Timothy Mcveeigh Research Paper

I believe that if this was tried again that David Goodreau would still be found guilty. Only because when he confessed he knew certain things about the crime that ordinary people wouldn't known. There were defiantly problems with the investigation, Starting with the fact that the police didn't even peruse the murders of the two girls. Another problem with the investigation was that the police never really looked or found any evidence at the crime scenes. David Goodreau was sentenced to life in prison with out parole. I agree with the decision of him being sentenced for life. He killed two innocent people and was making an attempt on a third person. I think a rightful punishment is life in

6 in 10 americans favor the death penalty for convicted murderers.There is no question that killing another person is the most heinous crime that one can commit. Yes, most prisoners convicted in death row are murders but there has been cases where someone innocent has been wrongly executed. For example, of this failure is the case of Roosevelt Green, who was executed in Georgia for the kidnapping and murder of a young woman. According to author David Bruck, "Green swore that his companion shot her . . . after Green had left and that he knew nothing about the murder. Green 's claim was supported by a statement his accomplice made to a witness". Roosevelt Green was executed despite witness testimony that he had nothing to do with the murder of

Whether one agrees or disagrees with the idea that a government has the ability to punish their citizens with death, it is hard to argue that our judiciary system is capable of wielding such power. The flaws that unarguably plague the US justice system make it impossible for our government to fairly distribute and regulate death as a form of punishment.

Death Penalty is a very ominous punishment to discuss. It is probably the most controversial and feared form of punishment in the United States. Many are unaware, but 31 of the 52 states have the Death penalty passes as an acceptable punishment. In the following essay, I will agree and support Stephen Nathanson's statement that "Equality retributivism cannot justify the death penalty." In the reading, "An Eye for an Eye?", Nathanson gives objections to why equality retributivism is morally acceptable for the death penalty to be legal. The first objection is that the death penalty does not "provide a measure of moral desert" (Nathanson). For the second, Nathanson states "it does not provide an adequate criterion for determining appropriate levels of punishment." The main objection is an "eye for an eye", or Lex talionis, and I believe it fails to support equality retributivism and creates punishments that are morally unacceptable. There is no way that

Even though it is true that taking the life of another is not right, it is even truer that the punishment should fit the crime. The death penalty is an exercise of justice that promotes retribution for crime and moral punishment for those who choose to take human life. Also, it prevents society 's worse offenders from re-offending, and it provides justice for the victims whose lives were cut short without a second thought. To better understand why capital punishment is a justifiable act, Kant 's theory gives a clear and logical understanding of the eye for an eye approach. Additionally the utilitarian view also explains why capital punishment is justifiable in regards to comfort for the victim 's family and prevention of re-offending.

Although the death penalty in Texas costs about three times more than life in prison without parole, it is reserved as the punishment of robbing another of their rights to life, freedom, and safety (Deathpenaltyinfo). It is a valid question to wonder why we should spare the life of one, opting to provide for all of their basics needs when they without question robbed another of their rights to life, freedom, and safety through murder or another cruel action. The case of Andre Thomas raised questions of whether or not the mentally incompetent should be eligible for the death penalty. Thomas murdered two children and the wife he was separated from, maintaining that the act was dictated by God. Statements by Thomas conveyed that he knew that what he had done was wrong after he had after committing the crime. However, it is unclear that he knew this while committing the murder. This, along with self-injury that included the removal of both his eyeballs, built a case against sentencing Thomas to death on the basis that he was mentally incompetent. His attorneys argued that his execution would violate the clause of the eighth amendment that prohibits cruel and unusual punishment. Prosecutors in this case would claim that his history with drugs and alcohol put him in this state, rather than a true mental illness (TX Tribune). Nevertheless, the fact still stands that he suffered from self-injury while incarcerated, and consequently he was not under the influence at that moment. In the case of Andre Thomas, I believe that he should be admitted into a mental care facility before being admitted into prison rather than being sentenced to

