DOES THE DEATH

PENALTY GET THE

Rebecca Patton was Frank Pattons wife for seventeen years and had two children.
Rebecca Patton was shot dead in their Texas home in an extortion attempt gone wrong on
September 18, 1985. Two men, Lesley Gosch and John Rodgers forced themselves into the
Patton household and were planning to hold her ransom for money. Something went wrong after
the ransom call was made to Frank Patton and the police found Rebecca Patton shot in the head
lying on the ground. Stephen Hurst was a friend of John Rodgers and after a $100,000 reward
was put out, he implicated Rodgers and Gosch in the murder. After investigation and trial, it was
found that Gosch was the one who put the fatal bullets into Rebecca Patton. Going along with the
Patton family wishes, the jury sentence Gosch to death and he was executed by lethal injection
April 24, 1998.
Capital punishment is an age-old debate that has been occurring since Biblical times.
Capital punishment has also been evolving for all these years in regards to the types of crimes
that the death penalty is used for and methods of the death penalty. People used to be stoned to
death for their crimes, now drug cocktails are used to provide a lethal injection. The Supreme
Court has moved towards quicker and less painful means of execution from hanging and firing
squads to the electric chair, then to the gas chamber and lethal injection. As mentioned earlier, in
Biblical times women were executed for having an affair. In modern day America, people can
only be executed if first-degree murder is committed. The death penalty has also evolved in
America in regards to who can be executed. In Atkins v. Virginia, the Supreme Court decided that
it was unconstitutional for a state to execute a defendant who is mentally retarded. In Roper v.
Simmons, the Court ruled that executing a defendant who was under the age of eighteen when the
crime was committed was unconstitutional. Eighteen states and the District of Columbia have
outlawed the death penalty in the United States (Berman).

Religious and political groups have pushed for both the death penalty and abolishment of
the death penalty. Some religious groups point to the fact that there are times in the Bible where
God sanctions capital punishment, while other groups argue that it should not be up to man to
take someones life (Pickens). Liberal political groups and many civil rights activists lobby for
the abolishment of the death penalty while more conservative groups tend to justify capital
punishment. The death penalty should be legal and in use for capital crimes because the
death penalty prevents future murders, a just society requires the death penalty for the
taking of a life, and the death penalty is applied fairly and the discretion used when
handing down a death sentence is fair and necessary.
The death penalty prevents and deters future murders. The purpose of punishment when
someone commits a crime, whether its probation, prison time, or death, is to deter crime. The
theory is, is that as the penalty gets more severe; the less likely a crime will be committed.
According to Michigan State Universitys death penalty curriculum, since society has the
highest interest in preventing murder, it should use the strongest punishment available to deter
murder, and that is the death penalty (deathpenaltycurriculum.org). Isaac Ehrlich produced
results showing that for every inmate executed, seven lives were saved because potential
murderers were deterred.
Analyzing murder rates have sometimes proved inconclusive, but this is only because of
how infrequently the death penalty is used and that it takes years for the execution to actually be
carried out. Although some tests may be inconclusive, capital punishment is the most likely
deterrent as people fear death more than anything else according to Ernest van den Haag, a
Professor of Jurisprudence at Fordham University. Execution not only deters others from
murdering, but also deters the murderer. The killer cannot kill again if they are dead, plus many

killers are locked in prison for life, so they figure that they have nothing to lose in life and may
do anything to get out of prison or to get their way which may involve harming even more
people.
A just society requires capital punishment for the taking of a life. This was the original
reasoning for capital punishment when it was first known to be instated (Pickens). An example of
this reasoning being used was by the family of the victim in the Gosch case. They pointed out
that it was about justice, not revenge, This man took a life. He took a lot of things. My mom
was a lot of things to a lot of people. He took her away from a lot of people and left a big hole in
a lot of peoples lives as well as deprived her of the pleasure of living
(deathpenaltycurriculum.org). Similar testimony is given time and time again by families who
have their loved ones stolen away from them and all that they want is justice to be served.
Closure is brought to the families and they are ensured that there will be no more victims from
the murderer.
The idea of retribution has its origin in religious values and has maintained it to be proper
to take an eye for an eye, or in this case a life for a life (deathpenaltycurriculum.org). It seems as
though any lesser punishment would undermine the value of life. One particular case in 1991
makes retribution necessary. A young mother was forced to watch her baby be murdered, then
she was brutally beaten and killed. This killer should not be able to get three meals a day, TV,
visits, and a roof over their head. For the worst of crimes, the toughest of penalties should be
dealt out and that is the death penalty.
The death penalty is applied fairly and discretion is necessary when handing down a
death sentence. In courtrooms everywhere across America discretion is used and the prosecution
hardly ever pursues every single possible offense or penalty. Each crime is unique and each case

