Matching Items (7)
Filtering by
- Creators: Barrett, The Honors College
Description
This paper explores the issues regarding disparities in sentencing of men and women to death. Research conducted includes both primary and secondary. A variety of sources were used to gain insight into societal gender differences and stereotypes. Theories were investigated for causes in gender discrepancies. Specific standards and factors were found to be relevant for men and others for women. The methods used to implement the death penalty, the constitutionality of the death penalty, and other various death penalty issues were studied to see if they had implications for the minimal number of women sentenced to death. Research indicated that the media had a significant influence in these cases, particularly in the cases where a female committed brutal murder. This paper examines these different elements, using Arizona as a test case, with four separate female case examples in order to determine what causes disparities in sentencing men and women to death. The case facts and analysis are given in each example. The conclusion is that the discrepancies found in sentencing men and women to death are ultimately based on cultural gender stereotypes that have been in place for some time, and are often exploited in the media.
ContributorsLopez, Rachael (Author) / Stanford, Michael (Thesis director) / Kirchler, Jeffrey (Committee member) / Barrett, The Honors College (Contributor) / Department of Management (Contributor)
Created2014-12
Description
In 1972, the United States Supreme Court found that the death penalty was being applied too arbitrarily in the United States and that this arbitrary application constituted cruel and unusual punishment under the eighth amendment (Furman V. Georgia, 1972). This lead to a moratorium on capital punishment until the case Gregg V. Georgia, which outlined guidelines for the states in applying the death penalty in order to ensure that its application was constitutional (Gregg V. Georgia, 1976). These guidelines included enumerated aggravating factors and a bifurcated capital trial (Gregg V. Georgia, 1976). Despite these findings from the Supreme Court, the application of the death penalty in Arizona has remained problematic. In practice, Arizona has adopted a death penalty statute that appears to conform to the standards set by Furman and Gregg. Arizona state law includes a list of aggravating factors to help guide juries in capital trials and these trials are bifurcated. However, Arizona's aggravating factors are both numerous and inclusive, to the point that it is challenging to commit a first-degree murder in Arizona that does not include an aggravating factor. The statute fails to limit the crimes that qualify for the death penalty so state budgetary concerns become the limiting factor. Arizona's application of the death penalty remains arbitrary, in consistent, and as a result, unconstitutional as defined by the United States Supreme Court.
ContributorsPerez-Vargas, Maricarmen Contreras (Author) / Cavender, Gray (Thesis director) / Corey, Susan (Committee member) / Barrett, The Honors College (Contributor) / School of International Letters and Cultures (Contributor) / School of Social Transformation (Contributor) / Sandra Day O'Connor College of Law (Contributor)
Created2015-05
Description
In the last seven years the practice of capital punishment in the United States has been shaken by one of the most unlikely suspects- the prescription drug market. The practice of capital punishment has gone from fervent support to abolishment and back again throughout the nation's history. Over time the process of capital punishment has evolved from public hangings to a secretive medical procedure. The American people have become detached from the act because it is no longer right in front of their face, but often occurs in a small prison room with a viewing window for a select group of witnesses. The modern method of capital punishment is lethal injection- a three-drug protocol that is accepted as the most humane means of executing criminals. The protocol has faced criticism and legal challenges for years. This is in part because the United States stands alone as one of the last westernized democratic nations to regularly execute convicted criminals. European activist groups and government agencies have been fighting for abolishment in the United States for years with little progress. Recently, the activist groups discovered a novel way to make an impact on the capital punishment system in the United States that had not been attempted. The groups appealed to the drug manufacturing companies in Europe and exposed their supply chains to the public. When it was revealed that the drugs these companies produced were ending up in U.S. prisons for executions the companies eventually stopped all sales of execution drugs to U.S. corrections facilities. This led to the European Union banning all exports of drugs for lethal use in 2011. This study will analyze the effects of the lethal injection drug boycott on the death penalty in the United States. Since the ban, death penalty states have been scrambling in order to procure enough drugs to carry out their future executions. They have attempted to obtain the drugs illegally, trade between each other, reinstate older methods of execution, and entirely change their three-drug protocol to incorporate new drugs or less drugs. Executions have dropped both in the number of death sentences handed down and the number of executions. Also, polls analyzing acceptance of the death penalty have shown decreasing support for the practice domestically. Although there are other factors that may have contributed to the decline of capital punishment in the United States, it seems as though the international lethal injection boycott has made the most progress in the shortest amount of time and has the potential to drastically change the future of the death penalty in the United States.
