Talk:Capital punishment in the United States/Archive 1

Archive 1

Illinois

Illinois just abolished capital punishment. The maps need to be redone to reflect this 99.184.223.190 (talk) 03:53, 11 March 2011 (UTC)Bea Bryant

Normal View has uploaded a newer map - File:Death penalty statutes in the United States-2011-10-03.svg, I've replaced the map in the article with it, changed the background colors of MA, NY, NM, and IL to the colors used on the (now-)previous map. I've updated/made minor corrections to the map's legend. --Jatkins ^{(talk - contribs)} 14:17, 11 March 2011 (UTC)

I think Illinois should have a different color key than other abolitionist states, because unlike the others, it has performed several executions since 1976. New Mexico should be similarly indicated if a retroactive abolition of death penalty occurs.

213.243.149.221 (talk) 20:32, 27 October 2011 (UTC)

is capital punishment murder by the state?

When capital punishment is legal, it's not murder. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 62.31.213.187 (talk) 10:51, 27 June 2008 (UTC)

No. The article does not state that. --Jatkins ^{(talk - contribs)} 12:35, 12 March 2011 (UTC)

Cost of a death penalty case

It is also claimed that the financial costs of a complete death penalty case exceed the total costs of a lifetime of incarceration. :) But we all know it should be legal.

This is one of the statements most frequently made by death penalty opponents. Is there any systematic study of this? This seems like one of those computations that is subject to infinite fudging based on what is considered to be a cost - for example, are you counting prosecutor's salaries? If so, wouldn't the state be paying that prosecutor anyway? Etc. etc. I'll try to see what I can come up with. Ellsworth 20:56, 10 Sep 2004 (UTC)

The state would be paying the prosecutor anyway, but they'd be paying the prosecutor less (in a non-capital case, less/no appeals, no separate penalty phase, etc.). As noted in the article, death penalty supporters claim that the money saved in cases where the threat of death results in a plea bargain and no trial offsets the extra costs incurred in death penalty trials' extra costs and the appeals process. DPIC (anti-death penalty) maintains a resources page on cost differences between LWOP and DP in several states (some of these studies - e.g. the CA one, which estimates costs at $250,000,000 per execution are regarded as inaccurate by DP supporters because these cost averages are attained by dividing the total cost spent on, in this case, CA's death penalty post-Gregg by the number of executions - obviously, amortization would reduce costs).

"But we all know it should be legal."
In 70% of the country, it is. More than 6 in 10 Americans support the death penalty in principle; between 1 in 4 and 3 in 10 oppose it. When the question asks if you prefer LWOP or the DP, the margin is narrow, but most recently the DP is ahead with a solid majority (a 2006 Gallup poll had LWOP and the DP statistically tied - LWOP: 48%, DP: 47%).
--Jatkins ^{(talk - contribs)} 15:10, 31 October 2009 (UTC)

Execution of minors

The article states that 8 nations allow this, however, I am sure this is out of date. In recent years I believe every nations bar the USA and Somalia have signed a declaration to cease sanctioning executions of minors. Anyone happen to know more? Grunners 05:14, 6 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Actually the article is internally contradictory. In the intro it says the US is only one of two countries that allow the execution of minors. Later in the article under the Execution of Minors area it lists like 8 countries that allow it. I do not know the correct answer, but they both can not be right...

Also with minors, it says in the article that the practice of executing minors ended in February. I thought it was March 1st. The newspapers didn't report it until the 2nd, except online.-LtNOWIS 03:55, 3 Mar 2005 (UTC)

There should probably be some clean-up with regards to the confusing term "execution of juveniles". I've talked to a lot of people who constantly insist that the US executed people under 18 all the time, and would flat out call me a liar when I countered otherwise. The problem is that human rights groups routinely use the phrase "execution of juveniles" or "execution of minors" to mean the death penalty handed down to someone for a crime they committed WHILE a minor, whereas 99% of those who read their materials believe them to mean the individuals are actually executed when under 18. Perhaps there should be a break-down of the two things "execution of juveniles" could refer, and then list the countries who do each. It is accurate to say that although the U.S. has not executed a juvenile since 1964, it did not bar the execution of prisoners whose crimes were made before their 18th birthday until 2005. —Preceding unsigned comment added by [[User:{{{1}}}|{{{1}}}]] ([[User talk:{{{1}}}|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/{{{1}}}|contribs]])

Plus, pre-Roper v. Simmons (2005) only crimes committed by 16 and 17 years old juveniles could result in death sentences. Thompson v. Oklahoma (1988) held that crimes committed by juveniles when aged under 16 could not result in death sentences, although Stanford v. Kentucky (1989) held that 16 and 17 year old criminals could be sentenced to death. --Jatkins ^{(talk - contribs)} 15:18, 31 October 2009 (UTC)

External links

So, EVERY external link is to an organization opposing the death penalty? That doesn't seem very fair, does it? --Davoarid 5 July 2005 16:20 (UTC)

I noticed the same thing when I moved the batch of US subject links here from the main capital punishment article. Please add some pro-death penalty links, although they are much less common on the web. Rmhermen July 6, 2005 04:04 (UTC)

The second largest mass execution- The Molly Maguires?

The article says the second largest execution was 13 black soldiers in Texas in 1917. The articles notes that this and the largest mass execution- that of Sioux Indians- were both of minorities.

Over 20 "Molly Maguires" were hanged in Pennsylvania in 1877-1879 after a series of show trials orchestrated by the railroad companies. This could be the second largest mass execution, if you consider that the railroad companies connected the trials and the defendants together, only that they were executed on different dates. However, on "Black Thursday" in June 1877, 10 of them were executed on the same day in two different prisons. All the Mollies were Irish Catholics, and no irish Catholics served on the juries, so this fits with the wikipedia article's observation about minorities. Does this give the Mollies the sad distinction of being at least the third largest execution in US history? If so, please add it to the article. Rakovsky (talk) 07:25, 6 August 2009 (UTC)

misleading information

this is whats written in the list of execution for solely other crimes: Rioting - Sam Shockley and Miran Thompson on 3 December 1948 in California (Federal execution)

• Also, the last execution for treason was the Rosenbergs (also Federal) R'son-W 08:59, 21 November 2005 (UTC)
  • The Rosenbergs were convicted of espoinage. Evil Monkey - Hello 20:35, 21 November 2005 (UTC)

Thing is that Sam Shockley and Miran Thompson were execucted becuase they encouraged their another partner (Joe Cretzer) to kill police guards while attempting escape from alcatraz . So execution was becuase they helped in a murder.

I took their crime from the Espy File which describes it as "rioting". I wasn't sure how realistic that was as a capital crime, especially in 1948. I might do a little more research and see if I can find out the exact crime they were executed for. If it turns out to be plain old murder or conspiracy then they should be removed from the list. And just a small reminder. You should sign your posts by adding ~~~~ at the end of them. This will add your username and date. Evil Monkey∴Hello 21:06, 18 August 2005 (UTC)

I've decided to remove this entry and also the one for Victor Feuger for "kidnapping". Although it is described in the Espy File as "kidnapping", he actually murdered his victim as well. Evil Monkey∴Hello 00:43, 19 August 2005 (UTC)

I have found sites saying rioting, mutiny or murder. Nothing conclusive though. Rmhermen 21:16, August 18, 2005 (UTC)

Champ Ferguson

Is that fair to say that he was not executed for murder as well? Tfine80 00:04, 1 October 2005 (UTC)

The problem I faced was that the crimes listed for certain people are taken from the Espy File. In the case of Champ Ferguson I'm guessing it may be a similar situation to Rainey Bethea who was charged and convicted solely of rape even though he did murder his victim as well. Not knowing the details I can't be sure but Ferguson may have solely been convicted of guerilla activities, and not murder. Evil Monkey∴Hello 00:59, 1 October 2005 (UTC)

Factual accuracy over Illinois

I can't find any news reports that say Blagojevich tried to overturn to blanked commutation in Illinois after he became Governor. Evil Monkey∴Hello 03:06, 20 October 2005 (UTC)

1. Lisa Madigan challenged (unsuccessfully) Ryan's commutations.

2. Any Illinoisan knows that Madigan is simply a puppet for Blagojevich and her father, the current head of the Ill. General Assembly. If you're not an Illinoisan, you have no business writing about what happens in IL. In fact, you're not even an American. Confine your writing to New Zealand's death penalty system or lack thereof. (preceding unsigned comment by 24.14.50.182 (talk · contribs) 17:16, 20 October 2005)

That is incorrect. Anyone is welcome to contribute to Wikipedia, regardless of their level of knowledge, provided they edit in good faith. We don't restrict people or make assumptions on their knowledge based on geographical location, age, occupation or any other factor. Your comment is somewhat out of order. Please retract it and apologise. Rob Church ^{Talk | FAHD} 22:23, 20 October 2005 (UTC)

Okay, thanks for actually providing some more information. I can now find a source that does say in fact Madigan tried to overturn *some* of the commutations. Evil Monkey∴Hello 22:24, 20 October 2005 (UTC)

Also, although we now have some source, there are still Peacock terms:

"...most Illinoisans regard..."

"The vast majority of Illinoisans..."

