentious history of the death penalty. It showed statistically how popular it was in the United States, the origins of capital punishment, the abolitionist mo$ement and most importantly, the constitutionality of capital punishment in the United States. "his source is $aluable since it is an unbiased source, not intending to con$ince you that any side is good but simply to educate

you on capital punishment in the United states. It was written with an accumulation of many sources, which pro$ides a broader understanding and less biased $iew of capital punishment. Since it was written in (3%%, many years after the moratorium, it could initially be seen as a limitation but, in fact, it increases the source1s $alue. Because there are more studies and information on capital punishment a$ailable, more ha$e been included in the article. "he limitation is that it is not a primary source, it is a tertiary source, or an accumulation of primary and secondary sources. "he other source that I found to be a great aide to my paper was an incredibly informati$e paper I found on 4S"56 entitled +7urder and Capital unishment in the 8$ol$ing Conte#t of the ost9 -urman 8ra, written by 6uth 0. eterson and /illiam C. Bailey. "his paper was published by the 5#ford Uni$ersity ress, which demonstrates that this is an e#tremely reliable source. :ot only was the paper reliable but the information was $aluable, informati$e and well written. "he purpose of this source is to in$estigate capital punishment after the Furman era. A limitation of this paper is that both of the authors are from American Uni$ersities, so they could be biased towards their own country and include only their own $iews pertaining to their state and country. Although the article pro$ides the necessary information from before the Furman trial so that we can understand the entirety of the article, another limitation is that it focusses mainly on the period after %&'(. !4. %nalysis 5ara3ra5h 1:/hy was the moratorium on capital punishment instated in %&'(; "here was already a $oluntary moratorium, which started in %&)', but it was only in %&'( that the Supreme Court $oted for an actual moratorium. "he Supreme Court ruled then that the death penalty systems that were in place were unconstitutional and $iolated the 8ighth Amendment<s prohibition on +cruel and unusual, punishments as well as the -ourteenth Amendment on due trial. In Furman v. Georgia 408 U.S. 238:, the U.S. Supreme Court declared in a monumental decision, decided by a =9> $ote, that capital punishment, as it was practiced, was a discretionary punishment and thus unconstitutional under the ?th and %>th Amendments. +"he Supreme Court acted in %&'(, ruling that capital punishment as applied in the United States was administered arbitrarily and so was cruel and unusual., @6imer, :ew Aor! "imesB. "he Supreme Court decided that the death penalty was unconstitutional because it could only be gi$en on the recommendation of a Cury. "hat encouraged defendants to wai$e their right to a Cury trial to ensure they would not recei$e a death sentence, thus depri$ing them of the %>th Amendment guarantee of due process and ma!ing the laws for the death penalty unconstitutional. It was also argued that it was unconstitutional to ha$e a person1s guilt and their sentence determined in one trial with one set of deliberations. 4. %nalysis 5ara3ra5h 2: /hy did the moratorium end thus reinstating capital punishment in %&'); In response to the Supreme Court1s decision in %&'( that the capital punishment laws were unconstitutional, many states changed their death penalty systems and laws. -our years later in the %&') case Gregg v. Georgia, the Court reaffirmed the death penalty as constitutional. "he ten9year moratorium on e#ecutions ended on 4anuary %', %&'', with the e#ecution of *ary *ilmore by firing squad in Utah.+As history was soon to show, many states quic!ly began to formulate death penalty statutes to meet the Court1s obCections., @ etersonDBailey, 'B In %&') Gregg v. Georgia 428 U.S. 153: "he Court held that *eorgia<s new capital punishment procedures, which ga$e *eorgia1s courts wider discretion in applying the death penalty and established the new +bifurcated, system, in which a first trial determines guilt or innocence of the accused and a second trial determines their punishment, were constitutional and in accordance with the ?th and %>th Amendment. @2istory of the 0eath enalty, 0eath enalty Information CenterB "he main reasons that the moratorium ended are e#plained in the following quote. +In addition to sentencing guidelines, two other procedural reforms were appro$ed by the Court in Gregg.... the practice of automatic appellate re$iew of con$ictions and sentence. "he final

