Zachary Shemtob

In the essay “Executions should be televised,” by Zachary Shemtob and David Lat, which originally appeared in the New York Times, is an argumentative essay that advocates for the proposition of making criminal executions open to the public in the United States. The authors Zachary Shemtob and David Lat—criminal justice teacher and former federal prosecutor, respectively—have formulated their essay using supporting points and evidence to substantiate their thesis that “Executions in the United States ought to be made public” (Shemtob & Lat pg. 62). The author’s introduction serves to build context and familiarity with the problem, they use the introduction to state the problem, as well as their thesis. The first couple paragraphs explain Andrew Grant DeYoung’s case—the soon to be executed pleaded and persuaded a judge to allow his execution to be filmed; ostensibly, to expose the truth that lethal injection causes unnecessary suffering. DeYoung’s case serves as precedent for publicizing executions; it gives us the

They authors state their supporting claims which are: executions in the past have been botched; how do we know if what the government is telling us about the executions are true; the people pay for their execution, thus we deserve to know what we’re paying for; and we already video tape homicide interrogations and confessions, so why can’t we video tape a man who’s acts have been deemed so wicked that he’s been sentenced to death. The authors’ claims are not unfounded, the substantiate their every one of their supporting claims. They cite sources such as the Atlanta Journal, affidavits from experts, and the, and legislation in the state of Illinois—which made videotaping homicide interrogations and confessions legal. Moreover, they gave enough evidence to reinforce their supporting