These assertions may very well be true, bit it would be nice to see some hard facts. For instance a poll of Illinoisans on their views on the death penalty, or a figure for huge numbers of letters to the editor. Evil Monkey∴Hello 00:14, 21 October 2005 (UTC)

Okay, some research shows that in 2003, 55% of voters in Illinois supported the death penalty.[1] To me that doesn't seem like the "vast majority". Of course this may have changed in the last two years, but now we have some real numbers. Also in the same poll we find that the support for the commutations was about 50/50. Evil Monkey∴Hello 00:24, 21 October 2005 (UTC)

________________________________________________________________ Puerto rico?????????????????????????????????????

Source mis-stated, restitution?

From →Controversy over use of death penalty:

that when life imprisonment without parole and making restitution to the victim are offered as an alternative, a majority of the American public oppose the death penalty (source)

First off, I cannot find in that source (or its linked page) any such statement. The word "restitution" is not mentioned on that page. My attention was first drawn since "restitution" is an absurd concept for a capital case. Also, the source reads "...if life without parole is offered as an option, response is a statistical dead heat: 46% favor the death penalty; 45% favor life without any chance at parole" which is misrepresented by the line above. I'm going to correct it unless someone can find what the line above is supposed to refer to. Demi ^T/_C 23:52, 10 November 2005 (UTC)

I've rewritten the whole paragraph to get rid of references to supporters and opponents. Just reporting the facts. Evil Monkey∴Hello 00:06, 11 November 2005 (UTC)

Second place

The United States is second only to the People's Republic of China in the number of death sentences passed.

This will need some clarification and a source. According to Amnesty International, Iran performed more executions than the U.S. did in 2004 (and most other years for the past several). And the PRC's executions number way more than a hundred times greater than the number in the U.S. Is it just that more people are sentenced to death in the U.S., but more people are actually executed in Iran? Regardless, we need a source. --Mr. Billion 05:53, 22 November 2005 (UTC)

Unclear information

Why was the death penalty taken up again in 1976, even though the Supreme Court had ruled that capital punishment was unconstitutional?

In Furman v. Georgia, SCOTUS struck down the unitary trial laws in Georgia. In Gregg v. Georgia they upheld new laws that split the guilt and punishment phases of the trial. Evil Monkey - Hello 22:52, 2 December 2005 (UTC)

Odd sentence

Religious groups are widely split on the issue of capital punishment,[16] generally with more conservative groups more likely to support it and more liberal groups more likely to oppose it.

I would say this is an untrue statement. Roman Catholicism, a highly conservative denomination, is opposed to it as are the Eastern Orthodox Churches, the United Methodist Church, Presbyterian, Episcopal, &c. You can see this in the link supplied (not really a great source), but judging by it it seems that support for the death penalty is the outsider opinion. On that list only some Baptists, Lutheran Church and Latter-Day Saints are retentionist. The divide seems, to me, to be down literalist-symbolic biblical interpretation, and even then it is fuzzy. --Oldak Quill 01:44, 3 December 2005 (UTC)

On the same topic but somewhat irrelevant: Some solid statistics:

          1/6th of all convicted fellons to death row are innocent or wrongly convicted.
          1/2 of all people conviceted to death row are realsed after reevaluation
          1/4 of all fellons convicted never even reach death row because of the process they under go

--—Preceding unsigned comment added by [[User:{{{1}}}|{{{1}}}]] ([[User talk:{{{1}}}|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/{{{1}}}|contribs]])

pov text deleted

the following text is hardly a consensus viewpoint.

The Fifth Amendment to the United States Constitution states that one shall not "be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law." Essentially stating that once due process has been given, capital punishment is an accepted form of punishment.

Benwing 01:35, 19 January 2006 (UTC)

intraracial vs inter racial

Someone changed, "Because most violence is intra racial." to, "Because most violence is interracial." I've always herd the fromer is true. Just wanted to draw the change to your attention. Mikereichold 04:20, 19 January 2006 (UTC)

According to the source cited in the article it should be the former. Nolamgm 04:36, 19 January 2006 (UTC)

States that apply the death penalty

According to the top of the page, 36 of 50 states allow the death penalty. According to the bottom of the page, 38 states apply it. Can anyone confirm which is true and fix this?

The discrepancy is due to the fact that two states have a law allowing the death penalty but their state supreme court's have ruled it unconstitutional. Someone recently changed the first number to consider these as states not having the death penalty. Rmhermen 01:04, 20 January 2006 (UTC)

U.S. presidents and the death penalty

I was reading about the Ricky Ray Rector / Bill Clinton business and that made me wonder how many execution warrants Clinton had signed as governor of Arkansas. Would it be relevant to have either a section of this page or another page about U.S. presidents and capital punishment, stating how many death warrants each one signed as president and/or governor, opinions and statements on the issue of capital punishment...?S.Camus 21:12, 25 January 2006 (UTC)

Table of Executions by Jurasdiction

Could whoever added this table provide a source for the information depicted in it? Or perhaps indicate the source in the table, at the bottom or somewhere, so that people can trust it as reliable. Some of the data seems innacurate to me, and it would be nice to know where it came from... Thx. AmiDaniel

The source is the Death Penalty Information Center and is linked at the top beside the date, [2]. Evil Monkey - Hello 04:27, 27 February 2006 (UTC)

Thanks, sorry I'm blind ... AmiDaniel 06:19, 27 February 2006 (UTC)

Suicide Rates

"The suicide rate of death row inmates was found by Lester Tartaro to be 113 per 100,000 for the period 1976–1999. This is about ten times the rate of suicide in the United States as a whole and about six times the rate of suicide in the general U.S. prison population."

This rate corresponds to exactly one suicide for the time period and hardly seems statistically significant given such a small population. The passage here is misleading; it should either note this or be removed. 128.12.195.170 12:37, 27 March 2006 (UTC)

No it doesn't, it includes 58 suicides in the study period. The reference is D Lester and C Tartaro, J Forensic Sci. 2002 Sep;47(5):1108-11.[3] (see table 1) It is somewhat misleading in that the overall suicide rate in the U.S. is about 10 - 11 per 100,000, the study uses as a comparison the suicide rate of males over 15, which is around 25 per 100,000 which gives a rate of among death row inmates of more than four times the comparison population. This is a closer cohort but overrepresents early suicide attempts in the general population than the average age of death row inmates would warrant. Rmhermen 15:54, 27 March 2006 (UTC)

Crimes Subject to the Death Penalty

I removed the line about how the seperate penalty phase "implied" that it was the same panel of jurors that decided guilt and sentence, since in every jurisdiction it is in fact the same panel. JCO312 19:29, 6 May 2006 (UTC)

Witchcraft

I won't remove it untilI know why it is there in the first place. Why does it mention that the person was black in Witchcraft - Black person named Manuel on June 15, 1779 in (present-day) Illinois?

That fact that he is black is why we don't have his last name - he didn't have one. Rmhermen 01:54, 22 May 2006 (UTC)

Thanks Rmhermen, it was bugging me

Sub-articles

Why polish wikipedia has an articles about Capital Punishment in Alabama, South Dakota, Michigan and Wisconsin, but english has'nt? (moved to bottom of page, Rmhermen 01:54, 22 May 2006 (UTC))

We have separate articles listing each prisoner executed since 1976 in each state - if that is what you are referring to - you can see these in the See also section or use the links (the number of executions in the table) We also have one separate article for the state with the vast majority of executions: Capital punishment in Texas. Rmhermen 01:54, 22 May 2006 (UTC)

Constitution does not grant states the right to execute people

Two things, first this argument about the 5th and 14th Amendments has been made to the Supreme Court on a number of occasions. The Court has never adopted your interpretation, at least not to the degree that you are making it. In Gregg, for instance, the majority noted the language of the 5th Amendment as indicating that the framers contemplated capital punishment as being permissible, but they never read it as an affirmative grant to the states (though I admit they did go as far as saying that the Constitution does not invariably prohibit it). The inclusion of the language from the 5th and 14th Amendments that you quoted is a protection of individuals, not a grant of power. The 5th Amendment also says that "nor shall any person be subject for the same offence to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb..." Certainly, that can't be read to mean that the government could amputate someones limb? I only point that out for the proposition that the language can't always be read as directly as I think you have. More importantly though, even if the 5th and 14th Amendments do give states the power to execute (I admit this is a colorable argument) it wouldn't mean that the 8th Amendment could nevertheless make the imposition of the death penalty unconstitutional.

Second, you changed the grounds for challenge and removed the equal protection and due process clause arguments. I'm not sure why, since those have been made as well. Frankly, I'm not sure this whole paragraph even belongs in the opening, as it well covered in the history section and strikes me as a little POVish. JCO312 02:27, 25 May 2006 (UTC)

I don't think you can make the argument that the 8th prohibits capital punishment without qualifying that argument and making it clear that it is not universally accepted. Both sides can agree that the US Consitution does not forbid capital pubishment. Thus, the argument by some that it does, is not so much an argument as wishful thinking. So, to answer your question, I wouldn't object to removing the paragraph completely. I'm only saying that if the argument involving the 8th is going to be mentioned, it should be balanced by a differing view. But it simply isn't possible to argue that language which grants the protection of due process to any individual facing the loss of "life, liberty or property" doesn't also grant the authority of the state to deprive the individual of said life, liberty or property - provided due-process is observed. --SpinyNorman 04:17, 25 May 2006 (UTC)

"Both sides can agree that the US Consitution does not forbid capital pubishment"

Actually, I'd disagree with that. Despite the 5th Amendment's references to the potential existence of capital punishment ("No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury", "nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law"), These measures are to PROTECT people from certain types of government executions, and does not explicitly establish that capital punishment is ok (the 9th amendment establishes that "The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people."... and there are some later amendments, (which would take precedence over the 5th anyways), which could easily be constructed to ban capital punishment.