ContributorsFleming, Karlea Paulette (Author) / Herbert, Anne (Thesis director) / Bodansky, Daniel (Committee member) / Sandra Day O'Connor College of Law (Contributor) / W. P. Carey School of Business (Contributor) / Barrett, The Honors College (Contributor)
Created2016-05
Description
In this project, I aim to provide a comprehensive account of the acceptability and utilization of capital punishment through the lens of retributivist and consequentialist ethical theory. After determining the moral justification for the use of the death penalty, I conclude that there is not enough theoretical ground to claim that capital punishment is ethical or morally justifiable on the basis of theory alone. It is necessary to account for the practical, empirical evidence when making policy decisions, rather than basing them on theory alone. I propose various alternative methods of reaching collective unity and establishing justice in the form of restoration and rehabilitation.
ContributorsWilliams, Owen (Author) / Simhony, Avital (Thesis director) / Saint, Michelle (Thesis director) / Barrett, The Honors College (Contributor) / School of Politics and Global Studies (Contributor) / Historical, Philosophical & Religious Studies, Sch (Contributor)
Created2023-05
Description
This report explores the United States’ continued use of the death penalty and the various costs of maintaining such a policy. This paper aims to investigate issues in the continued use of the death penalty and potential policy alternatives to this inhumane practice. To this end, topics such as constitutional law, crime control, and economic costs associated with the death penalty will be explored. Ultimately, due to patterns of racial and economic discrimination, a lack of evidence for a deterrent effect, the risk imposed on innocent defendants, and the economic cost of maintaining the status quo, it is suggested that the United States, at the very least places a federal moratorium on executions, while simultaneously encouraging states to do the same through the use of grants or mandates designed to lessen the cost of swapping to a life without parole or LWOP system could create on a state’s budget. Additionally, alternatives such as LWOP are explored as a means to address many of the concerns surrounding the death penalty.
ContributorsDoyle, Alexander (Author) / Scholz, Elizabeth (Thesis director) / Harris, Elizabeth (Committee member) / Barrett, The Honors College (Contributor) / School of Public Affairs (Contributor)
Created2023-05
Description
This project consisted of a review of the jury instructions used in the aggravating phase of death penalty cases in Arizona. Originally the project was looking for deviations between the definitions used for the F(6) aggravator (especially cruel, heinous, or depraved), but when none were found the focus shifted towards competing points within the instructions. Which begs the question of which instructions are being valued more than others, and how can we ensure jurors have the competency to accurately understand all the instructions given to them.
ContributorsBayless, Mallory (Author) / Broberg, Gregory (Thesis director) / Corey, Susan (Committee member) / Barrett, The Honors College (Contributor) / School of Social Transformation (Contributor) / Department of English (Contributor) / Watts College of Public Service & Community Solut (Contributor) / School of Criminology and Criminal Justice (Contributor)
Created2022-05
Description
In the United States, Black defendants are more likely to be sentenced to death than their white counterparts exclusively due to their race. There are several aspects that work to explain why this pattern is present, and this paper analyzes our current sentencing disparity through the lens of race to understand why this is the case. First, the historical context of legal racial discrimination will be explored as I discuss the legacy slavery and how the trade and ownership of Black people led to the devaluation of African Americans long after the 13th Amendment abolished the practice. This is seen from the establishment of convict leasing directly following abolition, to the development of Black Codes and Jim Crow laws, and eventually this legacy became the foundation that contributed to the targeted mass incarceration of African Americans beginning with Richard Nixon’s 1970s “war on drugs” campaign and spanning to today. Next, six important milestone Supreme Court cases relating to the evolution of capital punishment in the United States will be described. These cases include Furman v. Georgia, Gregg v. Georgia, Lockett v. Ohio, Batson v. Kentucky, and McCleskey v. Kemp. This research also presents data that illustrates the current trends in death penalty sentencing within 26 states who currently implement this punishment. The results show that there is an overwhelming amount of data in support of harsher criminal sentences and therefore a higher likelihood of Black defendants being sentenced to death in comparison to their white counterparts. Lastly, the systemic inequalities embedded within several aspects of capital trials are outlined—both in terms of juror bias against African American defendants as well as racial issues when hiring an attorney—and works to inform my argument that the death penalty should be abolished. An offender’s race should not play any role in determining the severity of their punishment, but the historic criminalization of Black people works to ensure that these groups of people are typically at a severe disadvantage when navigating the American justice system. Overall, the application of the death penalty can not be applied in a standard manner, nor can there be regulations passed in such a way to guarantee an absence of racism within our current system. Therefore, the United States should abolish this unjust, discriminatory practice.
ContributorsSasselli, Annabella (Author) / Shabazz, Rashad (Thesis director) / Corey, Susan (Committee member) / Barrett, The Honors College (Contributor) / School of Social Transformation (Contributor) / School of Politics and Global Studies (Contributor)
Created2023-12