Burnett 1
James Burnett
William Boyle
October 28, 2013
Writ 101, Section 76
Fair Convictions
Multiple accusations have been made regarding the fairness and moral acceptance of the death penalty. Is the death penalty murder? Is execution an evil act? How do you handle the death penalty through the eyes of religion? All questions that come to mind when the topic of the death penalty surfaces. The subject of the death penalty is a very sensitive one. Most do not know how to answers these questions. But one aspect, of the trail leading to either the death sentence or not, is completely done all wrong. If two people are being tried for the same crime, then why have two different trials, two different juries, and two different sentences. For example, the Michael Perry and Jason Burkett trial was, in my opinion, done wrong. They both should have had the same trial at the same time, together, and had the same jury. Therefore, they both should have the same sentence. Michael Perry was on death row, and Jason Burkett was not and that is just wrong.
Experiments and studies have been done to evaluate the fairness of the death penalty, and in North Carolina, “The Charlotte Observer recently concluded that North Carolina's death penalty system "is so tainted with mistakes, unfairness and incompetence that it risks executing innocent people while sparing some of the most vicious killers.’” Many wrong accusations have been made toward innocent people. I agree with the Charlotte Observer but bias and emotions can also make the final verdict of a trial quite jaded. How can this be fixed?, some may ask. A

Burnett 2 way is to have the trials at the same time and not have a sensitive, partial jury. The sensitive jury was part of the Burkett case. Jason Burkett had his dad testify during his trial, and his dad must have touched the hearts of two people in the jury by pleading to spare his son’s life. His father took the blame for whatever Jason had done wrong and said it was his fault because he was not there to provide a good stable home and a prominent father figure to teach him the rules and morals of today’s society. While touching the jury should take in consideration, the actions of
Jason Burkett and not the previous absences of Jason’s father in Jason’s life. As statistic show, of the males who are sentenced to death row the absence of a father figure in their young ages play a major role in their maturation into a man. As of 2002, 95% of death row inmates have had an absent father figure. Therefore, Jason Burkett and Michael Perry should have gotten the same penalty because: neither had a father figure, and they both committed the same crime.
Unfairness is evident in this case.
Why is the death penalty unfair? Some may say it is unjust and immoral, but it just depends on your moral beliefs. Personally, I am not afraid to voice my faith and taking the life of another is wrong unless completely necessary. I believe if someone is mentally unstable and is dangerous to his/her community then proper precautions must take place to either remove or eliminate that person from society. Whether they are locked up for life or put to death is not my choice but the judge’s decision. Some say Let the punishment fit the crime or they killed them therefore they must die. Personally, I think that the death penalty should only be used in extreme circumstances. But one of the major questions about the death penalty and not of it is, is the media killing the death penalty? Danny Hayes of the Washington Post says, “The erosion of public

Burnett 3 support for the death penalty has occurred across the nation, in large part because Americans are conflicted. Many believe capital punishment is justified, but they worry that innocent people might be executed. And as the political debate has in the last two decades focused on wrongful convictions and death row exonerations, Americans have increasingly come to