The most obvious is the 8th Amendment. "Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, [b]nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted.[b]" Society obviously regards pre-mediated killing as cruel, as it is banned in almost all its forms federally and in all 50 states... and capital punishment is simply a form of pre-mediated killing carried out by the government. I don't see how the fact that it's the government doing the killing makes it any less cruel.

This, of course, like all important rights, applies to the states through the 14th amendment.

Of course, the Supreme Court is unlikely to recognize this at the current time, because almost any potential appointee who is willing to come to grips with the fact that a practice which basically amounts to legalized public lynching is "cruel and unusual" wouldn't be politically viable right now, although a there have been a couple exceptions: Thurgood Marshall, William J. Brennan, and (sort of) Harry Blackmun. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.74.93.108 (talk) 07:54, 14 December 2007 (UTC)

State-by-State list of execution methods/statutes

Is there a list of state-by-state execution methods/statutes both primary and optional? Flibirigit 18:50, 1 June 2006 (UTC)

No; however the text gives: "Currently lethal injection is the method used or allowed in 37 of the 38 states which allow the death penalty and by the federal government. Nebraska requires electrocution. Other states also allow electrocution, gas chambers, hanging and the firing squad...From 2001, only 3 out of 273 executions have been by a different method. The last execution by any other method was the use of the electric chair on May 28, 2004..." See also DOJ report for more details. Rmhermen 18:53, 1 June 2006 (UTC)

• I just found such a list after surfing several external links.

See list of state-by-state methods of execution.

Are there any objections to incorporating this list into the article Capital punishment in the United States? Flibirigit 19:08, 1 June 2006 (UTC)

• • As long as it doesn't overwhelm the Methods sections. In the last 6 years, just over 1% of executions have been by an alternate method (not lethal injection) and in the last 2 years, 0%. Rmhermen 19:34, 1 June 2006 (UTC)

Prolific usage in Texas

Is there a reason why Texas' rate is so high? Skinnyweed 22:30, 6 June 2006 (UTC)

They include weak representation of defendants (many defendants' state provided attorneys have gone on to be disbarred), pro-prosecution state appellate judges (in a state appeals system that segregates civil and criminal appeals allowing criminal judges to be selected on death penalty preferences), one of the most conservative U.S. Courts of Appeal circuits in the U.S. (the 5th Circuit), the limited pardon powers of the Governor who can only pardon if a board recommends a pardon, substantive law that narrowly reads the insanity defense, and pro-death jury pools and prosecuting attorneys in a handful of highly populous counties (in part due to "death qualification of jurors", in part due to racial balance of jury pools, and in part due to local culture). Also, the numbers are partially high simply because Texas is the highest population Southern death penalty state. Ohwilleke 03:38, 9 June 2007 (UTC)

Many reasons. The death penalty is very popular in Texas - it is far less controversial than in the country as a whole (there is opposition, which comes from Austin). Texas is the second largest state, after California, which has the death penalty, and before New York, which doesn't (it has a statute, which was ruled unconstitutional and has never been used - the last NY execution was in 1963), so it is by definition likely to have more executions that other states (it isn't number one in per-capita executions). As Ohwilleke notes below, there is far less opposition to the death penalty in the Texas state judiciary and circuit courts than California (e.g. the 9th Circuit) or New York (e.g. the 2nd Circuit). --Jatkins ^{(talk - contribs)} 14:03, 31 October 2009 (UTC)

Also, Governor Rick Perry wouldn't sign a death penalty pardon if his life depended on it.173.184.16.211 (talk) 05:31, 9 May 2010 (UTC)

@Jatkins: Not number one, but Texas is number two in per-capita executions (after smaller Oklahoma) if I calculated correctly, with ~18 executions per million inhabitants. --Roentgenium111 (talk) 20:17, 6 January 2011 (UTC)

Oh okay, I had thought it was Delaware (sounds weird I know). --Jatkins ^{(talk - contribs)} 12:43, 12 March 2011 (UTC)

New York has abolished death penalty

According to this site I came across, NY still has the capital punishment existing: http://www.geocities.com/trctl11/state.html As far as I know the state abolished capital punishment for all crimes in 2004? Can anyone clarify if the city still has CP? If not, then they're the 13th state in the union to fully abolish capital punishment and should thus the page on CP in the USA be adapted.

The site you came across is just outdated. The New York Court of Appeals (the highest court in NY) declared the death penalty unconstitutional in 2004. JCO312 18:40, 27 July 2006 (UTC)

No, the court ruled the death penalty law unconstitutional (it was the state's jury instructions that were found unconstitutional).[4] A new law could still be written which provided for capital punishment (although its constitutionality would probably be tested). Rmhermen 23:24, 28 July 2006 (UTC)

Fair distinction I suppose, point being that at the moment, it's unconstitutional in NY. JCO312 18:43, 2 August 2006 (UTC)

The NY death penalty law has been reinstated, taking effect as of September 1, 1995, and they created a Capital Defenders Office as well. Arcturis 17:37, 6 September 2006 (UTC)

No, it hasn't. It was found to be unconstitutional in 2004, and an attempt to reinstate it last year failed. The info you have is outdated. JCO312 18:39, 6 September 2006 (UTC)

New York's last remaining death death row inmate was commuted to Life in Prison after the State's highest court ruled in October that an exception cannot be made to the courts 2004 ruling that the death penalty statute is invalid. Therefore, NEW YORK HAS NO DEATH PENALTY AND THE ARTICLE NEEDS TO BE UPDATED. New York should be changed to blue on the map, and it should be taken off the list of death penalty states and added to the list of abolitionist states. Legally, New York is in the same situation now as New Jersey or Massachusetts in regards to the death penalty. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Lazerbeams (talk • contribs) 16:51, 17 December 2007 (UTC)

see here http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/article.php?did=121 —Preceding unsigned comment added by Lazerbeams (talk • contribs) 03:12, 18 December 2007 (UTC)

Legally it is in the same position as Massachusetts, but not New Jersey. New Jersey has legislatively abolished the death penalty, while Massachusetts and New York do have death penalty statutes but they have been ruled unconstitutional by state courts, thus resulting in de facto judicial abolition. Also, neither New York nor Massachusetts have death rows or death chambers, and state-level death sentences are no longer sought in either state. For MA or NY to be in the same position as NJ, their legislatures will have to act to repeal the statutes or modify them to non-capital statutes. --Jatkins ^{(talk - contribs)} 14:11, 31 October 2009 (UTC)

Kansas

Kansas's death penalty statute is once again constitutional, thanks to the recent decision in Kansas v. Marsh. Can someone fix the map? ---Axios023 04:58, 1 September 2006 (UTC)

Moving current execution data

I am thinking of moving the modern executions data into a template so that the frequent updates of the totals is kept separate from the changes to the actual text of the article. It would also result in an article slightly easier to edit as it wouldn't begin with a large block of mostly code as it does now. One drawback is that those following this page will need to keep two pages on their watchlists. Unless there are complaints I will do this in a couple days. Rmhermen 21:50, 6 September 2006 (UTC)

Fair warning. I have moved that to Template:US executions. Rmhermen 18:41, 13 September 2006 (UTC)

Presidents and the death penalty

Is or was any U.S. President opponent of capital punishment? I think this is very important 83.24.195.81 22:53, 11 September 2006 (UTC)

Carter opposed juvenile executions - well after he was in office though -as governor of Georgia he had signed Georgia new death penalty law after the old law was overturned in 1972. That was all I could find. Rmhermen 18:46, 13 September 2006 (UTC)

• Many presidents have authorized state or federal executions at one time or another (either as Governor or President).
• Some of the founding fathers opposed the death penalty (Thomas Paine, etc.), as a result of which did some early presidents.
• Lincoln authorized the death penalty on certain occasions but with restraint [from Abraham Lincoln: "In 1862, Lincoln sent a senior general, John Pope, to put down the "Sioux Uprising" in Minnesota. Presented with 303 death warrants for convicted Santee Dakota who were accused of killing innocent farmers, Lincoln ordered a personal review of these warrants, eventually approving 39 of these for execution (one was later reprieved)."]. He prevented the execution of a 14 year old soldier in the Civil War.
• Some sources suggest Clinton was a former opponent but changed sides during the '92 campaign.
• A questionnaire Obama may/may not have filled out [5] when campaigning for Illinois Senate stated his opposition.
• Like Rmhermen has noted above, Carter is now a death penalty opponent (I believe in all cases - not just juvenile - but I'll need a source for that).
• There's a quote supposedly from James Madison: "I should not regret a fair and full trial of the entire abolition of capital punishment." Another supposedly of Jefferson paraphrasing a French death penalty abolition: "I shall ask for the abolition of the punishment of death until I have the infallibility of human judgment demonstrated to me."
• It's important to remember the history of the two parties' ideologies - the Democratic Party formerly the Jacksonian democracy/states rights party and the Republican Party formerly progressive / classical liberal / abolitionist - as such if you look up the history of some states which abolished the death penalty in the 19th century, you can find Republican legislators spearheading death penalty abolition - an example being Congressman Newton Martin Curtis (R-NY) (1835-1910) - cited in an August 7, 1898 New York Times article as a "vigorous opponent of the death penalty" (direct PDF link to article).
• JFK and President Clinton have commuted death sentences at the federal level (i.e., while President). IIRC, Reagan and Bush 43 each commuted a single death sentence as Governor.

