Wrongful judgments can delegitimize state
George Stinney, a South Carolinian, was the youngest American to be executed in the U.S. in the 20th Century. A 14-year-old boy from Columbia, Stinney was executed for the murder of two girls in 1944. After Stinney mentioned he had spoken to the girls before their deaths, he was arrested and allegedly confessed. Stinney’s defense lawyer, planning to run for state House and, not wanting to upset his white South Carolinians who might vote for him, offered a poor defense in a case that was decided by public opinion before it even came to court. Witness accounts paint a heart-breaking picture of George using a Bible as a booster seat in the electric chair.
My interest in the history of capital punishment in South Carolina was prompted by the Maryland legislature, which is on the cusp of banning executions. The Stinney case is especially powerful because it happened so close to home, in Alcolu, about 15 miles outside Sumter.
The death penalty has both practical and moral problems. Practically, it is expensive. Execution costs about two to five times as much as life without parole. This is because we allow for so many appeals. Some argue execution would be cheaper if we reduced the process around it, but that process arose because of cases like George Stinney. Civilized society will not tolerate uncertain executions. Death penalty proponents must recognize these costs will always accompany the punishment. Additionally, the death penalty is an ineffective crime deterrent. While it’s difficult to control for outside factors, no correlation between a death penalty and reduced violent crime has been found.
The main ethical concern is uncertain guilt. Since the mid-1970s, for every 10 death row inmates who have been executed, one prisoner has been exonerated. Among all prisoners, DNA evidence has led to reversed sentences for more than 300 people. Unless guilt is absolutely certain, every execution carries the possibility of innocence. The permanent nature of capital punishment makes it most ethically challenging. How many innocent people are we willing to see wrongfully killed to ensure the guilty are adequately punished? While years spent in prison can’t be returned, the innocent can be freed with a cleared name and compensation.
It all comes down to a cost-benefit analysis. Historically, the state’s monopoly on violence has contributed to its legitimacy. Some claim a government that fails to punish the guilty cannot be respected. This is true, but equally true is people will not respect a government that punishes the innocent. Every post-execution exoneration reduces confidence in the state’s role as an arbiter of justice. Because of these concerns, the death penalty should be retained as a contributor to the state’s legitimacy, but it should be used only to punish the most heinous and provable of crimes.