Download Brief description of the course and introduction for the 10 minutes

MSc in Criminology and Criminal Justice
Hilary Term 2016
The Death Penalty
PROFESSOR CAROLYN HOYLE
[email protected]
This option runs on Fridays from 14:00-15:30 in Seminar E Manor Road
Objective of the Option
To provide students with a good understanding of the scope and practice of capital punishment
and the movement - backed by international organizations and human rights treaties - to
abolish the death penalty worldwide. Students will learn about the extent to which defendants
in capital cases are protected by due process and have access to qualified defence counsel, and
where they lack protection from police abuse, unfair trials, and painful forms of execution. They
will explore what happens when the due process safeguards fail and innocent people are
convicted and sentenced to death. Further, they will consider whether capital punishment can
ever be administered equitably, without discrimination on grounds of race, geography, gender
or other non-legal variables. Throughout this course students will draw on recent and
controversial cases and decisions, as well as the social scientific literature.
Schedule of Seminars
1. Abolition and Retention: a brief tour of the world
2. Capital punishment in law and practice
3. Procedural Protections for the Accused
4. Protecting Vulnerable Defendants
5. Inequity and Arbitrariness in the Administration of Capital Punishment
6. Convicting and Sentencing the Innocent
7. Alternatives to death: is life imprisonment better than death row?
8. Guest Lecture, Carlton Gary: a case study of a wrongful conviction
Key Text for the Course
R. Hood and C. Hoyle (2015), The Death Penalty: A Worldwide Perspective, 5th edn., Oxford
University Press.
Accessible overview on some of the topics:
UN Human Rights (2014) Moving Away from the Death Penalty at
http://www.ohchr.org/Lists/MeetingsNY/Attachments/52/Moving-Away-from-the-DeathPenalty.pdf
1
Preparation for Class
Everyone should come to each seminar ready to engage in discussion with the same level of
knowledge of the subject. Therefore you should try to read all or most of the pieces on the list
for each week. On some weeks you will be asked to give a presentation on one of the topics.
Presentations will be assigned at least one week before the class. Presentations should be brief
(approximately 5 minutes) and can be accompanied by a short handout, providing the basic
information about the topic, to be given to the other students (you are allowed to photocopy
the handouts on the machine in the Centre for Criminology).
The introductory paragraph to the readings for each week provides a guide to the key issues you
should be considering when preparing for class. However, as with most of your studies at
graduate level, you should also formulate your own questions as you do the reading, and raise
these in class for discussion.
The following websites will prove useful during your studies:
http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/ Death Penalty Information Center
http://www.deathpenaltyworldwide.org Death Penalty Worldwide
www.amnesty.org: Amnesty International
http://www.deathpenaltyproject.org/ The Death Penalty Project
http://www.handsoffcain.info/ Hands Off Cain
If you notice any errors on the reading list or have any suggestions for further readings please
let me know.
Carolyn Hoyle
2015-16
2
Seminar One
Abolition and Retention:
A brief tour of the world
The first part of this seminar will cover the pace of abolition and the new wave of abolition
across the world, asking what the prospects are for international acceptance or rejection of
capital punishment, and what the alternatives are for those jurisdictions that abolish the death
penalty. The second part will focus on Asia, where there have been some significant changes in
the past decade and the third part on the post-Furman American experience, asking whether
America is exceptional in its retention of the death penalty. After the overview section, students
should study EITHER the US OR Asia.
Presentations: After a discussion about the death penalty worldwide, two students will be asked
to present brief presentations: 1) on Asia and 2) on the US.
All students should read Part 1, then EITHER part II OR part III
Part I: A ‘Whistle-Stop’ Tour of the World
Amnesty International, Death Sentences and Executions in 2014 (download at
https://www.amnesty.org/en/documents/act50/0001/2015/en/
R. Hood and C. Hoyle (2015), chapters 1-3 (but excluding the final section of ch 3 on the US) OR
Hood and Hoyle, ‘Progress Made for Worldwide Abolition of the Death Penalty’, International
Affairs Forum, Capital Punishment Around the World, vol. 6, 1, 2015, pp. 8-11.
