The story of the “Dead Man Walking” is as follows. A convicted killer on Death Row called Matthew Poncelet has been sentenced to death by lethal injection. He has committed the crime of attacking two teenagers, a boy, and a girl, raping the girl then killing them both. He writes to Christian nun, Sister Helen Prejean and asks her to find him a decent lawyer in hope of changing his death sentence to a sentence of life imprisonment. Sister Helen is unsure having not done anything like this before. She isn’t sure what she is getting herself into, nevertheless she agrees to go and see him.
Capital Punishment is not used in the United Kingdom, but is used in the United States. There are many arguments for Capital Punishment. A popular argument for Capital Punishment is that having criminals executed deters crime because, other people will not break the law in fear of being executed. One other argument is that families of the victim/s can have peace of mind and achieve revenge ion the criminal. In “Dead Man Walking” Mr Percy, a victims dad says
“I’m going to watch you fry, watch you sizzle”
This right of having revenge on a person who has committed a crime on you stems from the extensively quoted biblical text,
“an eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth” which means if someone, for example, stabs you it is quite all right for you to stab them back. This quote is used as an argument in “Dead Man Walking”. Another religious quote used in the film supporting Capital Punishment is ,
“Those who live by the sword, die by the sword” Jesus said this when he was arrested in the garden of Gethsemane and Peter tried to save him by attacking a roman solider. His words mean if you live your life killing you will be killed
Another key argument is that the person that has committed the crime has given up the right to life, so executing them is not murder.
Some people say that as the best predictor of future behaviour is past behaviour, murderers are likely to murder again, and so be executing them further murders can be prevented.
Some argue executing criminals is kinder to them than sentencing them to life in prison where they will live with a guilty conscience in horrible prison conditions.
Although a lot of people are for Capital Punishment, there are equally a lot of people against it. These people also have a lot of arguments against Capital Punishment. One of the key arguments is that the death penalty is killing and killing is wrong, therefore the death penalty is wrong.
They also argue that the death penalty is a violation of human rights and that torture and cruelty are wrong. Many executions are botched and the criminals suffer extensive pain.
Another important point they argue is that if the criminal is wrongly convicted or sentenced and mistakes have been made, then there is no way that the mistake can be justified if the criminal has already been executed. In the end an innocent person has been executed.
In the film “Dead Man Walking” specific arguments against Capital Punishment, taking into mind the crime committed, crop up. Matthew’s partner in crime got a life sentence instead of a death penalty because he could afford a better lawyer. Leaders commonly use Capital Punishment to win votes. Also Matthew’s Family was affected greatly, his younger brother was bullied at school following on from this Helen says everyone deserves respect no matter what they’ve done. She goes on to highlight Jesus’ teachings of
“Everyone is worth more than their worst act”
Helen strongly believes that killing is wrong, no matter who does it.
Helen’s job as a nun is not to save Matthew’s life, but to save his soul. She gets Matthew to take responsibility for what he has done and apologise to God, so that he gains redemption. Through this he will gain entry in heaven. Although Matthew denies having committed the crime, he eventually admits to Helen that he did.
I think the film “Dead Man Walking” is very emotive and questioning. It shows both sides of the arguments on Capital Punishment through a true story. The fact that it is true brings the argument alive to people and they see that it does affect their lives. I think it is clever the way that the scene where Matthew is being executed is filmed; during the scene a flashback of Matthew and his partner committing the crime are shown and the film darts between the flashback and Matthew execution, causing the audience to feel both sides of the argument. In this way I think the film did show a good balance of viewpoints, but most of the time I think it was biased on the argument against Capital Punishment. My reasons for this are that during the film it seems we are made to feel sympathetic towards Matthew by being shown his life on Death Row, but it does not show the victims parents grief at the loss of their children, arguments against Capital Punishment crop up a lot.
Nowadays although there are arguments for both for and against Capital Punishment, I think that the UK in leaning towards the against side. I believe this is true because of all the reports of the many executions in other countries and harrowing cases, many criminals having botched executions and people speaking out against the system in those countries are taking drastic affect on the people of the United Kingdom’s views. I think the person who directed the film, although trying to show both sides of the true story has let the film become biased, by only showing one sides arguments against Capital Punishment due to his own thoughts on the matter.
Nevertheless if the film was not biased I think it would be a great way to show Christian teachings to youngsters. The story is true and this is what makes the issue real, after watching the film their views on the matter undoubtedly become established.