procedural reform from Gregg was proportionality re$iew, a practice that helps the state to identify and eliminate sentencing disparities. "hrough this process, the state appellate court can compare the sentence in the case being re$iewed with other cases within the state, to see if it is disproportionate., @2istory of the 0eath enalty, 0eath enalty Information CenterB /ith these changes the laws could then be deemed constitutional by the Supreme Court. 0uring the four year moratorium support for capital punishment increased across the U.S. Because people fa$ored the death penalty, states were pushed to submit new laws so that it could be reinstated. 0uring an inter$iew with C::, when as!ed why the moratorium unra$eled in %&'),8$an 7andery said, E"hey1re @"he Supreme CourtB not elected but they feel that they are answering to people.E Since the people supported capital punishment again, the Court might ha$e been slightly influenced by them. "he states also wanted to be able to use the death penalty again because crime rates were increasing. +6ising crime rates accounted for mounting political support for it., @6imer, :ew Aor! "imesB 4!. Conclusion: I still do not understand why so many people thin! that the death penalty is necessary. It does not deter murder. In fact, as shown in the following quote, states with the death penalty normally ha$e a higher murder rate or the same as abolitionist states. +6ather, when neighboring death penalty and abolitionist states were contrasted, murder rates tended to be higher in the former Curisdictions, or at about the same le$el in the two types of states., Also, I find that !illing people for ha$ing !illed people is $ery hypocritical and so I would li!e to inter$iew people in the future who support the death penalty to see why it is that they ta!e this position. 5ther future areas of research could include the cases of innocent people who were wrongfully !illed by capital punishment, and how biased the death sentence is. 6e$erend 4esse 4ac!son argues that if you are a minority you ha$e a higher chance of recei$ing the death sentence than a white person for the same crime. In conclusion, the reason that in %&'), the moratorium on capital punishment ended was because the Supreme Court ne$er ruled that capital punishment itself was unconstitutional in %&'(, only the laws pertaining to it. So in the case Gregg v. Georgia, -lorida, *eorgia and "e#as changed their laws to include the followingF sentencing guidelines for the Cury, bifurcated trials, and automatic appellate re$iew, which made capital punishment constitutional and ended its moratorium. 1!1+!OG$%*H : 4S"56 ArticlesF 7urder and Capital unishment in the 8$ol$ing Conte#t of the ost9-urman 8ra Author@sBF 6uth 0. eterson and /illiam C. Bailey SourceF Social -orces, Gol. )), :o. H @7ar., %&??B, pp. ''>9?3' ublished byF 5#ford Uni$ersity ress Stable U6.F httpFDDwww.Cstor.orgDstableD(='&='= . AccessedF %)D%3D(3%H 3?F3%

"he Changing :ature of 0eath enalty 0ebates Author@sBF 7ichael .. 6adelet and 7arian 4. Borg SourceF Annual 6e$iew of Sociology, Gol. () @(333B, pp. >H9)% ublished byF Annual 6e$iews Stable U6.F httpFDDwww.Cstor.orgDstableD((H>H) . AccessedF %>D%3D(3%H %(F%( "rying to Understand America1s 0eath enalty System and /hy /e Still 2a$e It "he Contradictions of American Capital unishment by -ran!lin 8. IimringJ Beyond 6epair; America1s 0eath enalty by Stephen . *ar$eyJ Kansas CharleyF "he Story of a %&th Century Boy 7urderer by 4oan 4acobs BrumbergJ Ill. *o$ernor1s Comm1n on Capital unishment by *o$ernor1s Commission on Capital unishment 6e$iew byF "homas -. *eraghty "he 4ournal of Criminal .aw and Criminology @%&'H9B, Gol. &>, :o. % @Autumn, (33HB, pp. (3&9 (H? ublished byF :orthwestern Uni$ersity Stable U6.F httpFDDwww.Cstor.orgDstableDH>&%H3? . AccessedF %'D%3D(3%H %(F%% Inter$iewsF 6imer, Sara. ESupport for a 7oratorium In 8#ecutions *ets Stronger.EThe New or! Times. "he :ew Aor! "imes, H% 5ct. (333. /eb. (3 5ct. (3%H. /ebsites ArticlesF E art IF 2istory of the 0eath enalty.E "eath #ena$t% &n'ormation (enter. :.p., n.d. /eb. %? 5ct. (3%H.