In short, the history of US Presidents and the death penalty is complex and varied. My general guess is that a large majority favored or at least carried out the death penalty, but there is certainly a contingent of opponents who served as Commander-in-chief. --Jatkins ^{(talk - contribs)} 17:24, 29 October 2009 (UTC)

Vandalism

This page has been vandalised. I can not revert it. 82.40.75.55 23:49, 22 November 2006 (UTC)

PS. I SWEAR i did not do it (check the IP addresses if you must)

Fixed it, should this be locked for edeiting by unregistered users? 82.40.75.55 23:50, 22 November 2006 (UTC) (again)

Uh, I don't know what you're talking about, since the last edits were not by you (in fact, if this is the only IP address you use, you haven't edited on this page, at least not recently). As far as the suggestion that the page be locked to prevent unregistered users, are you sure that's what you want given that you're an unregistered user. JCO312 00:52, 23 November 2006 (UTC)

D.C. executions

Washington D.C. is a federal district, but executions in Washington weren't listed as federal executions in the Espy Files. Witch authority had right to commutation death sentences when D.C. retained Capital Punishment? The President? City Officials? Congress? Or others? 83.24.251.212 19:00, 13 December 2006 (UTC)

The District of Columbia does not have capital punishment at present. Were it to adopt it, the President would be the person with the power to pardon or commute a sentence. JCO312 19:10, 13 December 2006 (UTC)

Yes. As I recall, in the George John Dasch Nazi saboteur case in WW II they specifically tried the case by military commission in D.C., so that Rooseveldt (who wanted the saboteurs executed as examples) WOULD have the power of commutation and appeal review. And could choose not to exercise it. Six saboteurs died with military precision, one following another, in the D.C. jail electric chair. I bet most people didn't even know the D.C. jail ever had an electric chair. SBHarris 19:49, 13 December 2006 (UTC)

To be fair, those trials, although physically conducted in the district, were not conducted in the D.C. court system. The President also has sole authority to pardon military convictions. JCO312 19:54, 13 December 2006 (UTC)

Well, Nazi Spies execution were military or federal. But would President pardon of commute a sentence of people who were sentenced to die not under Federal or Military law, but D.C. court system? 83.24.235.89 15:11, 14 December 2006 (UTC)

Again, right now, there is no capital punishment in D.C. Nevertheless, only the President can pardon offenders convicted in the D.C. court system, for any offenses. JCO312 15:59, 14 December 2006 (UTC)

Alaska

The map states Alaska as having a death penalty. Incorrect; there is no death penalty in Alaska.65.74.76.143 22:43, 14 December 2006 (UTC)

Map removed and mapmaker asked to improve it. Rmhermen 03:46, 20 December 2006 (UTC)

Michael Ross

In the section labeled "Crimes subject to capital punishment" it says: "The most recent executions solely for other crimes other than homicide were, respectively: Rape - Ronald Wolfe on May 8, 1964 in Missouri". Wasn't Michael Ross executed for rape in 2003/2004? I don't remember if his charge was just rape or rape and homicide, but I just wanted to let you guys know.--LF2 01:11, 20 December 2006 (UTC)

He was a serial killer and was convicted of killing 4 of the 8 people he had confessed to murdering. (http://crime.about.com/od/deathrow/p/michael_ross.htm) JCO312 01:38, 20 December 2006 (UTC)

unrelated but he appears twice in the graph. 15:13, 29 May 2011 (UTC)Piepants — Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.119.248.252 (talk)

Crude Vandilsm

I found this vandilsm in the article

"which explicitly forbade any state from punishing a specific form of murder (such as that of a police officer) with a mandatory death penalty. If you murder a police officer, you should go strait to death row!!"

its just annoying, so dont do it. 71.225.106.138 20:02, 31 May 2007 (UTC)earthgirl89

"Found" it? Do you realize we have edit histories? You (or somebody using the same computer and spelling as poorly) added it 4 minutes before you reported "finding" it.[6] Thanks for removing it again. PrimeHunter 00:08, 1 June 2007 (UTC)

South Dakota's first execution in years!

I read in the newspaper that South Dakota has carried out the first execution in 60 years! And it happened last night! You should look all over the Internet to find out more, okay? --Angeldeb82 23:20, 12 July 2007 (UTC)

Something new

Thought this might interest you. If anyone's editing this article at all. US seeks quicker death sentences at The Guardian. Seegoon 19:56, 14 August 2007 (UTC)

Death Row Table

In the table "Capital punishment since 1976, by jurisdiction", having a column called "death row inmates" seems to imply that this is the number of inmates who have been on death row since 1976. According to the linked source, however, this is actually the number of current death row inmates. This should be made clear somehow, whether by renaming the column or the table. --Chrismith 17:21, 22 October 2007 (UTC)

why does new york state have "1" person on death row if it has abolished the death penalty? please can some on fix this? thanks —Preceding unsigned comment added by Nitramwin (talk • contribs) 00:16, 11 December 2007 (UTC)

The footnotes for this table don't tie in. Within the table footnotes are labeled 2 to 6, where the footnotes below are shown correctly as 1 to 5. In addition, I couldn't find the edit link for this table.--77.103.197.54 (talk) 20:55, 8 June 2008 (UTC)

Gibbeting

The text seems to imply that gibbeting was used as an actual method of execution? If this is so, I'd like to see some form of source for this, as gibbeting NORMALLY would be a punishment placed upon the body AFTER death, to wit placing the corpse in a hanging cage. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 194.22.238.224 (talk) 12:02, 30 October 2007 (UTC)

Information on executed people

Category:Lists of executed people lists people executed in the United States. Wikipedia:Notability (people) has some guidelines on what "notability" means. Depending on interpretation, the single event of having killed someone and having been executed for that may or may not constitute "notability". In fact, I have seen several articles on executed individuals that received the notability template. I don't wish to start a discussion here on whether an executed person is notable enough to get an article, I'm just looking at it from a practical point of view: More than 1,000 people have been linked now in those lists (Category:Lists of executed people) and I doubt that even a substantial fraction of those individuals will get an article any time soon, let alone ever. Again, this is not a discussion about whether someone "deserves" an article. I just think that, with so many links in those lists to non-existing articles, maybe "we" should at least include some more details in those lists. Things like "age when executed", "age when crime that got them condemned committed", and links to external articles. Then, at least if the names are no longer being linked, more information still is available, while at the same time providing information in case articles ARE being created. Any thoughts? wjmt 01:00, 14 November 2007 (UTC)

controversiality

The first sentence says that capital punishment in controversial in most of the world - but it really isn't in many places where it has been abolished - e.g. the whole of Europe, most of the Commonwealth, etc. Maybe this should be changed? Wikidea 22:03, 27 November 2007 (UTC)

I agree--Timtak (talk) 12:33, 14 January 2008 (UTC)

I agree wholeheartedly. To approach the matter more academically the United States should be compared to "the developed world". On the matter of capital punishment in the developed world the United States are lagging pathetically behind and should be ashamed of themselves.220.238.210.199 (talk) 09:55, 15 April 2008 (UTC)

Disagree. Despite being abolished in many places such as Europe and the Commonwealth, UK etc, many countries have quite large right-wing vocal groups who would advocate bringing back capital punishment. Polls often have majorities (google uk capital punishment poll) than you might expect It does therefore remain a controversial topic. 195.72.175.25 (talk) 12:20, 22 September 2011 (UTC)

New Jersey is set to abolish capital punishment!

I've got some news: New Jersey is set to abolish the death penalty! More on this link here. --Angeldeb82 (talk) 20:22, 6 December 2007 (UTC)

Here's more news: N.J. Legislature votes to end death penalty --Angeldeb82 (talk) 00:14, 14 December 2007 (UTC)

N.J. finally abolishes capital punishment

New Jersey has finally abolished capital punishment today! More info on the story here --Angeldeb82 (talk) 17:34, 17 December 2007 (UTC)

As if executions for murder weren't bad enough

Now executions for rape are getting worse and worse; Patrick Kennedy was sentenced to death for rape, though he wasn't directly involved in the rape. But all is not lost yet. The court will hear the Kennedy vs. Louisiana case on whether or not executions of child rapists are unconstitutional. Here's the link if you wish to add more. --Angeldeb82 (talk) 20:53, 6 January 2008 (UTC)

Are there any statistics for estimations of murders prevented?

