What are the philosophical and ethical responses to capital punishment?
The dictionary term for capital punishment is “the legally authorized killing of someone as punishment for a crime.” There is ongoing dispute when regarding the controversial study of capital punishment. Out of a possible 196 countries in the world only 58 still have legislation o the death penalty, Since 1976 there have been 1226 executions in the US alone. (Independence educational publishers 2011, volume 223 pg. 38). This ultimately shows mass diversion over the issue of whether the death penalty is considered right or wrong, Even though there are a higher percentage of countries that have opted for its abolition, there are still a mass number of countries favorable of it. The countries that still have the legal death penalty such as; USA, China, North Korea, Pakistan, Thailand etc., find that it meets its aims of punishment. There are 6 aims of punishment being; retribution, deterrence, protection, reformation and vindication. Retribution is the concept of 'taking revenge', There is an established philosophy that suggests 'an eye for an eye', ultimately suggesting a punishment fit for the committed crime. The Old Testament law of Talion taught this philosophy however was contradicted when Jesus goes on to tell his disciples to love their enemies and pray for those who persecute them, rather than seeking revenge. Retribution therefore is not consistent with Christian discipleship. (http://www.ndre.co.uk/aims_of_punishment.htm#Retribution) The theory suggests if you take someone’s life, the idea of retribution would be that you ultimately owe that person a life, therefore yours would be taken from you. In theory this philosophy seems fair and applicable, but what about the effect on those authorising and permitting the criminals death, this wouldn’t be contradictory as you are ultimately committing the crime that the criminal is being executed for-murder. If we look at Bernard Williams’s analogy of Jim in the Indians, "I could no nothing and let 20 Indians die or I could kill 1 and save 19, but what about the effect on my character? This is ultimately suggesting it would be within the greater good to kill this one person to provide justice and safety to the others, however, what about the effect of character on the person administrating their death. Deterrence is the idea of putting criminals off re-offending for fear of the consequences, For example with the death penalty in place, this may act as a deterrent for other criminals whom have considered murder. This view is consistent with Christian teaching as long as the deterrent is proportionate to the crime. There are controversial rebuttals to this Christian belief; one is stated by Albert Peirrepoint quoted by Amnesty International. I do not believe that any one of the hundreds of executions I carried out has in any way acted as a deterrent against future murder. Capital punishment in my view achieved nothing except revenge." (a punishment to fit the crime, Franklin Watts, pg.21)There is also the open letter to Amnesty International to US president Clinton, 1994 "...death sentences in the USA are imposed disproportionately on the poor; on members of ethnic minorities, on the mentally ill or retarded, and on those without adequate legal counsel." (A punishment to fit the crime, Franklin Watts, pg.21) This statement is extremely controversial as the issue of race and disability inevitably raises a sense of awkward debate and you have to be cautious of what you are saying, especially if it is open to public hearing.
To further this argument, many people do not think about the consequences of their actions before committing a crime, it is simply out of an act of passion or anger therefore, the idea of capital punishment as a deterrent act would not process in a criminals mind during the act of murder. The aim of protection is the idea that society is protected from the activities of criminals, this can consist of either prison or capital punishment. This idea of 'protection' is compatible with Christian teachings however, when it concerns the issue of the death penalty there is often controversy within the Christian belief. Protection is ultimately the strongest support for capital punishment as it enables the victim and their family’s security and safeness from their offender. A quote that agrees protection works was from Michael Howard, British home secretary 1994 “Researchers have looked at a sample of burglars who had been given a community sentence. They found that if they had gone to prison instead, this would have prevented between 3 and 13 crimes. Per burglar. Per year.” (A punishment to fit the crime, Franklin Watts, pg. 18), This does provide some credibility to the idea that prsion acts as a aim of protection, as without this, criminals would be allowed to reoffend, however, if we apply this to capital punishment, I believe it proves mainly that there are other substitutes than capital punishment, such as; imprisonment. To add, what about those who forgive their offender. If we look at the case of Anthony walker whom was brutally murdered in a racially motivated attack, his mother, a believer in Christianity, chose