W. Schabas, ‘Universal Abolition of Capital Punishment is Drawing Nearer’, International Affairs
Forum, Capital Punishment Around the World, vol. 6, 1, 2015, pp. 12-13.
READ EITHER PART II OR PART III
Part II: A Focus on Asia
Read at least one of the following reports:
Death Penalty Project, The Death Penalty in Taiwan, 2014;
Death Penalty Project, The Death Penalty in Malaysia, 2013;
Death Penalty Project, The Death Penalty in Japan, 2013;
Download all DPP reports at http://www.deathpenaltyproject.org/legal-resources/researchpublications/
Sangmin Bae (2014) ‘Death Penalty Moratorium in South Korea: Norms, Institutions and
Leadership’ in Lill Scherdin (ed) Capital Punishment: A Hazard to a Sustainable Criminal Justice
System?, Ashgate
3
Borge Bakken (2014) ‘The Norms of Death: On Attitudes to Capital Punishment in China’, in Lill
Scherdin (ed) Capital Punishment: A Hazard to a Sustainable Criminal Justice System?, Ashgate
Fort Fu-Te Liao (2014) ‘Why Taiwan’s de facto Moratorium was Established and Lost’ in Lill
Scherdin (ed) Capital Punishment: A Hazard to a Sustainable Criminal Justice System?, Ashgate
David Johnson, (2014) ‘Why Does Japan Retain the Death Penalty?: Nine Hypotheses’ in Lill
Scherdin (ed) Capital Punishment: A Hazard to a Sustainable Criminal Justice System?, Ashgate.
Roger Hood & Surya Deva (eds.) (2013), ‘Confronting Capital Punishment in Asia: Human Rights,
Politics and Public Opinion’ (Oxford University Press), Chapter 1 on Asia (by Franklin Zimring);
and chapter 8 on Singapore (by Michael Hor).
M Miao, ‘Capital Punishment in China: A Populist Instrument of Social Governance’ (2013) 17 (2)
Theoretical Criminology, 233-250
Part III: America: An Exceptional Case?
Up to date information on the current use of the death penalty in the US is produced by the
Death Penalty Information Center, Year-end Report 2014:
http://deathpenaltyinfo.org/documents/2014YrEnd.pdf
R. Hood and C. Hoyle (2015), The Death Penalty: A Worldwide Perspective, 5th edn., Oxford
University Press, Chapter 3, p. 128 (section on US).
B. Harcourt (2009), ‘Abolition in the United States by 2050: On Political Capital and Ordinary
Acts of Resistance’ in C. Ogletree, JR. and A. Sarat (eds) Road to Abolition?: The Future of Capital
Punishment in the United States, New York University Press, pp. 72- 96.
C. S. Steiker and J. M. Steiker (2009), ‘The Beginning of the End?’ in C. Ogletree, JR. and A. Sarat
(eds) Road to Abolition?: The Future of Capital Punishment in the United States, New York
University Press, pp.97-138.
C. Steiker & J. Steiker, "Entrenchment and/or Destabilization? Reflections on (Another) Two
Decades of Constitutional Regulation of Capital Punishment," 30 Law & Inequality 211 (2012)
D. Garland (2010), Peculiar Institution: America’s Death Penalty in an Age of Abolition, Oxford
University Press, chs. 4 and 11.
Note:
For those unfamiliar with US death penalty jurisprudence since 1972 the following cases are
referred to in the literature (a good place to find brief descriptions of these cases is
http://campuspress.yale.edu/capitalpunishment/ :
Furman v Georgia 408 U.S. 238 (1972) (The death penalty as administered is declared
unconstitutional.)
Gregg v Georgia 428 U.S. 153 (1976) (the death penalty is not per se unconstitutional)
4
Woodson v. North Carolina 1976 (mandatory death penalties are unconstitutional) (excerpt
from Bedau, 1997, pp. 206-209.