Criminals convicted of life sentetences for murder sometimes go on to murder again after their release. How many lives have been lost as a result of murder by such released criminals? (I am not generally in favour, since I don't believe that it works as a deterrent and don't agree with the other justifications but, if it actually prevents, by preventing released criminals from committing murder again then I might change my mind) --Timtak (talk) 12:35, 14 January 2008 (UTC)

How can one be "released" if they are serving a "life sentence"? --85.108.119.85 (talk) 09:02, 4 April 2009 (UTC)

If the prisoner is serving life with parole they may be paroled after a certain amount of their sentence has been served. --Jatkins ^{(talk - contribs)} 15:13, 30 October 2009 (UTC)

DR Numbers

Can someone update the numbers of inmates on death row? The numbers there now are out of date or simply incorrect. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Smb2a (talk • contribs) 03:17, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

Link launches porn website

Has anybody else noticed that the "state-by-state methods of execution" link opens a porn website? Butcam (talk) 18:35, 20 April 2008 (UTC)

Well, I tried opening the link to the Death Penalty Information Center at www.deathpenaltyinfo.org, but it ends up getting infected by spyware! Anyone else have this problem? --Angeldeb82 (talk) 22:59, 20 April 2008 (UTC)

I now get the spyware infection too. Butcam (talk) 04:47, 21 April 2008 (UTC)

No, it works fine for me. Maybe they were hacked? This link needs to be there as it is used as a source for statistics in several parts of the article. Rmhermen (talk) 05:06, 21 April 2008 (UTC)

Landmark Current execution

With bated breath, hours just hours, before the first execution in Georgia will be... if if if there is no reprieve, so I added this landmark ...Without reprive or stay from courts or the President, Georgia's William Earl Lynd, 53, will be the first to have the lethal injection at 7 p.m., of May 6, 2008 since the September stay. 3 dozen states, including Georgia, used a similar method / three-drug injection. Besides Georgia, Mississippi scheduled on May 21 the execution for Earl Wesley Berry, while Texas set on August 5, the execution of Jose Medellin, 33, Mexican-born convict. Lynd has a pending appeal for stay before the Georgia Supreme Court, but had already selected his final meal: two pepper jack barbecue burgers with crisp onions; two baked potatoes with sour cream, bacon and cheese; and a strawberry milkshake.ap.google.com, Ga. execution would be first since Supreme Court rulingwww.reuters.com, U.S. set for first execution since end of moratorium --Florentino floro (talk) 10:51, 6 May 2008 (UTC)

The list of moratoria is a list of times when executions were stopped, not a list of people who were executed after the moratorium was ended. Much less a list of their last meals. maxsch (talk) 15:26, 6 May 2008 (UTC)

Recruitment of executioners

Please expand the article with information about how the states and the federal government recruits execution officers. /Yvwv (talk) 18:29, 18 May 2008 (UTC)

Error in the data

http://www.bop.gov/about/history/execchart.jsp has a list of federal prisoners who were executed, and aren't included in the list here. Amsibert (talk) 14:36, 30 May 2008 (UTC)

No error at all. Our infobox here only shows "modern era" executions (those post-1976). Which is 3 for the federal government. more information is at Capital punishment by the United States federal government. Rmhermen (talk) 18:48, 5 June 2008 (UTC)

Pro-death penalty comments in AIUSA's anti-death penalty website blogs

Amnesty International USA used to be a good website, until it is polluted by racist pro-death penalty activists spewing hateful comments and garbage in its Death Penalty blogs shown here. I thought the website was anti-death penalty! What happened to it?! --Angeldeb82 (talk) 23:04, 7 August 2008 (UTC)

You know what? Screw the AIUSA "Death Penalty" blogs, because they are all filled with too many comments from too many pro-death penalty people who only believe in "an eye for an eye" and that the death penalty is a "deterrent that brings justice and closure, and the low-cost, ultimate, final solution". Though I'm anti-death penalty, I've decided not to join the website (which was supposed to be anti-DP) to avoid more insulting comments from too many DP supporters. I quit. --Angeldeb82 (talk) 17:00, 15 October 2008 (UTC)

Table

How do you update the table for number of executions? It does not reflect today's Cooey execution in Ohio. Czolgolz (talk) 18:50, 14 October 2008 (UTC)

The box is rarely exactly up-to-date with 60 or so executions a year. I just added a view/edit/talk line to the template that contains the information so that it can be accesssed more easily. Please update the entire box from the quoted source each time you change it. Rmhermen (talk) 21:36, 14 October 2008 (UTC)

There are currently 17 executions not included in the box. Rmhermen (talk) 21:46, 14 October 2008 (UTC)

Okay, I went through and updated everything. Czolgolz (talk) 22:20, 14 October 2008 (UTC)

federal crimes

can someone be given the death penalty for a federal crime and if so can this happen in states that don't have the death penalty for state crimes? Plugwash (talk) 21:03, 22 October 2008 (UTC)

Yes, they can - as discussed in this article and in Capital punishment by the United States federal government. Federal crimes are tried in federal courts so the states they occur in is mostly irrelevant (except for allowing a choice of execution methods allowed in the state the crime occured in). In practice all of the recent federal executions have occured in Indiana and have been lethal injections. Note that there have been only 3 federal executions in the past 45 years although there are currently 55 people on federal death row. Rmhermen (talk) 21:08, 22 October 2008 (UTC)

Idaho Death Penalty

Idaho is one of the few states in this country that has HANGING still legal. What do you think about hangings still legal? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.83.66.24 (talk) 23:32, 15 December 2008 (UTC)

Hanging is no longer a method of capital punishment used in Idaho. It was lasted used in the US in 1996, in Delaware. Until July 1, 2009,[7] when the Governor signed legislation standardizing Idaho's lethal injection procedure and making it the sole method, execution by firing squad was an alternative method of execution in Idaho (last used in the US in 1996, in Utah). The only states with hanging still on the books are New Hampshire and Washington.[8] --Jatkins ^{(talk - contribs)} 15:44, 30 October 2009 (UTC)

Mississippi Supreme Court Justice: Death Penalty is Unconstitutional

Mississippi Supreme Court Justice Oliver Diaz, said on December 11, 2008, in Doss vs. Mississippi, that the death penalty is unconstitutional. More info can be found on the link here. --Angeldeb82 (talk) 22:23, 18 December 2008 (UTC)

His dissent is not uncommon among judges nor likely to have any effect on the state's laws, and so is not important to this article at this time. Rmhermen (talk) 22:49, 18 December 2008 (UTC)

New Hampshire

I dont know what this info will do for this article but....

"The death sentence ordered for Michael Addison is the state's first in half a century"

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/28298184/

^ Source: MSNBC news

Knowledgekid87 14:17, 19 December 2008 (UTC)

Thanks. I used it to update the Capital punishment in New Hampshire article. Rmhermen (talk) 20:40, 19 December 2008 (UTC)

Youre welcome, I do what I can to help =). Knowledgekid87 14:46, 20 December 2008 (UTC)

New Mexico has abolished the death penalty!

New Mexico governor Bill Richardson, after weeks of many struggles with the death penalty issue, has finally signed a bill abolishing capital punishment into law! So the US states with capital punishment are now down to 35 today! Story here. --Angeldeb82 (talk) 02:39, 19 March 2009 (UTC)

March 18th changes

Added New Mexico to the list of States banning the death penalty (with source). Cleaned up the first run-on sentence to more clearly define that the death penalty is only used against civilians in cases involving death (with source), in the military for various offenses, and for crimes against the state. That second sentence is still a mess though... AStudent (talk) 02:41, 19 March 2009 (UTC)

There's more: Amnesty International Applauds Governor Bill Richardson for Abolishing New Mexico's Death Penalty. --Angeldeb82 (talk) 16:54, 19 March 2009 (UTC)

"Is applied rarely" (?)

The opening sentence of this article says that capital punishment is "applied rarely." Huh? There are very few nations on earth that use capital punishment as much as the U.S. In fact, much of the world has banned it entirely.

Relative to the United States, it is rarely the resultant punishment for murder - roughly one in 300 murders results in an execution. --Josh Atkins ^{(talk - contribs)} 20:46, 28 August 2009 (UTC)

Error on Massachusetts Death Penalty Status

According to the current image Massachusetts is displayed as blue, meaning that the state has no death penalty statute. This is incorrect as the state still has the laws on the book, it is just in the same boat as New York because the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court ruled the statutes unconstitutional in 1984. The image needs to have Massachusetts with the light green color which means it was simply declared unconstitutional. The laws can be seen here: MGL, Part IV, Title 1, Chapter 265, Section 2 http://www.mass.gov/legis/laws/mgl/265-2.htm, and the method of death and specific procedures in a death penalty case can be seen in MGL, Part IV, Title 1, Chapter 279 (entire chapter). comment added by Ncrown23334 (talk • contribs) 16:13, 30 July 2009 (UTC)

Fixed. I've updated Template:US executions to reflect the unconstitutionality of the MA and NY statutes. Josh Atkins ^{(talk - contribs)} 20:02, 28 August 2009 (UTC)

Is the Institute for the Advancement of Criminal Justice a reliable source?

Despite their imposing name, their page, cited for two sets of statistics in the article, provides no sources of its own and reads, generally, more like an impassioned essay than a reliable source of information. (It is source 78, at the moment.) Is this a reliable source for those figures? --Aquillion (talk) 13:04, 8 September 2009 (UTC)

I don't think it qualifies as a reliable source to be used as a citation. However, it can probably be included in external links under pro-death penalty. The argument can (and is) made that DPIC is exhibits an anti-death penalty bias rendering it unreliable (of course, we can cite it for facts such as lists of executions, murder rates, etc.) - but it is listed under anti-death penalty so its inclusion (at least there) is acceptable.

The IACJ link is terribly biased. It states that one professor's findings as conclusive evidence that the death penalty has a solid deterrent effect - ridiculous. It then quotes another professor "of course, the death penalty deters some crimes" (of course - so does life imprisonment). It's also a little out of date on the innocent execution question - it was published before Dr. Beyler's report and the subsequent New Yorker article on Cameron Todd Willingham, who may have been innocent).