to forgive her sons murderer, therefore, she would be in opposition to the death penalty as she would have no more resentment or bitterness towards her son’s killer. http://www.bbc.co.uk/learningzone/clips/a-mothers-forgiveness-for-her-sons-killers/439.html Christianity teaches "to err is human, to forgive, divine." Alexander Pope (http://christian-quotes.ochristian.com/Forgiveness-Quotes/) Reformation is the concept that imprisonment can allow criminals to reform into law abiding citizens. This view is consistent with the Christian views of repentance for ones sins. If we look at the study of Saul to Paul, Saul had a conversion experience which converged him from his vicious threats against the Lords disciples to him changing his name to Paul and spreading Christianity around the world, therefore, Christians would be favourable of the idea of reformation. This idea of punishment would be against capital punishment. There is evidence of criminals reforming as well as there is evidence of them re offending. If we look at the case of James Bulger, who was tortured and killed by Robert Thomson and Jon venables, they received a minimum of 15 years imprisonment for their murder, after their release in 2001 after serving only 8 years due to their age, Venables went on to breach a fundamental condition of his license by visiting Merseyside, he was also taking excessive amounts of drugs and downloading child pornography. In 2008, he was found with a large amount of cocaine and received a caution, In 2010 He returned to prison for “extremely serious allegations” which was suspected to be child pornography. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Murder_of_James_Bulger). This shows that there is a high risk in allowing criminals to re-enter a civilised society as some are not capable of reform, however, there is evidence that suggests some criminals can reform, if we look at the study of Nicky Cruz, whom was a member of a gang, he converted to Christianity and became a Christian evangelist, proving that ultimately there is room for reformation and that Capital punishment does not always seem to be the best option. The aim of vindication is the idea that you are permitting the law by punishing those who commit crimes. This aim is a fair strategy and is compatible with capital punishment, as if someone murders another human being, surely by taking their life from them would show equal balance. However, what about the universal idea that killing is wrong? We punish those for murdering another human being but then we make exceptions for issues like capital punishment, which is still ultimately killing another human being, through legal authority. Surely there are other ways to deal with such crimes, such as life imprisonment etc.
If we refer to earlier
century capital punishment, the process of legal murder was of much more
brutality than what it is today. In England, the punishment for treason was
hanging, drawing and quartering, and sometimes the dismembered bod parts were
publicised as an act of deterrence, this was abolished in the 19th
century and instead criminals were hung and then beheaded, beheading was
usually reserved for the highborn and was last used in 1747, with Lord Lovat.
Hanging was the most common form of capital punishment from Saxon times to the
20th century in Britain, however it was not the only one, in 1401
there was a law that established burning as the penalty for heresy, which was “belief or opinion contrary to
orthodox religious (especially Christian) doctrine.” This ultimately suggests
that in earlier century Britain, they followed principles of religion and any
objection against it was worthy of severe punishment. In modern day society,
there is a higher secular approach to the law,
and not everyone follows teachings of religious principles.
(http://www.localhistories.org/capital.html). If we look at the methods of capital punishment now, there is a mass differentiation of methods. The most common modern day method of execution is the lethal injection. In America alone, since 1976 there have been 1367 lethal injections with the last being Juan Chevaz on 2/12/14. The last man to be electrocuted was Allen Davies in Florida in July 8, 1999. This is important to consider as Florida has the highest number of inmates on death row in the USA. There have been 3 cases of hanging used as well as 3 cases of firing squad. Lethal injection was discussed by Miami surgeon Leonidas Koniaris, whom said “My impression that lethal injection as practised in the US now is no more humane than the gas chamber or electrocution, which have both been deemed inhumane,.” This ultimately perceives that the attempt of making lethal injection as a humane way of execution fails, and infact there are no truly humane ways of killing another being. I am favour of this belief, as I do not believe the murdering of another human being under legal authority or not, is in any way justifiable or humane. If we do compare it to earlier century punishment of hung drawn and quartered, the use of lethal injection does seem a less brutal alternative, however it still commits the act of murder, which I so not believe in a modern society is applicable and desirable.