Lockett v Ohio 438 U.S. 586 (1978) (reaffirms the concept of individualised sentencing)
Coker v Georgia 433 U.S. 584 (1977) (the death penalty for rape is unconstitutional)
and Post Furman: Callins v Collins 510 U.S. 1141 (1994) (Blackmun J. dissenting from denial of
certiorari; and Scalia J. concurring in the denial of certiorari)
5
Seminar Two
Capital punishment in law and practice
Seminar two seeks to understand the scope of capital punishment in law and practice, the
process of execution and the experience of those on death row. We will consider which offences
the death penalty is used for around the world, how prisoners are held on death rows, what
challenges are posed by attempts to executed prisoners, and who else suffers when the death
penalty is imposed.
Presentations: Three students will be asked to present brief presentations: 1) the scope of
capital punishment around the world; 2) death row; 3) executing prisoners
Overview
R. Hood and C. Hoyle (2015), The Death Penalty: A Worldwide Perspective, 5th edn., Oxford
University Press, Chapters 4 & 5.
Scope of Capital punishment
Skim information about Pakistan, India, Iran, and other countries you’re interested in from the
AI report detailed in week 1 reading list.
Lines, R.. ‘A “Most Serious Crime”? – The Death Penalty for Drug Offences and International
Human Rights Law’, Amicus Journal 21,(2010), pp. 21-28.
Penal Reform International, Sharia law and the death penalty, 2015,
http://www.penalreform.org/resource/sharia-law-and-the-death-penalty/
Liu, Renwen, ‘Recent Reforms and Prospects in China’ in R. Hood and S. Deva (eds.), Confronting
Capital Punishment in Asia (2013), pp. 107-122.
Death row
Johnson, D. T., ‘Where the state kills in secret. Capital punishment in Japan’, Punishment and
Society 8 (2006), pp. 251–285.
B. Batra, ‘Don’t be Cruel: The “Death Row Phenomenon” and India’s “Delay” Jurisprudence’ in R.
Hood and S. Deva (eds.), Confronting Capital Punishment in Asia (2013), pp. 287-312.
American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU), A Death before Dying: Solitary Confinement on Death Row
(July 2013).
Executions
Brian Evans, ‘Medical Ethics, Globalization, and the Decline of Lethal Injection’, International
Affairs Forum, Capital Punishment Around the World, vol. 6, 1, 2015, pp. 18-22.
6
Martschukat, J., “No improvement over Electrocution or even a Bullet” Lethal Injection and the
meaning of Speed and reliability in the Modern Execution Process’ in C. G. Ogeltree, Jr. and A.
Sarat (eds.), The Road to Abolition? The Future of Capital Punishment in the United States’
(2009), pp.252-278.
Denno, D. ‘For Execution methods Challenges, the Road to Abolition is Paved with Paradox’ in C.
J. Ogletree and A. Sarat (eds.), The Road to Abolition, (2009), New York: NYU Press, pp. 183-214.
The Conversation, Utah’s firing squad is another twist in America’s long quest for a perfect
execution method, April 8, 2015. (Daniel LaChance)
The Conversation, Punishment, secrecy and lethal injection: a few thoughts on Glossip v Gross,
July 2, 2014 (John Stinneford).
Collateral damage
Robertson, O. and Brett R., Lightening the Load of the Parental Death Penalty on Children,
(2013) Quaker United Nations Office, New York.
Vandiver, M., ‘The Impact of the Death Penalty on the Families of Homicide Victims and of
Condemned Prisoners’, in J. R. Acker, R. M. Bohm, and C. S. Lanier (eds.), America’s Experiment
with Capital Punishment (2nd edn., 2003), pp. 613–645.
7
Seminar Three
Procedural Protections for the Accused
Seminar 3 looks at the procedural protections for the accused and the extent to which they
protect the innocent from conviction. In doing so, it questions the extent to which juries are able
to make fair and accurate decisions. After the overview section, students should study EITHER
the US OR Asia.
