Is Anthony Graves To Blame For A Magnificent Murder?

Such as in the case of Anthony Graves, who was wrongfully convicted of a brutal murder in the year of 1992 and therefore sentenced to death. In fact, Graves had no connection to the crime, including a lack of evidence, no plausible motive, and only one witness to place him at the scene, who turned out to be the actual perpetrator. Overall, a total of eighteen years of Graves’ life was spent behind bars and twelve of them on death row for a crime he had no relation to. Graves was failed by not only the district attorney, but also the entire United States justice system, that didn’t allow him to be innocent until proven guilty. In the case of Cameron Todd Willingham, he was convicted in the year 1992 and executed twelve years later for starting

a fire that killed his three children. Willingham’s conviction was primarily based upon forensic evidence that later was discovered to be inaccurate and resembled folklore (Hall). Each of these cases demonstrate wrongful deaths and irreversible murder displaying that false witnesses, testimonies and a lack of both forensic and technology advancements can kill an innocent individual.
By the same token, the American capital punishment system leaves room for irrevocable mistakes, such as irrevocable sentences and the risks of executing the innocent.

In other words, “Four percent of defendants sentenced to death are innocent” and “If all innocent people who were given death sentences [were] to be cleared of their offenses, the exoneration rate would rise from the actual rate of those released – 1.6% – to at least 4.1%” (Pilkington). Often times in death penalty trials, prosecutors withhold exculpatory information or include false testimonies and unreliable witnesses in order to comply with the public's desire to blame a scapegoat in a timely matter. America’s legal system lacks the ability to function flawlessly on all accounts. Every defendant and every case differentiates in such large extremes that it is impossible for one system of death to justly exist, especially with the state governments abusing their judicial

power.
Despite the obvious complications with the American death penalty process, supporters will claim that capital punishment is a deterrent to crime.

Especially for the protection of law enforcement that is dealing with inmates on death row that can’t be deterred by anything less than the death penalty, it clearly is the only deterrent believed to prevent further crimes (Death Penalty Curriculum). On the contrary, as stated by Dr. Jonathan Groner, "The psychological mindset of the criminal is such that they are not able to consider consequences at the time of the crime. Most crimes are crimes of passion that are done in situations involving intense excitement or concern. People who commit these crimes are not in a normal state of mind -- they do not consider the consequences in a logical way" (Death Penalty Info Center). Thus meaning that individuals in their right mind would fear the thought of death row, but a criminal in the heat of passion cannot be deterred or if the person is thinking irrationally. A deterrent would be more effective if the punishment awarded was both obvious and immediate, unlike month-long trials and years sitting on death

row.
Is a true criminal really going to fear the death penalty when they are unlikely to even be executed?
Nonetheless, death penalty advocates believe in the concept an “eye for an eye” and that an individual who commits a crime deserves to be punished: a murderer deserves to be murdered. The flaw in this philosophy is indicated in the statement, “pouring gasoline on a fire will only fuel a larger flame”. Acting in violence forces an image upon our government that resembles one of a criminal, murdering a murderer is acting in vengeance and retribution rather than justice. The American government should not punish individuals for a crime with the crime they committed, it displays hypocrisy and tyranny. In other words,“If a person who commits a terrible act can "deserve" the cruelty of death, why cannot others, for similar reasons, "deserve" to be tortured or imprisoned without trial or simply shot on sight?” (Amnesty International). This exemplifies that if the government has the power to execute and kill in cold blood, it’s power cannot be limited to other constitution-breaking actions.
Whereas the death penalty is an extremely controversial subject most people can agree that if wronged by taking a precious life from our midst the need for justice and the desire for revenge is understandable. It still does not warrant the inhumane killing of a human being disguised by the term injection. Even the most heinous criminal still remains someone’s loved one and murdering another human being exemplifies the flaws of the American justice system that both perspectives can acknowledge.
As can be seen by irreversible death, the violation of both constitutional and human rights, and individual and judicial morality, the American capital punishment system is no longer applicable to a twenty first-century nation. The death penalty is cruel and unusual, it targets individuals by race, gender, ethnicity, geography, and economic status. It is unjust and morally wrong for a nation based on the statement; you are innocent until proven guilty to judge an individual in the court of law primarily upon their ability to provide and pay for a qualified attorney. Capital punishment abuses the rights of American citizens and allows the American government to legally break and disregard the very fundamentals the entire nation was built upon. Though, a government enacted punishment system is necessary, life without parole would be a cheaper and more effective solution and keep our nation morally and ethically sound. Completely eliminating the death penalty and requiring criminals to serve the rest of their lives in prison without any possibility of parole would still guarantee a natural death behind bars (Galik). Life without parole leaves room for those who are innocent to be proven so and prevent wrongful deaths and irreversible sentences such as in the cases of Anthony Graves and Cameron Todd Willingham. It is necessary to abolish the death penalty and allow the United States to flourish and reach its potential without contradicting its values or murdering the innocent. Capital punishment is an outdated and perilous process in which America would thrive better lawfully and morally without. America takes innocent lives in the name of justice and performs actions that compare to those of a criminal. It is the duty of a free nation to uphold a punishment system which directly reflects its morals and ethics. Until the American capital punishment system no longer targets individuals by gender, race, ethnicity, and geography, it must be halted. And since no system of death can guarantee it will not execute innocent men and women, no system of death can remain intact.
By the time, the clank of police boots echo on the concrete floors approaching swiftly and my last call has come. My scheduled meeting with death has arrived. As I am pushed forcefully down the hallway we walk into a small room and though I can’t see them, I feel the eyes staring at me through the one-way window. A physician straps my arms and legs down and sterilizes the vein of my arm…
A shrill screech escapes my lips and my body thrusts upward trembling. My skin is cold and the sheets of my bed drenched in sweat of fear, tears of joy and relief.
I managed to escape the nightmare of the American capital punishment system, though death row inmates awaiting their execution will never be able to simply just open their eyes and escape unjust sentencing, irreversible deaths, immorality, and unconstitutionality. The death penalty must be executed.