There is
mixed opinions when applying religious beliefs to the idea of capital
punishment. Some religions are in favour whilst others are against it. If we
consider the key religions of Christianity, Buddhism, Islamism, Hinduism and
Judaism, you will discover that there are a range of mixed opinions when the
issue of capital punishment is raised. Christianity rests their faith in the
teachings of God and the holy bible. When regarding the death penalty, there
are mixed opinions on whether capital punishment is right or wrong. Throughout
history, Christians condemned the fact that capital punishment was a part of
everyday life and society. Pope Innocent III stated “The secular power can
without moral sin, excersize judgement of blood, provided that it punishes with
justice, not out of hatred, with prudence, not precipitation. There is biblical
evidence to suggests that supports the death penalty shown in the old and New
Testament. In genesis 9:6 there is a quote that reads; "whoever sheds the
blood of man, by man shall his blood be shed." This quote is suggesting if
you shed the blood of another man, that man has the authority and the power to
shed the blood of you, this quote can in theory be applicable as it preaches
equality. This is ultimately agreeing with the idea of retribution-"an eye
for an eye." In the Old Testament there are 36 capital offences specified
including murder, however, Christians are fond of the belief that
"Christians say it is inconsistent to preserve murder alone as a capital
crime." The New Testament openly talks of the most famous biblical
execution, which is Jesus on the cross. In Matthew 15:4 Jesus says "He who
speaks evil of father or mother, let him surely die." Even though Jesus
does not use violence to exercise his belief or power, there is nowhere in the
bible that suggests the state cannot condemn capital punishment. There is a
quote in Romans 13:4 that reads does not bear the sword in vain; for he is the
servant of God to execute His wrath on the wrongdoer" This is a clear and
apparent reference to capital punishment which suggests that those who have
done wrongly are eligible for capital punishment. The assemblies of God quoted
in July 28, 2008 "Opinion in the Assemblies of God on capital punishment
is mixed. However, more people associated with the Assemblies of God probably
favour capital punishment for certain types of crimes such as premeditated
murder than those who would oppose capital punishment without reservation. This
consensus grows out of a common interpretation that the Old Testament sanctions
capital punishment and nothing in the New Testament negates maximum punishment
as society's means of dealing effectively with serious crimes..."
(http://deathpenalty.procon.org/view.answers.php?questionID=000986)If we look
at the opinion polls from the years 2001-2004, the data shows that 65% of those
who are weekly churchgoers favour capital punishment. (http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/religion-and-death-penalty)Most
Christians who are in favour of the death penalty are of the belief that the
state acts out of authority of God whom has the autonomy to dispose of life out
of his own freewill. This argument was expressed through the philosophy of St.
Augustine. "The same divine law which forbids the killing of a human being
allows certain exceptions, as when God authorises killing by a general law or
when He gives an explicit commission to an individual for a limited time. Since
the agent of authority is but a sword in the hand, and is not responsible for
the killing, it is in no way contrary to the commandment, 'Thou shalt not kill'
to wage war at God's bidding or for the representatives of the State's
authority to put criminals to death, according to law or the rule of rational
justice."
(http://www.bbc.co.uk/religion/religions/christianity/christianethics/capitalpunishment_1.shtml)There
is an argument that capital punishment is similar to suicide. The argument is
that if a person kills another human being, there are ultimately surrendering
their own life to the state if they are caught. Pope Puis XII quoted "Even
when there is question of the execution of a condemned man, the State does not
dispose of the individual's right to life. In this case it is reserved to the
public power to deprive the condemned person of the enjoyment of life in
expiation of his crime when, by his crime, he has already dispossessed himself
of his right to life." There are also arguments that suggests Christianity
is against the idea of capital punishment. Augustine quoted "Life is a
precious gift from God and only he has the autonomy to take it away."