must be looked at independently. The Supreme Court has even ruled that the death penalty
cannot be used in every first-degree murder case (Atkins v. Virginia and Roper v. Simmons).
Those under the age of eighteen cannot receive the death penalty and neither can mentally
retarded defendants.
There have been some questions raised over racial discrimination and socioeconomic bias
because of the discretion that is used in these cases. However, in McGautha v. California, the
Court ruled that state jury discretion schemes did not violate the due process clause of the
Fourteenth Amendment (Weisberg). These discretion schemes have improved, however, and are
now legally guided and the jury is much better advised so that there is a smaller chance of unfair
discretion. These state law changes were mainly in response to Furman v. Georgia in which in a
five-to-four decision struck down the death penalty in every scheme across the United States in
1972 (Weisberg). In 1976, the Supreme Court took another look at the issue and in Gregg v.
Georgia, found that the death penalty was constitutional and that adequate safeguards against an
arbitrary and discriminatory application of capital punishment [were in place] (Weisberg).
The issue of the Eight Amendment and cruel and unusual punishment is also
commonly brought up when discussing the death penalty and its usage. According to Shulman in
the Encyclopedia of Contemporary American Social Issues, the Supreme Court tends to rule
more often on non-capital cases, but even those are rare. Three major cases have come to the
Supreme Court regarding the Eighth Amendment and capital punishment. Two of which have
already been discussed, Atkins v. Virginia and Roper v. Simmons. Coker v. Georgia is a case in
which the Supreme Court ruled that death sentences are disproportionate in crimes other than
murder. In 1983, a key case came up in the Supreme Court regarding penalty proportionality,
Solem v. Helm. Out of this case came the Solem test. According to Shulman, the test is, First, a

court should look to the gravity of the offense and the harshness of the penalty. Second, a court
should compare the sentences imposed on other criminals in the same jurisdiction. Finally, courts
should compare the sentences imposed for commission of the same crime in other jurisdictions
(Shulman). This test is yet another tool for juries to use in order to prevent arbitrariness,
discrimination, and unnecessary discretion.
Capital punishment has been a crime fighting tool for centuries. Studies have found that
executions save lives by preventing the killer from killing again and deter potential killers
because the ultimate fear that people have is death. The value of life is belittled when murderers
are allowed to walk out of prison and when the most heinous of killers receive benefits from
states such as food and shelter. The death penalty also provides closure and justice for the
victims families who had loved ones ripped away from them tragically. The death penalty is
applied fairly, the discretion used is necessary and used in all court cases, and the Supreme Court
has upheld capital punishment. Discretion is very important and a key factor in the American
justice system; each crime, victim, and perpetrator is unique. The Supreme Court has upheld the
most recent state jury discretion laws in 1976 and has deemed them to be fair. The Supreme
Court has also rejected the idea that capital punishment is cruel and unusual and has even
provided tools for juries to use their discretion correctly in order to prevent possible unfairness
and bias. Capital punishment is a legal and moral necessity and should be in use today as it
prevents potential murders, is morally just, and there are measures in places so that it is enacted
fairly.

Works Cited
"Arguments For and Against." Death Penalty Information. Michigan State University, n.d. Web.
24 Oct. 2015.
Berman, Mark. "There Are 18 States without the Death Penalty. A Third of Them
Have Banned It since 2007." Washington Post: n. pag. Print.
"Death Penalty Information." Death Penalty Information. Michigan State University, n.d. Web.
24 Oct. 2015.
Pickens, Donald K. "Capital Punishment." Dictionary of American History. Ed. Stanley I. Kutler.
3rd ed. Vol. 2. N.p.: n.p., n.d. 39-41. Print.
Shulman, William L. "Cruel and Unusual Punishment." Encyclopedia of Contemporary
American Social Issues. Ed. Michael Shally-Jensen. Vol. 2. N.p.: n.p., n.d. 414-20. Print.
Weisberg, Robert. "Capital Punishment." Encyclopedia of the Supreme Court of the United
States. Ed. David S. Tanenhaus. Vol. 1. N.p.: n.p., 2008. 262-69. Print.