In our current case, a young black man was accused of a crime spree involving 22 cases of armed aggravated robbery and 1 case of murder. He admitted to 10 cases of aggravated robbery, but denied the murder allegation. There was only 1 witness that placed him at the scene of the murder. As there were circumstances that would 've prevented this one witness from clearly identifying our defendant, it could be a case of mistaken identity. Because all of his other crimes were robberies carried out with a 22 caliber handgun, the fact that our murder was initially a robbery that ended in murder with a .22 caliber handgun led police to charge him with capital murder. Classic utilitarianism is widely realized as being a theory that promotes moral
…show more content…
In reference to capital punishment, and our current case, the death penalty would bring unhappiness only to the defendant and his family. It would bring happiness to a much larger amount of people- society in general. Capital punishment totally does away with the criminal and his ability to injure anyone else in society with his criminal activities. He cannot commit crimes while he is on death row, and certainly cannot hurt anyone else once he has been put to death. This is certainly a good …show more content…
To their way of thinking, the death penalty permanently incapacitates the criminal, but they believe that life without parole does as well. On the other hand, if we keep murderers in prison, will they be released only to commit other dreadful crimes? A significant number do. A lifetime imprisonment can 't stop anyone from killing other inmates or guards, because they most likely have nothing to lose by doing so. Many people have been found innocent after years on death row due to advanced technology that wasn 't available/ not used in their initial case or by additional witnesses coming forward. There are some states are still prosecute people based on circumstantial evidence alone, without absolute certainty that the individual has committed the crime. In our current case where there was only one witness who identified the defendant as the perpetrator of the murder for which he was convicted. She saw the crime in the dark and the perpetrator from 20-30 feet away. This leaves a lot of room for identification error. More often than not, the only one 's who know what actually happened are the accused and the
In reference to capital punishment, and our current case, the death penalty would bring unhappiness only to the defendant and his family. It would bring happiness to a much larger amount of people- society in general. Capital punishment totally does away with the criminal and his ability to injure anyone else in society with his criminal activities. He cannot commit crimes while he is on death row, and certainly cannot hurt anyone else once he has been put to death. This is certainly a good …show more content…
To their way of thinking, the death penalty permanently incapacitates the criminal, but they believe that life without parole does as well. On the other hand, if we keep murderers in prison, will they be released only to commit other dreadful crimes? A significant number do. A lifetime imprisonment can 't stop anyone from killing other inmates or guards, because they most likely have nothing to lose by doing so. Many people have been found innocent after years on death row due to advanced technology that wasn 't available/ not used in their initial case or by additional witnesses coming forward. There are some states are still prosecute people based on circumstantial evidence alone, without absolute certainty that the individual has committed the crime. In our current case where there was only one witness who identified the defendant as the perpetrator of the murder for which he was convicted. She saw the crime in the dark and the perpetrator from 20-30 feet away. This leaves a lot of room for identification error. More often than not, the only one 's who know what actually happened are the accused and the