Father Gino Concetti, L'Osservatore furthered Augustines idea and quoted
"In light of the word of God, and thus of faith, life--all human life--is
sacred and untouchable. No matter how heinous the crimes ... [the criminal]
does not lose his fundamental right to life, for it is primordial, inviolable,
and inalienable, and thus comes under the power of no one whatsoever." He
is ultimately suggesting there should be no exceptions to the established
Christian teaching of 'Thou shalt not kill." All human life is sacred and
is not ours to dispose of under any circumstance. There is further argument
that the teachings of the bible are inconsistent. The New Testament says that
there are 35 crimes that are referable for the death penalty, however, in
modern society we would no longer consider such crimes such as; blasphemy, idolatry,
magic etc., applicable for the death penalty. The bible speaks of forgiveness
and compassion, such as the biblical quote "Love thy neighbour and pray
for those who persecute you." However, how can we convey such forgiveness
with the death penalty in place? We do not know if these criminals could reform
and turn their faith into a supreme being such as God, if they do not have a
chance of reformation.
(http://www.bbc.co.uk/religion/religions/christianity/christianethics/capitalpunishment_1.shtml).
The united Methodist church believes that the power of the church is
reformation for criminals who have disobeyed the law; therefore they are in
full disagreement with the death penalty. This Christian organisation believes
that "all human life is sacred" No matter how your actions have
impacted someone else. When law permits the death penalty, any hope of that
person reforming is taken away, and they are ultimately devalued from society.
They go on to quote "For this reason, we oppose the death penalty (capital
punishment) and urge its elimination from all criminal codes." (http://archives.umc.org/interior.asp?ptid=1&mid=6385)
The teachings
of Buddhism do not have an established opinion when regarding the death
penalty, they neither agree nor disagree. If we look at Buddhist teachings, it
is obvious that the death penalty is not compatible with their beliefs. A quote
from the Buddha states "An action, even if it brings benefit to oneself,
cannot be considered a good action if it causes physical and mental pain to
another being." This does not necessarily relate to the issue of Capital
punishment however has a certifiable connotation that it is not moral nor good
to cause physical harm if pain to another human being. When discussing life
after death Buddhists believe in the process of reincarnation which is that
when you die your soul will leave your current body and will be born into a new
body. If you have lived a good life then you will be rewarded in your next
life, however if you have lived a bad life, you will be somewhat devalued in
your future life. Buddhists believe that with the death penalty in place, this
will have an effect on both the offender and the punisher. Buddhism teaches
that reformation of a criminal is much more desirable than their execution, as
it gives them a chance to rectify their mistakes, which is ultimately the
paramount importance. Despite such firm belief against the death penalty, there
are still some Buddhist influenced countries that continue to use it. An
example of this is Thailand. It is essential to consider however that there is
no country that considers Buddhism as their official religion. These countries
that do support the death penalty however are not always influenced by
religion. Politicians have the authority to establish laws such as capital
punishment as they believe it brings deterrence to criminals and future
convicts. They also may be influenced by the history of that country, if they
have had abided by the death penalty in earlier centuries then they are none
the wiser to accept it and believe it is a functional part of society. Alarid
and Wang states that he contradiction stems from popular and monastic Buddhism,
They suggest that Lay Buddhists show complete dedication in their commitments
of faith, however, others believe it is superficial and unfitting with daily
life. The Buddha Dharma education suggested that Capital punishment entails
killing which goes against the Buddhist first precept of 'do not kill.'
throughout history there have been devoted Buddhist monarchs who have abolished
capital punishment, there are still Buddhist influenced countries that legalise
capital punishment however it is incompatible with the teachings of the Buddha.