However, like with DPIC, if they have articles which are mere factual lists then there's nothing wrong with that.--Jatkins ^{(talk - contribs)} 15:28, 8 September 2009 (UTC)

Contradictory legends on the map

Anybody else notice that the map image itself has a legend, and then directly below it in the image caption there is another, completely different legend? 122.111.95.213 (talk) 12:08, 1 October 2009 (UTC)

Which map are you referring to? File:Death penalty statutes in the United States.svg uses stripes on some states (e.g. NY, MA, NM). --Jatkins ^{(talk - contribs)} 15:49, 1 October 2009 (UTC)

I think I see what you are referring to, if indeed File:Death penalty statutes in the United States.svg is the image you are looking at. The "legend" on the image itself is not a legend, but in fact shows the colors for the three groups which can impose capital punishment but are not technically states: Washington DC, the federal government, and the US Military. The colors in the boxes are not giving a legend for the other states; rather they apply to the same legend as provided in the caption. Dylan (talk) 21:09, 4 November 2009 (UTC)

Who may/shall/must witnesses an execution

An information that is missing in the article: Who is allowed/supposed to witness the execution (probably, I guess, relatives of the victim(s) and the delinquent)? Is witnessing the execution mandatory for some involved people like, e.g. relatives of the victim(s) or, in case of surviving the crime (e.g. an attempted murder), the victim him/herself in some states of the U.S.? If not, do they have to apply for witnessing, are they usually invited, or what is the standard procedure of witness selection?--SiriusB (talk) 21:50, 28 November 2009 (UTC)

There have been cases where there were both fatalities as well as survivors, and one of more of the attempted murder victims has attended the execution (such as a January 2009 execution in Texas, where a survivor who was shot and set ablaze in a crime which left three dead attended the execution). It varies considerably between the different death penalty states, though (all?) allow victims' families to attend and many allow defendants' families to attend. --Jatkins ^{(talk - contribs)} 14:34, 23 December 2009 (UTC)

Are there any cases known where survivors or relatives of killed victims had been forced (either by law or by their attorneys, relatives, the public etc.) to witness the execution? Or would such thing directly collide with the constitution of the U.S. (which, on the other hand, does not seem to contradict the mandatory gun ownership in Kennesaw)? Furthermore, have there been cases where surviving victims have campaigned against death penalty in general or against the execution of the (attempted) murderer in particular?--SiriusB (talk) 09:35, 30 January 2010 (UTC)

I don't know of cases where survivors or relatives have been forced to attend, and a Google search isn't very revealing, but I do know of cases where relatives have chosen not to attend ([9]: "McLauchlin's parents, who live in Live Oak, Fla., chose not to attend the execution but were represented by North Charleston police Sgt. Ray Garrison, one of the lead investigators on the case."), and have always presumed it was voluntary. --Jatkins ^{(talk - contribs)} 20:41, 30 January 2010 (UTC)

Ah thanks. What might still be interesting (also for this article, I hope) would be some info or statstics about the fraction of victim's relatives or surviving victims(*) who themselves oppose death penalty even after becoming victum and even appeal for clemency?

(*Could even attempted murder of a single victum lead to capital punishment, if the attempted murderer acts in a very cruel way, e.g. by raping or torturing the victim (like in the Marc Dutroux case, who, however, was also convicted of murder), and if the survival of the victim was just luck? Or does the 2008 decision of the supreme court ultimately require at least one dead victim for a death sentence?)--SiriusB (talk) 12:37, 31 January 2010 (UTC)

From what I understand, the 2008 Kennedy decision, like you say, limited capital cases to those involving the death of the victim(s), as far as crimes against individuals are concerned (as opposed to crimes against the state, e.g. treason). I don't know of statistics for murder victims' families who oppose the death penalty, but there are several organizations founded by murder victims' families who have become anti-death penalty activists - Murder Victims' Families for Reconciliation and Murder Victims' Families for Human Rights, for example. --Jatkins ^{(talk - contribs)} 18:25, 31 January 2010 (UTC)

Thought you might be interested:[10][11]

“ Wycoff sentenced to death despite victims’ son’s request

Martinez, CA – On Tuesday, December 8, Edward Wycoff was sentenced to death for murdering his sister, Julie Wycoff Rogers, and her husband, Paul Rogers, in their El Cerrito home. The couple’s son, Eric Rogers, had told jurors his uncle’s life should be spared. He later said his parents had opposed capital punishment.

Rogers said in a courtroom statement Tuesday that Wycoff is “completely childish and sick and immature. I think it’s very clear he struggles with a mental illness.”

“For us to kill a crazy person would be wrong,” Rogers said. “I would hate to see that done in my parents’ name.”

”

--Jatkins ^{(talk - contribs)} 18:30, 31 January 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for the links. I guess that 'Murder Victims' Families for Reconciliation' would be worth adding it to the Weblinks, wouldn't it?--SiriusB (talk) 10:24, 2 February 2010 (UTC)

Could be, yeah. One thing to keep in mind is we oughta have an equal number of pro-DP and anti-DP links to avoid the appearance, or existence, of flagrant bias. --Jatkins ^{(talk - contribs)} 12:34, 12 March 2011 (UTC)

Major cleanup required

I don't have the time right now, but this article needs a major cleanup. There's a lot of important information, relevant charts, and useful citations, but the composition of the article is a mess, some information is repeated, and it is excessively long and requires some further wikification. --Jatkins ^{(talk - contribs)} 17:30, 24 February 2010 (UTC)

I agree. A lot of the sourced statements are sourced disreputable sources with serious biases. 72.66.69.69 (talk) 21:22, 11 March 2010 (UTC)

Finally done. What a morbid achievement! --Jatkins ^{(talk - contribs)} 12:32, 12 March 2011 (UTC)

Controversy

One of the primary arguments against the death penalty is missing: it can't be reversed. As for a source, the Virginia ACLU agrees in "Unequal, Unfair and Irreversible The Death Penalty in Virginia" which can be found at http://www.acluva.org/publications/deathpenaltystudy.pdf 173.184.16.211 (talk) 05:54, 9 May 2010 (UTC)

It is included in the article:

“ ...and whether the irrevocability of the penalty is justified considering possible new evidence or future revelations of improper conduct by the state...Between 1976 and 2003, fewer than 2% of death row prisoners were exonerated (that is, cleared of all alleged crimes), while others had their sentences reduced for other reasons. This amounted to 112 prisoners released. ”

These figures are of course based on the DPIC list, which death penalty opponents generally embrace and death penalty supporters generally criticize (often claiming it is misrepresented as a list of proven innocents rather than mere legal acquittals or dropping of charges). A New York Times article from 2005 stated that Jed S. Rakoff, a Manhattan federal judge who had ruled the death penalty unconstitutional, had analyzed the DPIC list and found 32 factually innocent exonerees:"A Legal Quest Against the Death Penalty", January 2, 2005

“ He reviewed a list of exoneration cases on the Web site of the Death Penalty Information Center, a research group that says it is critical of how the death penalty is carried out. His law clerks, too, went to work. He ultimately came up with 32 cases of exonerated prisoners who, he concluded, were "factually innocent" - 12 were cleared through DNA testing and 20 through other means. ”

--Jatkins ^{(talk - contribs)} 20:44, 9 May 2010 (UTC)

Utah - firing squad

Utah is listed as "only lethal injection" in that graphic, however Ronnie Lee Gardner is sentenced to death by firing squad in Salt Lake City. CNN article --zandperl (talk) 02:16, 11 June 2010 (UTC)

Inmates conviced before a certin date were given the option of dying before a firing squad or lethal injection. A new law was passed in favor of just lethal injection and all inmates convicted after that date now die through lethal injection. - Knowledgekid87 (talk) 02:30, 11 June 2010 (UTC)

I've changed the map color for Utah because like you state the 2004 law still allows some inmates after Gardner to face the firing squad, and it's consistent with the color-coding used for New Mexico, which has abolished the death penalty for crimes after July 1, 2009, but retains it for earlier crimes, which is color-coded as using lethal injection as its primary method. --Jatkins ^{(talk - contribs)} 12:48, 21 June 2010 (UTC)

Executions since 1976

The table of executions since 1976 should probably contain the per capita numbers and be arranged in that order, rather than in order of raw numbers of executions. If anyone cares, the per capita numbers to 2009 can be found here:

http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/state-execution-rates —Preceding unsigned comment added by Hoplophile (talk • contribs) 11:22, 21 June 2010 (UTC)

I don't think executions per capita, at least as calculated by DPIC, is useful information. DPIC has calculated the executions based on the number of executions since 1976 in each DP state divided by the estimated 2008 populations of each DP state, times by 10,000 (e.g. (89/3,642,361)*10,000 ~ 0.244 for OK), meaning that the result is executions per capita per 34 years, not executions per capita per year, which would be a more useful statistic. To get that you could work out the average number of executions per year for each state since 1977 (though the moratorium was lifted in 1976, the first execution wasn't until January 1977) divide it by the average population from 1977 to present, and times by 10,000 to get executions per capita per year, thought that might be considered original research. Anyway, I think the basic idea of adding per capita rates, or replacing the cumulative rates with per capita rates entirely, is the best way to go. --Jatkins ^{(talk - contribs)} 12:26, 21 June 2010 (UTC)

If you're interested, the 2009 population estimates are here: http://quickfacts.census.gov/qfd/index.html and DPIC has a post-1976 execution database here: http://deathpenaltyinfo.org/executions (the number of executions is sometimes obscured by a horizontal rule; you might have to view the source of the page to get the number). --Jatkins ^{(talk - contribs)} 12:29, 21 June 2010 (UTC)

I do think that the "total per capita" numbers from Hoplophile's link are useful information to add, unless someone finds or calculates the "per capita per year" numbers.--Roentgenium111 (talk) 19:16, 29 May 2011 (UTC)

Sexism

Between 1 Jan 1973 and 30 Jun 2009, 8,118 people were sentenced to death in the USA. Of those, 165 were women - one in 49. There were 1,168 executions, of those 11 were women - only one in every 106. Yet women commit up to 12% of capital murders - one in 8. Source: Victor Streib.

