Dudley Sharp, contact info below
Are death penalty opponents really concerned about innocents at risk? Of course.
However, as innocents are more at risk without the death penalty, it is appropriate to challenge their understanding of that easily accessible fact.
1) There is no known actual innocent executed in the US, at least since the 1930's.
Possibly, 0.4% of all those sentenced to death since 1973 may have been actually innocent. All were released. An incredible record of accuracy - 99.6% accuracy in proper actual guilt convictions, with the 0.4% released (1).
2) Anti death penalty folks say taking the death penalty away eliminates actual innocents dying prior to their exoneration. Nonsense.
While we have executed about 1300 murderers in the US (1973-2012) about 5,000 inmates per year die while in custody (2). We cannot bring back any of those that may have been innocent, either.
3) Murderers that we have allowed to murder again, recidivist murderers, MIGHT number around 28,000 since 1973 , based upon existing studies (3).
However, I think it likely that the numbers are closer to 14,000, based upon my review in footnote 3.
4) Since 1973, the same year several states re instated the death penalty, post Furman, from 40,000-200,000 innocents have been murdered by those under the government supervison of parole and probation and/or other early releases (4).
5) 28 studies, beginning in 2000, find for a deterrent effect, ranging from 1-28 innocent lives spared per execution, or totals from 1,300 - 36,400 innocent lives saved, since 1973 (4).
Based upon an estimated 700,000 murders in the US (1973-2012), that represents a range from 0.18% to 5% of potential murderers who were deterred from committing murder - a huge savings in innocent lives spared, but, statistically, a very small reduction in murder rates.
6) The death penalty spares more innocent lives than does a life sentence, in two additional ways, as well:
Enhanced due process and enhanced incapacitation.
No one questions that the death penalty has greater due process protections than a life sentence, thereby the death penalty protects actual innocents to a higher degree than any lesser sanction.
Neither does anyone question that living murderers harm and murder, again and that executed ones do not.
6) REALITY: ARE DEATH PENALTY OPPONENTS REALLY CONCERNED ABOUT INNOCENT LIVES AT RISK?
Of course, but . . . The reality is that we can spare murderers lives and thus sacrifice more innocents or we can spare more innocent lives by executing more murderers.
Look at Ernest van den Haag's interview of well known anti death penalty activists. He asked them, if it was proven that 100 innocent lives were spared per execution, via deterrence, would you still oppose the death penalty. All said yes (5).
Based upon our 1300 executions (1973-2012), those anti death penalty folks would chose sparing the lives of 1300 murderers over saving the lives of 130,000 innocents.
Think about that.
Well known anti death penalty scholars "(Charles) Black and (Hugo Adam ) Bedau said they would favor abolishing the death penalty even if they knew that doing so would increase the homicide rate by 1,000 percent." (5).
For them, they would chose sparing the lives of 1300 murderers (from 1973-2012) over saving an additonal 6.3 million innocent lives, taken by murder.
For some very well known leaders of the anti death penalty movement, their motivation is not protecting innocents, but protecting the lives of all murderers, no matter the cost in innocent lives. That's their moral choice.
They, and all death penalty opponents, need to face that.
NOTE: I am making two points with this information. If anti death penalty folks were concerned about innocents, their efforts would be to fix the huge problems in the criminal justice system which really sacrifice innocents lives, as opposed to trying to end the death penalty, a penalty which assists in sparing additional innocent lives.
I think many of those opposed to capital punishment would change their minds if they knew that sparing murderers sacrificed more innocent lives.
c. "The innocence tactic: Unreliable studies and disinformation", reports By United States Congress, Senate, 107th Congress, 2d Session, Calender no 731, Report 107-315. The Innocence Protection Act of 2002, (iv) The innocence tactic: Unreliable studies and disinformation, p 65-69
(2) Deaths in Custody Statistical Tables, Bureau of Justice Statistics, SEE 7 links on right side of page. http://bjs.ojp.usdoj.gov/content/dcrp/dictabs.cfm
(3) "Recidivism of Prisoners Released", Bureau of Justice Statistics
See both studies, of 1983 and 1994 data
6.6% recidivism rate, 1989 study of 1983 data
1.2% recidivism rate, 2002 study of 1994 data
The combined recidivism rate for the two studies is 3.9%. These rates are based upon re-arrest, not re-conviction.
I suspect the real recidivism rate, looking at 1973-2012, will be closer to half that, at 2%.
Why the recidivism rates should be higher:
Both of these studies only looked at recidivism for 3 years after release. We are concerned with recidivism for 40 years and less, years 1973-2012, as the modern era of new death penalty statutes began in 1973. Recidivism rates will be higher if released prisoners were tracked for the additonal 4 years to 40 years, as opposed to only 3 years. In addition, rates from 1973-1983, will likely be about the same as the 6.6%, if not higher, because we had barely started the period of longer sentences and increased incarcerations rates.
Why the recidivism rates should be lower:
The dramatic reduction in recidivism between the two studies reflects a dramatic increase in sentencing terms and incarceration rates, which amounted to lower rates of early release and thus recidivism.
EXACT NUMBERS: Based upon convictions, 8.4% of those on death row had murdered, at least one person, prior to committing additional murder or murders which put them on death row --an estimated 600-1000 additional innocents murdered, by those who had murdered before, just for that small set that have made it to death row.