(http://www.buddhanet.net/e-learning/dharmadata/fdd20.htm) Judaism
has a strong disagreement towards the study of the death penalty. During the
time when Jewish law operated as a secular and religious jurisdiction, it
rarely imposed the death penalty. The death penalty was abolished in Israel in
1954; however, this was with the exception of Nazi war criminals. In the 54
years that Israel has existed as an independent state, only one person has been
executed. This person was Adolf Eichman, a Nazi war criminal with particular
responsibility for the Holocaust. The Old Testament preached philosophies such
as; "life for life, eye for eye, tooth for tooth..." Exodus 21:23-24,
There is a quote in genesis 9:6 that reads "A man who spills human blood,
his own blood shall be spilled by man because God made man in His own
Image." However, to truly understand the teachings of Jewish law one must
read the Torah and consult the Talmud. The rabbis who wrote the Talmud made it
exceptionally clear that they were intolerable of the death penalty, they
achieved this through teachings of the sanctity of life, the use of emphasis of
anti-death philosophies such as 'Thou shalt not kill." Finding alternative
punishment for criminals, or compensation for the victims’ families, also
imposing procedural barriers that made the death penalty inoperative. Hinduism
has a worldwide established teaching of Ghandi that suggests "an eye for
an eye makes the whole world blind." Hindus nor favour nor disregard the
death penalty however they do oppose killing, violence and revenge, following
the principle of ahisma-non-violence. India still has legislation of the death
penalty for reasons similar to Buddhist influenced countries, such as political
influence, history of the country etc. There was controversy raised with the
debate on capital punishment in India through the case of Dhananjoy Chatterjee
who had been sentenced for rape and murder, however his plea of freedom was
denied on 4 August 2004
and he was executed by hanging on August 14, 2004.
This caused mass uproar in India as it was the first hanging since 1955 where
murder convicts Kartik Sil and Sukumar Burman were hung. There are over 100 people presently
facing death row in India however this is suggested considerably low, and the
death penalty is only used in the rarest of cases. Islamism
ultimately accepts capital punishment. The Qur-an states “....Take not life,
which God has made sacred, except by way of justice and law. Thus does He
command you, so that you may learn wisdom” Muslims are of the belief that
capital punishment is a harsh sentence however is classified as necessary in
severe cases. In Islamic countries popular ways of execution are; beheading,
firing squad, hanging and stoning, in some countries these executions are
public to act as a deterrent from future crimes. Some
extremist Islamic countries practise the strict Sharia Law which uses capital
punishment as a way of deterrence for the largest variety of crimes. The more
moderate Islamic countries such as; Albania and Bosnia still have legal capital
punishment however are abolitionist in practise. The death penalty can only be
applicable for two specified crimes which are; intentional murder: in this case
the punishment of that person is left up to the family, and Fasad fil-ardh,
which is spreading mischief in the land/ disobeying the state, these crimes
often consist of; terrorism, piracy, rape, adultery and homosexual activity. While
Islam remains a retentionist country, there is a minority view that is
favourable of the abolition if the death penalty. The Ulamas do not always
agree on the social context in which texts should be applied, also, Sharia law
is often used by repressive powers that attack women and the poor, as there is
still a high standard of sexism that remains prominent in some Islamic
countries, due to their traditional values and beliefs. There have also been
incidences where the death penalty has been used without the criminal’s access
to a lawyer, which is contradictory to the concept of Islamic justice. In
Geneva, on 28th April 2005, there was a call for a moratorium on corporal
punishment, stoning and the death penalty. This was, however, rejected by the
Legal Research Commission of the Al-Azhar University in Cairo, the world's
leading Islamic learning centre.
There has been a mass example of miscarriages
of Justice and if we look at the death penalty, it is not uncommon to have
executed the innocent. In the UK alone between the years 1950-1953 there were 3
exonerations and one pardon with compensation, this may not seem like a
considerable amount however the execution rate was only 17 per year, so to have
3 miscarriages of justice was completely inexcusable. I will focus on 3 UK cases that consist of;
Timothy Evans, Ruth Ellis and Derek Bentley. Timothy Evans was a Welshman whom
was tried and convicted to death by hanging in 1950, for which he was
wrongfully accused of murdering his wife and daughter at 10 Rillington place.
During his conviction Evans led suspicions to his neighbour John Christie. 3
years after his execution Christie found to be a serial killer, and the who had
a number of other women buried at his home-10 Rillington place. Christie later confessed to the murder of
Mrs.Evans, and an official inquiry in 1966 established that Christie had also
murdered Evans’ daughter. Soon after this realisation, Timothy Evans received a
posthumous pardon for his execution, however, was this enough to justify the
murder of an innocent man? There was a variety of unfortunate incidents that
led to Timothy Evans; trail, the most considerable his lack of education. Evans
had always struggled with school, and received a tubercular verruca when he was
8, which caused him to be missing more of his education. Consequently he was
unable to write or read anything beyond his name as an adult. He was also prone
to making stories about himself as a way of boosting self-esteem. On 30th November, 1949 Evans
informed the police that his wife had died in unfortunate circumstances. His
first confession was that he had accidently murdered his wife by giving her by
giving her a certain fluid he was given by a man that would abort the foetus.