So why aren't 1 in every 8 executions of women? Could it be sexism? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 124.197.15.138 (talk) 07:23, 23 September 2010 (UTC)

Call it Gender Bias and compare: Thad Rueter: Why Women Aren't Executed: Gender Bias and the Death Penalty , Human Rights, Fall 1996, Vol. 23, No. 4, p.10-11. online Fall 1996 Human Rights Magazine.--Max Dax (talk) 08:16, 23 September 2010 (UTC)

Innocent inmates of death row

Hi,

I come from Germany and I have a few questions about innocent people in the death row:

How many people were released because there were found innocent? In how many cases was this because new DNA evidences? In how many cases was this because exclusion of evidences in a retrial? Felidae28 (talk) 17:48, 26 January 2011 (UTC)

You can't be "found innocent" in the American system, only found "not guilty" or "guilty". 138 people since 1973 have been exonerated in the legal sense - that is, acquitted by a jury, prosecutors dropped the capital charges, or their sentence was commuted or they received a pardon based on possible innocence. Federal judge Jed Rakoff in New York concluded circa 2005 that around 32 cases presented clear symptoms of innocence (per NYT).

According to DPIC, which compiled and maintains the controversial list, in 17 exoneration cases DNA played a "substantial factor" in what they refer to as "establishing innocence".

The last question I can't answer, and I'm not sure if there's a solid stat for it, but it's at least a fair number, I would say.

--Jatkins ^{(talk - contribs)} 12:30, 12 March 2011 (UTC)

Double Controversy?

There are two sections in the article, one titled simply "Controversy" and the other one titled "Controversy over use of death penalty". Why we have two sections on the same issue? Vanjagenije (talk) 11:09, 14 February 2011 (UTC)

It's really just that the article is a mess and needs cleaning up. The content is good but the structure is poor. --Jatkins ^{(talk - contribs)} 16:49, 14 February 2011 (UTC)

I've finally gotten round to cleaning it up. --Jatkins ^{(talk - contribs)} 12:31, 12 March 2011 (UTC)

English

What on earth are 'abolishment' and 'retroactive'. Do you mean 'abolition' and 'retrospective'? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.135.182.149 (talk • contribs)

Please look the terms up in a dictionary. (In particular, "retroactive" and "retrospective" do not have the same meaning, particularly in the legal arena.) --Nlu (talk) 22:12, 26 February 2011 (UTC)

US Military

In 2008, then president Bush signed the death sentence for Pvt Ronald Grey. Grey was found guilty of rape and murder that he conducted in North Carolina. The execution was carried out on Dec 10, 2008. This being the first US Military execution since 1961. This part of the article should be updated to US Military: Executions 1; Deathrow 8. http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/news/past/37/2008 67.166.155.113 (talk) 04:47, 11 May 2011 (UTC)

Late response but that isn't what your source says. He is still un-executed today. See more detail in our article: Capital punishment by the United States military. Rmhermen (talk) 15:57, 28 May 2011 (UTC)

July 1, 2011

Shouldn't the map illustrating capital punishment's legitimacy in the US change today as in Illinois the punishment becomes illegal.--Ecad93 (talk) 09:00, 1 July 2011 (UTC)

Not so much that it "becomes illegal", but that it's abolished. You might want to approach the most recent editor of the map, and if he's still an active editor, ask him to change it. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 09:05, 1 July 2011 (UTC)

Poorly organized

The overwhelming majority of the article is oriented toward the individual states' attitudes, but the grid lists federal executions as if they were performed by a state; Eddie Slovik, executed by the US military (in the end, a federal execution), is listed as if the location in France was a US state.

If you are going to list federal and military executions, they should be listed separately; the states (and France) had nothing to do with the decision to execute.--Mfwills (talk) 13:07, 22 January 2012 (UTC)

I am not sure exactly which part you are talking about by "grid". Are you talking about the chart of U.S. executions since 1976 which is organized by juridictions? The federal gov and military are jurisdiction just like the states. And the Slovik execution is too old to show there. Rmhermen (talk) 19:36, 22 January 2012 (UTC)

"Witchcraft (1779)"

The reference reads:

(Happening at Kaskaskia) A Negro slave named Manuel, who made a honorable fine at the door of the church was (arrested) He was sentenced by Col Todd for the crime of Voodoo. He was sentenced 13 Jun 1779 by Col Todd to be chained to a post and burned alive with his ashes scattered. The sentence was carried out by sheriff Richard Winston.

This has nothing to do with "Capital punishment in the United States" as it happened in Illinois Country, which wasn't part of the United States to begin with. Also, the "crime" was speficied as "Voodoo", not "witchcraft". --dab (𒁳) 14:44, 30 March 2012 (UTC)

The Americans captured Illinois Country in 1778 - before this execution occured. Col Todd was lieut.-commandant for Illinois appointed by Virginia's governor. And voodoo/witchcraft is not really a meaningful distinction then (or sometimes now). Rmhermen (talk) 21:51, 14 April 2012 (UTC)

Seems Todd was Mary Todd Lincoln's great-uncle. Rmhermen (talk) 21:54, 14 April 2012 (UTC)

missing fact

Something very simple and important is missing, at least in the introductory paragraph -- currently, how many U.S. states have the death penalty and how many don't? Instead of going into detail about how many executions were carried out in 2011 etc you should first inform the reader about how many states allow the death penalty — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.84.68.252 (talk) 21:32, 14 April 2012 (UTC)

That would be a good addition. In fact, I can't find a clear statement of it anywhere in the article. (We would have to note the federal death penalty as well.) Rmhermen (talk) 02:59, 15 April 2012 (UTC)

External resources

I've removed this section because it mostly didn't comply with WP:EL. I could maybe have left some in, but not in a non-biased way. Reason I'm doing this is to prepare the article for a front page link for WP:ITN, not because I have anything in particular against the links.

A discussion of what should and shouldn't go in would maybe be worthwhile, though. Formerip (talk) 20:52, 26 April 2012 (UTC)

Paragraph at End of Intro Seems Misplaced, Biased / Promotional, and Possibly Irelevant; Discuss

This following excerpt, which I recommend should either be moved or deleted, is the one that is in question:

38 year old man was proved to be innocent after 15 years of prison in Louisiana in September 2012. He was the 18th capital punishment convicted person and 300th prison proved to be not guilty with the DNA tests. Death Penalty Information Center is concerned of the convictions of innocents.

--Mrzubrow (talk) 07:20, 30 September 2012 (UTC)

Table

I see you have removed the table I placed (Revision as of 21:26, 2 December 2005) with total execution in the USA by year. You say that there is also a graphic but I think that no one is able, viewing graphic only, to say exactly how many executions there were this year or in 1993. Graphic and table should coexhists. What do You think? -- Armando82, 7 December 2005.

I must underline that Image is not been updated while a table (see My edit) could be easily updated by anyone. -- Armando82, 21 January 2006.

Caleb Adams Link Removed

The website is devoted to a single execution hundreds of years ago and provides no general information revevant to the bredth of the topic. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.133.93.98 (talk) 21:23, 22 January 2006‎ (UTC)

NOTE: The previous editor would much rather ignore history and mis-spell words like revevant, and think that he/she is an open-minded scholar. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.208.127.190 (talk) 11:51, 11 March 2006‎ (UTC)

Pre-Furman history

It would be interesting with some pre-Furman history that explains the rather rapid drop in executions after 1935. Gunnar Larsson (talk) 15:32, 20 December 2012 (UTC)

Suggested structural changes

As it is the article feels a bit "spaghetti-ish", with some issues reoccurring at different locations. I would suggest the following changes:

• A section called "Current status". It will include "recent abolition" and "Puerto Rico".
• In the history section no distinction is made between states with/without capital punishment.
• "New concerns post-Furman" is made part of the history section (i.e. it is moved down one level)
• "Current moratoria and de facto moratoria" is moved to either "current status" or "history". Any repetition is removed.

Any comments? Gunnar Larsson (talk) 15:52, 20 December 2012 (UTC)

Post-Furman Links

There are currently two un-wikilinked references,

the "Federal Death Penalty Act of 1994" link, I assume, could be linked to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federal_Violent_Crime_Control_and_Law_Enforcement_Act_of_1994#Federal_Death_Penalty_Act (though not being from the US I could be getting things confused)

As far as the kingpin one, it seems there are several variations floating around. (is http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Continuing_Criminal_Enterprise the same thing?)

Perhaps for both of these it'd be worth linking to the actual act as a reference rather than leaving them as unwritten wiki pages.