Presentations: Two students will be asked to prepare brief (5-minute) presentations to lead our
discussions on procedural protections in 1) Asia and 2) the US.
For an overview of the topic in various jurisdictions, see R. Hood and C. Hoyle (2015), The Death
Penalty: A Worldwide Perspective, 5th edn., ch 7, sections 1-5.
All students should read EITHER part II OR part III
Asia:
Surya Deva, Death Penalty in the 'Rarest of Rare' Cases: A Critique of Judicial Choice-Making in
Roger Hood & Surya Deva (eds.) (2013), Confronting Capital Punishment in Asia: Human Rights,
Politics and Public Opinion (Oxford University Press).
David Johnson (2010) ‘Capital Punishment without trials in Japan’s Lay Judge System’, 8(52) Asia
Pacific Journal 1-8
Roger Hood & Surya Deva (eds.) (2013), ‘Confronting Capital Punishment in Asia: Human Rights,
Politics and Public Opinion’ (Oxford University Press): chapter 6 on China (by Liu Renwen); and
chapter 7 on India (by Bindal and Kumar).
The US:
For a good introduction to the key issues in the US (which will inform your understanding in the
following weeks too!): see C Steiker & J Steiker, (2008) ‘Report to the ALI Concerning Capital
Punishment, Annex B at http://www.ali.org/doc/Capital%20Punishment_web.pdf
D. Garland (2010), Peculiar Institution: America’s Death Penalty in an Age of Abolition, Oxford
University Press, ch 9.
S. Bright (2003), ‘The Politics of Capital Punishment: The Sacrifice of Fairness for Executions’, in:
J.R. Acker, R.M. Bohm and C.S. Lanier, America’s Experiment with Capital Punishment, Carolina
Academic Press, ch. 4, pp. 127-146.
P. Brace and B. Boyea, 2008, State Public Opinion, the Death Penalty and the Practice of Electing
Judges, American Journal of Political Science, vol. 52, 2, 360-372
8
C. Haney (2005), ‘A Tribunal Organized to Convict and Execute?: On the nature of jury selection
in capital cases’, ch 5 in Haney, Death by Design, OUP, pp. 93-114
C. Haney (2005), ‘Preparing for the Death Penalty in Advance of Trial: Process Effects in Death
Qualifying Capital Juries’, 6: in C. Haney, Death by Design, OUP, ch. 6, pp. 115-140.
Jesse Cheng (2010) Frontloading Mitigation: The “Legal” and the “Human” in Death Penalty
Defense Law & Social Inquiry Volume 35, Issue 1, pages 39–65.
J. L. Madeira, The Family Capital of Capital Families: Investigating Empathic Connections
Between Jurors and Defendants' Families in Death Penalty Cases" Mich. St. L. Rev. (2012).
Stephen B. Bright (2009) ‘The Right To Counsel In Death Penalty And Other Criminal Cases:
Neglect Of The Most Fundamental Right And What We Should Do About It’, The Journal of Law
in Society 11 J.L. Soc'y 1
9
Seminar Four
Protecting Vulnerable Defendants
In this seminar we shall examine how mental health, disability, and age affect the application of
the death penalty and the links between these two related concepts. The treatment of
vulnerable defendants has been the subject of fairly recent judgments of the US Supreme Court
in Atkins and Roper and even more recently with cases regarding the mentally ill. Some of the
questions raised are: Should vulnerable defendants be treated any differently? If so, what does
“vulnerable” mean in this context? Are there good reasons to retain the death penalty in these
cases? What is the appropriate role of the Court in these questions? And how, if at all, should
social science affect Court decisions?
Presentations
Three students will be asked to prepare brief (5-minute) presentations on the main issues
covered in this weeks readings: 1 on juveniles, 1 on intellectual disability, and 1 on mental
illness, but other students should aim to cover TWO of these three topics in full and be ready to
discuss them in class.