He then claimed he disposed of her remains in a sewer drain outside 10 Rillington
place. He said he arranged for his daughter-Geraldine to be cared for and then
he went to Wales to stay with relatives. When
police examined the drain outside the front of the building, however, they
found nothing and, furthermore, discovered that the manhole cover required the
combined strength of all three officers to remove it. Evans was re-questioned
and changed his story yet again. He claimed that John Christie, his neighbor
had offered to perform an abortion on his wife-Beryl; however, Christie had
claimed the abortion was botched and had killed his wife. He suggested he would
dispose of the body and made plans for Geraldine to stay with a couple in East
Acton. He told Evans to stay with relatives in Wales as abortion was illegal in
the UK. When Evans returned to 10 Rillington place to see Geraldine, Christie
refused contact. The place performed a preliminary search at 10 Rillington
place after Evans second confession. On 2nd December, police found
the bodies of Beryl and Geraldine, which the cause of death had both been
through strangling. When Evans was shown the clothing of the bodies, and was
informed of their cause of death, he confessed to their murders. Ludovic Kennedy
suggested that Evans’ confessions were fabricated and dictated to Evans by the
investigating officers. The time of questioning was over late evening and early
morning which added to his physical and emotional detriment, he also had issues
with his self-esteem therefore being questioned under pressure would have only
added to his emotions. Evans also stated in court that he was threatened with
violence by the police, and it is likely that they coerced Evans to his false
confession; there was also a lack of forensic evidence, especially considering
Christie had human bones-a human thigh bone of 16 long and 14 ft. wide in his
back garden.
The case of Ruth Ellis
has been one of the most controversial British executions known to history,
simply because her execution was left open to question, there was established
right or wrong answer. Ellis had an uneasy childhood, being one of six
children. When she was 17 she fell pregnant to a Canadian soldier who stopped
sending money about a year after her son’s birth. As she could not financially
support this child he was sent to live with Ellis’ mother. Ellis then went onto
work as a nightclub hostess at the Court Club, through nude modeling work,
which had a significantly superior pay than her previous employment. Morris Conley, the manager of the club
blackmailed his employers into sleeping with him, which led into work in the
prostitution industry. In 1950, Ellis fell pregnant by one of her regular
customers; however she had her pregnancy illegally terminated and returned to
work. On 8th November she married 41-year old George Ellis- a
customer at the Court Club. In 1951, George was a violent alcoholic and was very
jealous and possessive. Ruth gave birth to daughter Georgina in 1941 however
separated with George soon after. In 1953 she became manager of a nightclub,
and met David Blakely, whom she was a victim of domestic abuse to. Ellis fell
pregnant again however had an abortion due to the lack of commitment she felt
she received from Blakely. In January 1955, Ellis lost another child induced by
a punch in the stomach from Blakely during an argument. On 10th
April 1955, Ellis followed Blakely to Magdala. “At around 9:30 pm David
Blakely and his friend Clive Gunnell emerged. Blakely passed Ellis waiting on
the pavement when she stepped out of Henshaws Doorway, a newsagent next to the
Magdala. He ignored her when she said "Hello, David," then shouted
"David!" Through a moment of passion, Ellis shot Blakely 5 times and
then handed herself in to the police. The case of Ruth Ellis raised such
controversy as there was a divide in opinion of whether she was truly eligible
for the death penalty. Some people believed that her execution was justified as
she did take out a gun and intentionally kill her husband, she followed him to
Magdala with the gun in her purse and shot him, therefore some people believed
it was a pre-planned killing. However, others believe it was instead a crime of
passion and that it was a buildup of anger and resentment that led to such a
crime. Ellis was a victim of domestic abuse which actually caused her to
miscarry due to a punch in her stomach.