Passed on September 25, 1789 and ratified on December 15, 1791 by Congress, the eighth amendment has been present in the United States for quite some time. Over time, the amendment has morphed and interpreted differently. In the Constitution it states, “Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted”. In the 1990s, individuals referenced the eighth amendment when discussing capital punishment or the death penalty. Death sentences were most frequent during the 1900s, resulting in some individuals declaring that it went against the amendment (Source A). Since then, opinions on the death penalty have fluctuated, some claim that is barbarous while others deem it to be necessary. The

People argue that the death penalty is a good way to protect our population from these criminals that have done terrible things. While that may be true, life without parole still protects the population from these criminals as they will be in prison for the rest of their lives. Also, the price of a death penalty case is significantly higher than that of a life without parole case. A life without parole case typically averages at about $740,000 while a death penalty case averages at about $1.26 million. The death penalty also puts innocent lives at risk. Every one in twenty-five people on death row are actually innocent. Since the death penalty was reinstated in 1976, 143 people have been exonerated. Sadly this is less than half the number of the people who may have actually been innocent. The death row inmate stated earlier, Jesse Tafero, who had a botched execution was later found to have been innocent (Time). An innocent man experienced an extremely painful death orchestrated by the government. Additionally, many people believe that the death penalty will stop future criminals from doing terrible crimes. However, the South has the highest execution rate in the US and they also have the highest homicide rate while the Northeast has the lowest execution rate and the lowest homicide rate (DPIC). The death penalty will not stop criminals from doing terrible

Stress from events such as the Oklahoma City Bombing causes people to smoke. Studies show that tragedies such as the 9-11 attacks or the Oklahoma City Bombing causes people to smoke, which can lead to other negative effects.

“ we make mistakes. Scores of innocent people have been exonerated after being sentenced to death” (Stevenson 16), this quotation reminds me of a story that happened in 1991 to Todd Willingham, as detailed by the Travis County District Court of Texas. Willingham was executed as he was found guilty of the murder of his three children in a fire that took place at their home. The Innocence Project, however emphasizes that the wrongful execution of Willingham is a tragedy and must never happen again. We must restore the good name of Willingham, and ensure that a tragedy of this kind never happens again of executing an innocent man. These objectives were arrived at based on the petition of Willingham’s relatives.

Chris McCandless, a young, nonconformist man, died in the Alaskan wilderness trying to live off the land there. Some laud McCandless for his transcendentalist behavior and unique, nonconformist beliefs; others call McCandless a reckless fool whose impulsive actions ended up costing his life. Chris McCandless was ultimately a modern day transcendentalist because he believed that nature was purer than society, a common transcendentalist belief.

“I understand what they felt in Oklahoma City’, he said. ‘I have no sympathy for them’. (Michel)” Timothy J. McVeigh is accused of the worst act of domestic terror in American history. With six years on trial, McVeigh was finally executed. Many Americans question if McVeigh should’ve been sentenced to life in prison or death. The final say was that Timothy McVeigh should get sentenced to the death penalty.

The victim in the case, Michele Mallin, speaks and writes about the case to raise awareness about misidentifications and wrongful convictions. “I was positive at the time that it was him,” she said, “I was shocked when I found out it wasn't him. I joined Tim’s family in working to exonerate him because it was the right thing to do. Timothy didn’t deserve what he got.” Cole's family members received $1,060,000 in compensation for his time in prison. I believe this compensation was appropriate because Cole lost his life in jail plus the last 22 years of his life.

Proposition 62 wants to overturn the death penalty and turn it into life imprisonment. Meanwhile, Proposition 66 wants to shorten the death penalty time.The death penalty time should be shortened and not turned into life imprisonment in order to replace it. Life imprisonment would place the criminals in prison for as along as they live. Coincidentally, this would overcrowd the prisons even more. Some criminals deserve to die because they should not have the privilege to live 30 years after, from being sentenced to death for committing first degree murder. For example, there has been a case, in 1984, where Kermit Alexander’s family was murdered. As a matter of fact, the criminals have not been executed since they have received the death sentence.

Killing another seems very unjustifiable, which might be the case but when someone takes another 's life and sent to prison, death row or capital punishment is needed to put that person were they belong. People like that deserve to die because of their mistake of killing another and it deters other people to not kill others, showing them what would happen. In the case of Capital Punishment, Hunting for Sport, or George and Lennie, killing is a justifiable act.