Overview
R. Hood and C. Hoyle (2015), The Death Penalty: A Worldwide Perspective, 5th edn., Oxford
University Press, ch 6: (Excluding the Vulnerable from Capital Punishment)
R. Smith, S. Cull, and Z. Robinson, "The Failure of Mitigation?," 65 Hastings Law Journal 1221 (2014).
1. Intellectual Disability: From Atkins to Hall
(J. Blume, et al., "A Tale Of Two (And Possibly Three) Atkins: Intellectual Disability And Capital
Punishment Twelve Years After The Supreme Court's Creation Of A Categorical Bar," 23 William &
Mary Bill of Rights Journal 393 (2014)).
J Amy Dillard, (2011) ‘And Death Shall Have No Dominion: How to achieve the categorical
exemption of mentally retarded defendants from execution’ 45, University of Richmond Law
Review 961-1008
James W. Ellis (2014) ‘Hall v. Florida: The Supreme Court’s Guidance in Implementing Atkins’,
William & Mary Bill of Rights, vol 23, No. 2, UNM School of Law Research Paper no 2015-03
http://hq.ssrn.com/Journals/RedirectClick.cfm?url=http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/PIP_Journal.cfm?pip_jrnl
=1625301&partid=350508&did=245660&eid=1619725
10
2. Mental Illness
D. Clay Kelly, (2010) Death Penalty and Mentally Ill Defendants, Journal of the American
Academy of Psychiatry and the Law Online, 38: 2: 284-86.
Franklin J. Bordenave, MD and D. Clay Kelly, MD, "Death Penalty and Mentally Ill Defendants,"
Journal of the American Academy of Psychiatry and the Law, 2010.
R. Bonnie (2007), ‘Panetti v Quarterman: Mental Illness, the Death Penalty, and Human Dignity’,
University of Virginia Law School Public Law and Legal Theory Working Paper 71
Lyn Entzeroth (2011) The Challenge And Dilemma Of Charting A Course To Constitutionally
Protect The Severely Mentally Ill Capital Defendant From The Death Penalty 44 Akron L. Rev. 529
A. Dillard, "Madness Alone Punishes the Madman: The Search for Moral Dignity in the Court's
Competency Doctrine as Applied in Capital Cases," 79 Tennessee Law Review 461 (2012).
S. Sundby, "The True Legacy of Atkins and Roper: The Unreliability Principle, Mentally Ill Defendants,
and the Death Penalty's Unravelling," William & Mary Bill of Rights, Vol. 23, forthcoming, 2014.)
3. Juveniles: from Roper to Miller
Human Rights Watch and Amnesty International (2005), ‘The Rest of Their Lives: Life without
Parole for Child Offenders in the United States’, October 2005
Adam Liptak (2007), ‘Lifers as Teenagers, Now Seeking Second Chance’, The New York Times,
October 17, 2007.
Hood and Hoyle, The Death Penalty, 5th edn., chapter 11, pp. 496-501
Cara H Drinan (2014) ‘Misconstruing Graham and Miller’ 91(3) Washington University Law
Review 785-95
Google recent newspaper articles on the on-going interpretation of Miller
11
Seminar Five
Inequity and Arbitrariness
in the Administration of Capital Punishment
In this seminar we consider the various types of inequities and arbitrariness in the
administration of capital punishment. In particular, we examine how the US Supreme Court has
dealt with the argument that the application of the death penalty is racist and discuss recent
studies of the place and importance of race within capital punishment.
Presentations: Two students will be asked to give brief (5-minute) presentation on 1) racism in
the administration of capital punishment, 2) the role of victim impact evidence.
Overview
R. Hood and C. Hoyle (2015), The Death Penalty: A Worldwide Perspective, 5th edn., Oxford
University Press, ch 8: from s. 2, p. 354.
James E. Liebman and Peter Clarke, Minority Practice, Majority’s Burden: The Death Penalty
Today, 9 Ohio St. J. Crim. L. 255 (2011).
M. J. Songer and I. Unah (2006), ‘The Effect of Race, Gender, and Location on Prosecutorial
Decisions to Seek the Death Penalty in South Carolina’, South Carolina Law Review, 58, p. 161.