The case of Derek Bentley rose mass controversy
throughout Britain. Bentley first showed signs of academic struggle at Norbury
secondary modern school where he failed his eleven-plus examination. Bentley
was known to have had a variety of health development problems. During WWII,
the house in which in he lived collapsed around him causing serious head
injuries and leaving him concussed. In December 1948, his mental age was
estimated at 10 years, 4 months; his actual age was 15 years, 6 months. He
scored 66 on an IQ test in December 1948 and 77 in 1952. After his arrest in November
1952, further IQ tests were administered to him at Brixton Prison. He was
described as "borderline feeble-minded", with a verbal score of 71, a
performance IQ of 87 and a full scale IQ of 77. In November 1952, the time of
his arrest, Bentley was still considered “quite illiterate.” On 2nd November 1952, Bentley and
16 year old companion, Christopher Craig attempted the robbery of warehouse of
the Barlow & Parker confectionery company at 27-29 Tamworth Road. Craig was
armed with a Colt New Service .455 Webley calibre revolver, and provided
Bentley with a knife and knuckle duster. Police were alarmed and Detective
Sergeant Frederik Fairfax grabbed hold of Bentley, until Bentley broke free.
The next thing to happen has rose mass controversy and is the key event that
caused so much division in attitudes about Bentley’s execution. Bentley quoted
the phrase “Let him have it” to Craig who then fired a bullet into the arm of
the police officer, whom survived the shot. Bentley then alarmed the police
officer he had more ammunition, therefore more police officers arrived at the
scene. As a result Police Constable Sydney Miles was shot in the head and
immediately died, during this time Bentley had refrained from using any of his
weapons. As a result Bentley and Miles
were charged with the murder of Police Constable Sydney Miles. They were tried
by jury before the Lord Chief Justice of England and Wales, Lord Goddard, at
the Old Bailey in London between 9 December and 11 December 1952. The death
penalty was considered a capital offence at this time and under 16’s were not
admittible, therefore only Bentley was eligible for t=the death penalty if
convicted. There were 3 principle points of contention at the trial; the first
being; A forensic ballistics expert cast doubt on whether Craig could have hit
Miles if he had shot at him deliberately, as the fatal bullet was not found. To
add, Craig had used bullets of different under-sized calibres and the sawn-off
barrel made it inaccurate to a degree of six feet at the range from which he
fired. Secondly, the phrase “Let him
have it Chris” did not have a specified meaning. Even if Bentley said the
words, there is no evidence that he was implying “shoot him Chris” He could of
instead meant “Let him have the gun, Chris.” Therefore, the use of this lacks a
certain support to its evidence, as there is no evidence for its true
meaning. Thirdly, there was the issue of
whether Bentley was physically capable to stand trial. Bentley was referred to a Psychiatrist-Dr
Mill, under Maudsley hospital. Hills reports suggested Bentley was illiterate
and suggested as almost borderline retarded. However, Matheson The principle
medical officer claimed he was of low intelligence however he was still
“feeble-minded” and sane, therefore fit to stand trial. At this time, England was unaware of the
concept of diminished responsibility due to retarded development, whereas the
Scottish Law did. The jury took 75 minutes before they decided both youths were
responsible for the murder of Sydney Miles. Bentley was sentenced to death on
11 December 1952, while Craig was ordered to be detained at Her Majesty's
Pleasure. Craig was released in May 1963 after serving 10 years imprisonment.
Bentley’s execution was scheduled for December 1952 but this was postponed to
allow for an appeal. Bentley’s lawyers protested for appeal due to his mental
age and the fact he did not use his weapons, however Bentley's appeal was
unsuccessful on 13 January 1953. The Home Secretary David Maxwell Fyfe, after
reading the Home Office psychiatric reports, refused to request clemency from
Queen Elizabeth II, despite a petition signed by over 200 of his fellow MPs.
