Who Is Really Being Punished Through The Practice Of Death Penalty?

But there are many grey areas when it comes to murder. The motive of a commited murder is not irrelevant. I think the death penalty should only apply to what may be described as predatory murder or murder one, and I believe this is mostly the case. The justice system must also have enough security to ensure that no innocent people are ever sentenced to death ever. The benefit of the doubt should always apply. If only one innocent person is/has been/will be sentenced to death the justice system is working against its purpose. In the United States several innocent people have been executed in modern times so obviously the system needs some major adjustments. The treshold for giving the death sentence is obviously to low.
When it comes to the question of revenge versus justice,knowing myself, I know I would seek revenge if my family or friends fell victim to such a horrible crime. This is a natural reaction. Blood for blood, It is seen practiced in tribal communities all over the world and in europe it can be found in Albania among other countries outside the justice system. Is this need for revenge satisfied by the justice system through the death penalty in the US? I don't know , I can imagine this is the way it is perceived for some people.

I think we pretty much agree on who should get the death penalty. That's why I said the murderer needs to be witnessed at the scene either by people or video, along with corroborating forensic evidence and/or a confession. If we have that, then there will be little to no doubt about whether or not the person committed the crime. This is why circumstantial evidence alone is usually not enough to convict someone of this type of crime. But when people are caught - especially on video - and still get off or get a lenient sentence either on a technicality or because they plea bargain, I think it does the public injustice.

The death penalty is not revenge. It is not the victim or their family that delivers the punishment to the criminal; it is the general public through the court system. If the punishment was decided solely by the victim's family without regard to the defendant's motive or rights, then that would be revenge. But with a system of laws and procedures, established by the public long before the act or the punishment, revenge is not an issue. Both the criminal and the victim's family already know the potential consequences and each has a duty to respect the punishment that is sought by the prosecution and decided by the judge and jury.

*If you're interested in reading my articles, Click Here.

I understand that both the criminal and the victims are aware of the consequences, but i still suspect there is an element of revenge to it, on a personal level. At least for me I know it would be, that's the way i would feel. However, this is irrelevant considering, like you say, that it is the justice system that delivers and decides the punishment. Still innocent people are being executed and that can't be accepted under any circumstances.

Any other opinions on this?

there can be no doubt whatsoever that the perpetrator is is guilty. And as it is today this is not the case. Innocent people has been sentenced to death and executed.
Here's an example of such a case. http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2000/05/30/eveningnews/main200710.shtml
Anthony Graves has not yet been executed but there's a good chance he will be, even if he is not executed he may have been wrongly imprisoned.

There exists no physical evidence to put Anthony Graves on the scene of the murder yet he is still on death row based on circumstancial evidence for a murder commited in 1992.

read more about his case here http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anthony_Graves

His case is coming up again July 7 this year after another appeal