A thought on Capital Punishment..

I was watching a very interesting show late last night, I think it was called "Forensic files" anyway, I found this one particular arson case quite interesting apparently, from what I understand of it (I only got to it near the end), a man was accused of burning his parents house and killing his parents. The house's living room was mostly made out of wood so the fire spread quickly where his parents were sitting and no one believed his side of the story when he told investigators that when he ran into the sink and got a bucket of water which he then used to douse the fire with the fire got stronger. The man was then charged for the death of his parents and put on death row and would recieve the death penalty. One investigator researched the whole event (even though he was insulted and belittled by his peers who believed the case was closed and no more investigation was needed) by getting samples and backtracking the events he then brought the samples to a forensics lab who discovered and found 0.01% of lead on the carpet where the fire started. They then had another hypothesis for what happened. They believed that a match which still had some flames in it hit the floor and started the fire. They made a complete remake of the scene (copies of the scene from the exact manufacturer and making it completely the same) and tested it out and not surprisingly the whole remade scene went into flames. The cause of this was hypothesised to be the work of carpentors who when finished making a wooden floor would (in past times) finish their design by scrubbing (what is from my understanding) oil onto the wooden surface which then gets seeped into the carpet and had the spark cause the fire also the introduction of lead into the case gave credit to the man's story because it is, apparently, common knowledge that using water to put out a fire with lead in it will strengthen it. After 10 months, the man who was on the death penalty was let go although some of the investigators peers were apparently upset with the turn of events and had wished to put the man on death row for some reason or another. Well, anyway, guy lost 10 months of his life during which he should have been grieving for his parents deaths. Imagine being put on death row for the death of your parents because no one gives a shit about what your side of the story was? Must have sucked for that guy. I mean think of the emotional impact it has on a person...well anyway, the guy is free now even though some investigators still wished he was on death row but can't do that to him in light of the evidence.  

 Well, this whole thing got me thinking about capital punishment (the death penalty) and I was thinking...what if the evidence had either 1.) Not come at all because the investigator who went through all that trouble thought his peers (being criminal experts like him) were right. Or 2.) The evidence came too late? You can't simply say "Oh, it'll never happen!" because chances are it has already happened and is probably still happening today. Now, if the death penalty was taken off then maybe these innocent people would still have some chance at being able to live there lives again? I know that prisons are being overpopulated and that the death penalty could remedy this but if we end-up killing an innocent person then what is the point? Doesn't that just show how much democracy in America fails? If we allow the death penalty to continue to be a legal action then what is the point of even trying to have a fair and legal process if in the end (no matter if they are guilty or not) we end peoples lives? What if critical information such as the supposed criminal's perspective on what happened is needed to clear his/her name but they can no longer get it because s/he has already been put to death? I'll be honest to anyone reading this about something, I hate overpopulation of any kind and until I watched that case on "Forensic files" I had been pro-death penalty (though I did question myself on if it was actually right but I figured using what-if's got no one anywhere) because I had figured a decrease in population was severly needed and killing criminals would be the easiest and most acceptable method to achieve that goal. I've changed my mind though because if it is the killing of someone who has been found innocent then there really is no justice with the use of capital punishment. What I found horrifying was that some criminal investigators still wanted the man on death row remain on death row (i.e. in jail) because they didn't like the idea of him being innocent (possibly because it showed how stupid they were in their process of the crime scene but to think that they would go so far as to want this guy on death row so they don't look bad..this is just my assumption on what there reasoning could be).

 Any ideas on the argument I presented? Any personal thoughts on the blog? I'm welcome to just about everything so long has some line of reasoning or logic to it or even praise or insult. If you have a problem with my grammer and/or spelling then please tell me.

Share this post on:

 •    •    •    •    •