Parliament was not allowed to debate Bentley's sentence until it had been
carried out. At 9am on 28 January 1953, Derek Bentley was hanged for murder at
Wandsworth Prison, London by Albert Pierrepoint. When it was announced the
execution had been carried out, there were protests outside the prison and two
people were arrested and later fined for damage to property. These case studies
were some of the most famous case studies for raising mass controversy. They
highlight the problems with the death penalty and act as credibility as to why
it has been abolished in so many countries. I am of the opinion that if capital
punishment acts as a risk to any innocent man, it should not be sustained; no
matter what amount of benefits it brings. The religious belief of Christianity
ultimately has ideas for and against the belief in Capital punishment. In genesis 9:6 there is a quote that
reads; "whoever sheds the blood of man, by man shall his blood be
shed." This is suggesting that whatever harm you cause to a person, that
person therefore has the authority to harm you in return. However, this is only
applicable to those that directly harm another being, the case studies of
Timothy Evans and Derek Bentley who did not directly harm the victim would act
as the exception to this rule. However, Ruth Ellis directly killed her lover,
despite being a victim of domestic abuse. In Christianity, murder is wrong, and
it does not account for motives or personal revenge for killing another human
being. Even though the Bible preaches killing is wrong, Some Christians believe
that the state acts out of authority of God who has the autonomy to give and
take life of his own accord. The teachings of Buddhism would suggest that
killing is ultimately wrong as it is not compatible with their teachings. A
quote from the Buddha states "An action, even if it brings benefit to
oneself, cannot be considered a good action if it causes physical and mental
pain to another being." This relates to capital punishment as; even though
the execution might bring justice to a victim and their families, it still
intentionally causes pain and harm to another human being, which is wrong.
Therefore, it is an undeniable fact that Buddhists would believe the punishment
of these accused offenders are wrong as; Evans had no attempt what so ever in
the murder of his wife and child and was still executed as a result, Bentley
did not have any physical input in the murder of the police officer, and was
regarded as ‘mentally retarded.’ Ellis on the other hand was controversial as
her crime was a crime of passion from a lot of built up anger she felt under
the influence of a domestic abusive partner. However Buddhism teaches that
harming another person physically or mentally is wrong no matter what amount of
good it brings to the person. However, what about the physical and mental pain
Ellis received under the treatment of her abusive husband? Should he not be
punished for his actions? The teachings of Hinduism believe in the principle of
no revenge, Ghandi quoted “an eye for an eye makes the whole world blind.” They
also believe in ahisma, which means non-violence. Therefore they ultimately disagree
with capital punishment as it acts subsequently as revenge for the victim and
their families. If we consider the case of Derek Bentley and Timothy Evans, who
were innocent men in the physical crime and both had a low intelligence rate,
Hinduism would disagree with their murder, as they would suggest it is an act
of violence which is what they disagree with. If we consider the case of Ruth
Ellis however, Hinduism disagrees with revenge, and her crime was an act of
revenge to her abusive husband, therefore they would disagree with her crime,
however, I believe they would also disagree with her punishment as it is not
compatible with their beliefs and teachings. Judaism has a strong disagreement
with capital punishment therefore within these circumstances Judaism would
disagree with them. They preach many anti-death philosophies including ‘thou
shalt not kill.” Therefore, in the cases of Timothy Evans, Derek Bentley and
Ruth Ellis, Judaism would be against all their punishments. The Qur’an teaches “....Take
not life, which God has made sacred, except by way of justice and law.” This
ultimately suggests that you should not take life unless it is justified by
law. Therefore, if we look at the case of Timothy Evans, Islamism would
disagree with this punishment as he did not directly harm another human being,
he was falsely accused and therefore he was not eligible for the death penalty.
If we look at the case study of Derek Bentley, He committed theft as he was
committing burglary when the crime happened. In Shiriah Law disobeying the
state is eligible for death penalty, and theft is a factor of this therefore
his initial crime could be worthy of capital punishment. If we look at the case
study of Ruth Ellis, she committed intentional murder, which is eligible for
the death penalty under Shiria Law, therefore, despite her motive for the
killing or whether it was a crime of passion, she still ultimately killed
another person and therefore her punishment was justified.