On Geography
Frank R. Baumgartner, The Geography of the Death Penalty
http://www.unc.edu/~fbaum/Innocence/NC/Baumgartner-geography-of-capital-punishmentoct-17-2010.pdf
Racism in the administration of capital punishment
J. Acker, “Life, death and race - How color-blind is justice, especially in capital cases?,” Albany
Times-Union, April 22, 2012 http://www.timesunion.com/default/article/Life-death-and-race3500557.php
M. Lynch and C. Haney, "Looking Across the Empathic Divide: Racialized Decision Making on the
Capital Jury," 2011 Michigan State Law Review 573.
Isaac Unah (2011) Empirical Analysis of Race and the Process of Capital Punishment in North
Carolina’ Michigan State Law Review 609
David Baldus and George Woodworth: ‘Race, Discrimination and the Death Penalty: An Empirical
and Legal Overview, in: J.R. Acker, R.M. Bohm and C.S. Lanier, 2003, America’s Experiment with
Capital Punishment, Carolina Academic Press, ch. 16, pp. 501-551.
12
W.J. Bowers, M. Sandys and T.W. Brewer (2004), ‘Crossing Racial Boundaries: A Closer Look at
the Roots of Racial Bias in Capital Sentencing When the Defendant is Black and the Victim is
White’, 53 De Paul Law Review 1497.
M.L. Radelet and G.L. Pierce (2009), ‘Racial and Ethnic Disparities in Resolving Homicides’ in C.
Lanier, W.J. Bowers, J.R. Acker (eds). The Future of America’s Death Penalty, Carolina Academic
Press, pp. 113-134.
2. Victim Impact Testimony
R Paternoster & J Deise (2011) ‘A Heavy Thumb on the Scale: The effect of victim impact
evidence on capital decision making’, Criminology, 49(1), 129
D Minot (2012) Silenced Stories: how victim impact evidence in capital trials prevents the jury
from hearing the constitutionally required story of the defendant’, Journal of Criminal Law and
Criminology, 102(1)
S. Phillips (2009), ‘Status Disparities in the Capital of Capital Punishment’, Law and Society
Review, vol. 43, No. 4, pp. 807-
13
Seminar Six
Convicting and Sentencing the Innocent
Having in previous weeks considered the procedural safeguards in place to protect the innocent,
and particularly those who are deemed to be ‘vulnerable’, in this seminar we consider what
happens when those safeguards fail to protect defendants and innocent people are convicted
and sentenced to death. We explore what has failed in the criminal process when the innocent
are convicted; what difficulties defendants encounter in trying to prove their innocence; and
how social scientific research has developed our understanding of innocence. This class will
focus on the US, though for information on wrongful convictions in death penalty cases see:
R. Hood and C. Hoyle (2015), The Death Penalty: A Worldwide Perspective, 5th edn., Oxford
University Press, ch 7, (section on Wrongful convictions).
Presentations: Two students will be asked to give brief (5-minute) presentations addressing the
following:
1) What, in your opinion, is the most intractable problem for those who would like to
reduce the number of wrongful convictions in capital murder cases?
2) How helpful is the innocence movement for death penalty abolitionists?
For up-to-date information and reports see:
National Registry of Exonerations held by the law school at the University of Michigan
http://www.law.umich.edu/special/exoneration/Pages/about.aspx
and read the key findings of their recent report (S. Gross & M. Shaffer, "Exonerations in the
United States, 1989–2012," Univ. of Michigan Law School, May 21, 2012):
http://www.law.umich.edu/special/exoneration/Documents/exonerations_us_1989_2012_sum
mary.pdf
J. Roman, K. Walsh, et al., "Post-Conviction DNA Testing and Wrongful Conviction," Urban
Institute Justice Policy Center, June 2012. The report is at this link. You need only read the
executive summary at pp. 1-3 for class, but if you write a paper on this topic you’ll need to read
the full report.
https://www.ncjrs.gov/pdffiles1/nij/grants/238816.pdf
http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/article.php?did=412&scid=6
Academic studies on US:
For an overview on research on sources of wrongful conviction, see J. Gould and R. Leo (2010),
One Hundred Years Later: Wrongful Convictions after a Century of Research, The Journal Of
Criminal Law & Criminology, Vol. 100, No. 3.
