• Join over 1.2 million students every month
  • Accelerate your learning by 29%
  • Unlimited access from just £6.99 per month

Members of the jury I come before you today in hope of persuading you to remove the ultimate denial of human rights, the death penalty.

Extracts from this document...


English Oral Members of the jury I come before you today in hope of persuading you to remove the ultimate denial of human rights, the death penalty. I ask you today to put aside your feelings of hate for criminals of past encounters and perform your duty and legal responsibility to remove the death penalty, for while it is in place, justice will never be fully served. For you to fully understand how much of a burden the death penalty places on everyone, I would first like to share with you my past experiences with juries and the death penalty. I have been a professional lawyer for eighteen years now and in that time I have seen many cases where the accused was facing the death penalty. For the larger part of those cases I have been the one defending the accused. In almost all of those cases even though the evidence indicated that the defendant was guilty most of my clients were acquitted. ...read more.


Surely justice can be served through different means. Now to those of you who remain who still don't share my view, who answered no to both of my questions, I now wish to impress upon you how the death penalty is a burden on everyone else, not just you. It is a burden on the government as it costs more to kill someone than it does to imprison them. It costs between two and three million dollars on average to execute someone, the same cost for imprisoning someone for forty years. Surely life imprisonment would be a less inhumane and less expensive way for justice to be served. The death penalty is also a burden on the families of the offenders. Surely the family would rather the offender is kept in jail, instead of being taken from them. The knowledge that their son or daughter, brother or sister is still alive somewhere would surely be less stressful than having to come to terms with them being gone forever. ...read more.


The United Kingdoms Royal Commission stated that "there is no clear evidence that the abolition of the death penalty has led to an increase in crime, or that its reintroduction has led to a fall." Recent statistics showed that the abolition of the death penalty has actually led to a fall in crime. In Canada the homicide rate of 3.09 in 1975 has dropped to 1.76 after the abolition of the death penalty. This is a forty four point seven percent drop in homicides. This clearly acknowledges that the death penalty is not a deterrent. Retentionists may also state that the death penalty provides incapacitation of criminals and prevents them from re offending. But surely life imprisonment achieves this in a less inhumane way. The main objective of any punishment is to serve justice. Plato, an ancient Greek philosopher stated that "Justice is a form of correct or proper action." The death penalty is neither correct nor proper, and you the jury have a duty to see that the death penalty is abolished, and that justice is served. ...read more.

The above preview is unformatted text

This student written piece of work is one of many that can be found in our GCSE Capital Punishment section.

Found what you're looking for?

  • Start learning 29% faster today
  • 150,000+ documents available
  • Just £6.99 a month

Not the one? Search for your essay title...
  • Join over 1.2 million students every month
  • Accelerate your learning by 29%
  • Unlimited access from just £6.99 per month

See related essaysSee related essays

Related GCSE Capital Punishment essays

  1. Critically evaluate arguments for and against the death penalty.

    The Eighth Amendment clearly states that any "cruel and unusual punishments" are forbidden. The debate then lay on whether the death penalty is in fact a "cruel and unusual punishment". Pro-Death Penalty views claimed that the death penalty is not a cruel and unusual punishment in the eyes of those who wrote the Amendments due to the Fifth Amendment.

  2. "Every country should retain the death penalty is the ultimate punishment" - Argue in ...

    must look at the consequences of the action first and depending on the number of people that are happy with the outcome, the action is then taken. The consequences of capital punishment would be the death of the accused and the people who have suffered due to the person(s)

  1. Death Penalty

    Some states have got the death penalty enforced whilst some others don't. I have made a graph to make it easy to analyse; As you can clearly see the death penalty looks as if it doesn't work because in Louisiana where they have the death penalty they have the highest rates of murders, thirteen a years.

  2. Death penalty.

    That's not true". This one statement he made explains the government's reason for practicing the death penalty. These kind of people are not able to live in this society. They are dangerous, and nothing can make them better, so therefore they should die.

  1. Is an eye for an eye a legal remedy in the 21st century?

    ix The imposition of the death penalty would clearly violate the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. The death penalty even breaches America's own rights under the Bill of Rights-the Eighth Amendment's ban on "Cruel and unusual punishment". Powers of governments are most of the times underestimated.

  2. The death penalty

    There are 3 international instruments in force which commit State parties to not have the death penalty. They are: - The Second Optional Protocol to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights aiming at abolition of the death penalty, which has now been ratified by 53 states.

  1. What is a human being?

    * An embryo is a form of life. * A foetus is a form of life. * A newborn baby is a form of life. * A newborn baby is a person. * Somewhere during the nine months of pregnancy, personhood begins.

  2. Capital punishment and human rights.

    It is moral and it is a way of expressing common beliefs in what's right and wrong. Some believe that the instinct for retribution is part of the human nature. Some supporters may believe that channelling that human instinct would have a favourable effect, in promoting the stability of a society governed by law.

  • Over 160,000 pieces
    of student written work
  • Annotated by
    experienced teachers
  • Ideas and feedback to
    improve your own work