J. Acker (2009), ‘Actual Innocence: Is Death Different?’ Behavioral Sciences and Law, 27, pp. 297311.
J. Acker and R. Bellandi, “Firmament or Folly? Protecting the Innocent, Promoting Capital
Punishment, and the Paradoxes of Reconciliation,” 29 Justice Quarterly 287 (April 2012)
14
B. Garrett (2008), ‘Judging Innocence’, 108 Colum. L. Rev. 55. SSRN HeinOnline (PDF)
B. Garrett (2010) "The Substance of False Confessions," 62 Stan. L. Rev. 1051. HeinOnline (PDF)
The Conversation, ‘Coerced confessions and jailhouse snitches: why the death penalty is so
flawed’, August 5, 2015, (Brandon Garrett).
C. Steiker and J. Steiker (2005), ‘The Seduction of Innocence: The Attraction and Limitations of the
Focus on Innocence in Capital Punishment Law and Advocacy’, The Journal of Criminal Law and
Criminology (1973-), Vol. 95, No. 2 (Winter, 2005), pp. 587-624.
The Conversation, Loss of Innocence: the experience of exonerated death row inmates, August 3,
2015 (Saundra Westervelt & Kimberly Cook).
The Death Penalty Project, 2014, The Inevitability Of Error: The Administration Of Justice In
Death Penalty Cases, download report at
http://www.deathpenaltyproject.org/news/1795/1795/
15
Seminar Seven
Alternatives to death: is life imprisonment better than death row?
(with Marion Vannier)
Abolitionists cannot content themselves with arguing the negative aspects of capital
punishment. Those that seek to abolish the death penalty face the task of establishing a viable
alternative or alternatives. They must have a clear idea about what punishment is appropriate
for those who commit terrible offences. In this final seminar of the course we will discuss how
perceptions and understandings of life imprisonment have evolved over time (from prison
management concerns to humanitarian issues).
For an overview of how different countries have dealt with the question of alternatives to death,
see: Hood and Hoyle, The Death Penalty, 5th edn., chapter 11, and for the specific issues to be
discussed in class, from p. 485
Presentation: one student will introduce the seminar with by a five-minute presentation on the
key issues that come out of this literature, and the questions it raises.
Most of the class will focus on a discussion that draws on the following pieces:
Sentencing Project, (2013) ‘Life goes on: the historic rise of life sentences in America’
http://sentencingproject.org/doc/publications/inc_Life%20Goes%20On%202013.pdf
Wright, Julian (1990) "Life-Without-Parole: An Alternative to Death or Not Much of a Life at
All?". 43 Vand. L. Rev. 529
Stewart, Jim, and Paul Lieberman (1982) “What Is This New Sentence That Takes Away Parole?”
Student Lawyer
Bedau, H. (1990) "Imprisonment vs. Death: Does Avoiding Schwarzschild's Paradox Lead to
Sheleff's Dilemma?", Albany Law Review, 54:481-495
Mauer, M., King, R., and Young, M. (2004), "The Meaning of "Life": long prison sentences in
context", The Sentencing Project,
http://www.sentencingproject.org/doc/publications/inc_meaningoflife.pdf
Nellis, A. (2013), "Tinkering with Life: A Look at the Inappropriateness of Life Without Parole as
an Alternative to the Death Penalty", University of Miami Law Review, 67:439
16
Seminar Eight
Guest Lecture, Carlton Gary: a case study of a wrongful conviction
Optional reading for this guest lecture:
David Rose, 2011, The Big Eddy Club: The Stocking Stranglings and Southern Justice
http://www.amazon.co.uk/The-Big-Eddy-Club-Stranglings/dp/1595586717
17
18