58.6.128.122 (talk) 10:07, 22 February 2013 (UTC)

"Abolition" is loaded (and not really accurate) language

Use of the words "abolition" and "abolish" throughout this article gives rise to some problems:

(1) it is misleading in that it suggests the elimination of the death penalty was somehow permanent or unconditional; in reality, generally what has happened in states that don't currently have a death penalty is that the existing death penalty statute was repealed, or in some cases the existing law was found to be unconstitutionally defective in some particular way and then no replacement version correcting the defect was passed.

(2) it carries connotations of some obvious evil (e.g., slavery) being righteously destroyed by the forces of truth and justice. Anything sounds sinister when you say it has been "abolished".

This is not really in keeping with the neutral, dispassionate tone that's expected of WP articles. Most or all instances of words like "abolished" should be replaced with words like "repealed" or "eliminated". Centrify (f / k / a FCAYS) (talk) (contribs) 17:16, 24 July 2012 (UTC)

I think the words, "death penalty" sound pretty sinister in and of themselves. Shall we change that too so you don't feel so, shall we say, squeamish about it? How about we call it the "taking of life by the state?" Will that do? Will it? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 108.23.105.146 (talk) 07:56, 22 March 2013 (UTC)

Well, to me abolish is the neutral word and eliminate a heavily biased one that denotes the thing "eliminated" as obvious evil. But then of course I'm German. "Again what learned", as we say in joke translation. --93.134.239.96 (talk) 11:56, 30 August 2012 (UTC)

"Abolish" has very clear overtones toward the abolition movement, and to a disconnected but related extent, to the term abortion. That illiteration is not probably a coincidence. "Abolishment" is not a term used by mainstream English speaking media, including British English speakers. It deserves mention as a term, but I agree that it should not be used uniformly throughout the article. Shadowjams (talk) 06:42, 25 February 2013 (UTC)

Biased towards abolition

This article is weighed very heavily towards various attempts at ending the death penalty over the years. I came here looking for history of the death penalty such as what methods were used most often, but I got "history of abolition from the time of the colonies to now" instead. --108.210.126.195 (talk) 03:03, 28 April 2013 (UTC)

I do see the Methods section down further, but would've expected that to be the main topic. Perhaps I'll be bold and edit. --108.210.126.195 (talk) 03:05, 28 April 2013 (UTC)

This video depicts...

The section entitled "States without capital punishment," and then simply says "This video depicts the abolition of capital punishment in the United States between 1846 and 2012," with a link to a video is completely inappropriate for an encyclopedic article. This information needs to be written out. The only appropriate place for a link to a video like this is the references section or perhaps the "see also section." Kronos o (talk) 10:08, 9 May 2013 (UTC)

Confusing

The article states 29 states still have the death penalty. Then it says 17 of the 32 impose it. Further down it says of the 38 states that have the death penalty. Just exactly how many states, in 2013, still have the death penalty is unclear - despite the length of the article — Preceding unsigned comment added by 176.253.5.103 (talk) 10:21, 9 June 2013 (UTC)

Additionally, the map in the "Abolition" section doesn't match the list, and where are the citations? Revision at *14:22, 7 June 2013* added that Washington state death penalty statute was abolished in 2013 (and later edit added a footnote that it was "struck down by court ruling") but I can't find a case nor even any second-hand news articles, the Capital punishment in Washington state page says nothing about this, and both the WA Department of Corrections and the fact that there are still ongoing death penalty appeals in Washington as of 6/26/13(see: charge in Washington death penalty appeal) imply that this has NOT been abolished. Oregon also appears to be suspect (if for no other reason than it is also inconsistent with the Capital punishment in Oregon article.) Same edit also appeared to add Colorado, which has since been removed from the list. Where did this information come from? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.194.72.49 (talk)

Problem with table of executions for crimes other than homicide

There is a problem with the last entry in the table of executions in the United States that did not involve homicide. As <a href="http://collections.mnhs.org/MNHistoryMagazine/articles/1/v01i01p003-025.pdf">this source</a>, http://collections.mnhs.org/MNHistoryMagazine/articles/1/v01i01p003-025.pdf, suggests, the account cited is questionable. The actual underlying crime was homicide: Manuel murdered his master and mistress. The story of witchcraft appears to have been promulgated for reasons of bias. Additionally, since the underlying crime was homicide, it doesn't qualify for a list of executions for reasons other than homicide.

I wanted to submit this change for comment before removing the entry from the table. Please comment.DSchuler123 (talk) 13:33, 29 July 2013 (UTC)

Other entries of this table have the same problem:

- Rudolph Wright's vistim, Robert Grayson, died: [1]; his remplacant could be Robert Harmon, executed the August 9,1960 in Caliornia for assault by a lifer.

- Frank Bass isn't the last burglar to suffer death, Ross McAfee (executed the Nov. 22, 1957 in N.C) is: 1 ,2; Frank Bass was classed, in the EPSY files, in Burglary-Housebreaking whereas Ross McAfee was in Burglary-Attempted rape.

- I can see here 1 Bird Woods and George Early the January 1st, 1893 in Virginia and William Cannon and Jim Bowers the September 1st in Georgia were executed for arson well after Georges Smith and Asbury and Georges Hughes.

- There are some problem with Jmes Coburn discussed here 2A01:E35:2E0A:CC0:7410:AB90:9D21:8C4E (talk) 21:12, 27 August 2013 (UTC)

New concerns post-Furman

There are several areas of concern in this section:

1. - The lack of chronology of content makes it hard to follow.
2. - The second to last sentence in the first paragraph includes, "although most jurisdictions require aggravating circumstances. A)- The use of "most jurisdictions" is vague and, B)- The United States Supreme Court mandates concerning aggravating and mitigating circumstances are clear.
3. - Concerning the death penalty in Florida for drug trafficking, content currently states, "drug trafficking resulting in a person's death in Florida", with the reference; See The 2009 Florida Statutes § 782.04(1)(a)(3), available at http://www.leg.state.fl.us/Statutes/index.cfm. This reference and statute is not "specifically" for drug trafficking.

• 893.13 (3): Any person who knowingly brings into this state 300 kilograms or more of cocaine, as described in s. 893.03(2)(a)4., and who knows that the probable result of such importation would be the death of any person, commits capital importation of cocaine, a capital felony punishable as provided in ss. 775.082 and 921.142.". The later statute follows the dictate of the United States Supreme Court under 921.142(3); (a) That sufficient aggravating circumstances exist as enumerated in subsection (5) and, (b) That there are insufficient mitigating circumstances to outweigh the aggravating circumstances. Subsection (5) (a) through (p) provides the criteria as to aggravating circumstances and (6) (a) through (h), provides provides the criteria for mitigating circumstances. Subsection (5) gives support to more than the criteria that, "resulting in a person's death" may result in the death penalty. Reference: "The 2012 Florida Statutes"-Title XLVII; - Retrieved 2013-09-04
• Florida (along with Missouri) is listed as a state that provides for non-murder crimes such as Drug trafficking. It is certainly the majority position of the Roberts Court that the death penalty would be disproportionate for any offense against an individual that did not involve death of the victim when he wrote, "the death penalty would be disproportionate for any offense against an individual that did not involve the death of the victim.": Reference; Other State Statutes allowing the death penalty for non-murder crimes- Retrieved 2013-09-04

4.- Article content dated: "As of November 2008, there is only one person on death row facing capital punishment who has not been convicted of murder. Demarcus Sears remains under a death sentence in Georgia for the crime of "Kidnapping With Bodily Injury.".

• • Update; On June 29, 2010, the U.S. Supreme Court vacated (and the case remanded) the death penalty of Sears for ineffective council; Reference- Equal Justice Initiative- posted July 1, 2010, retrieved 2013-09-04. -- Otr500 (talk) 03:34, 5 September 2013 (UTC)

Abolition Video

Hi folks:

I have created a YouTube video that depicts the abolition of capital punishment in the USA on a State by State basis from 1846 - 2012 (an update is in the works). Originally I posted the link to the video right after the heading "States Without Capital Punishment". While there it averaged about 1,200 hits a month suggesting the video is of interest to viewers of this section of the page. However, the link was removed and I was told it was the wrong place. Subsequently, I have relocated the link to the bottom of the page in the 'Further Readings' section. Since then it is averaging about 350 hits a month suggesting readers who might be interested in viewing it aren't seeing the link. My question is: is there any other appropriate place on the page the link can be located where it might be of more obvious to those interested its content? I think an appropriate location would be in the 'Notes' section at the end of the abolition discussion but I wanted to check before relocating it there. You thoughts will be appreciated. By the way, I don't make anything from the video - it is solely for the public good.

Cheers,

Ron — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rstansfi (talk • contribs) 17:41, 28 October 2013 (UTC)

External links belong in the External links or further reading section. Rmhermen (talk) 01:32, 30 October 2013 (UTC)

"Popularity" in the Intro?

According to the intro, "Over the past 20 years, the death penalty has slowly declined in popularity in the United States from an all time high in 1994 of 80% in favor, to around 63% in 2012.[5] Since 2007, six states have abolished the death penalty."

What does that mean? Popularity in public opinion polls? Popularity among juries? Popularity among justices? What are the percentages listing? 80% of who are in favor of what? --130.22.247.113 (talk) 12:12, 12 December 2013 (UTC)

@130.22.247.113: Is it possible that in this instance they meant to use "frequency" instead of "popularity"? teratogen (talk) 20:12, 12 December 2013 (UTC)

Include Territories in Graphic?

I'm wondering if the US territories should be included in the graphic that's on this page: File:CAPITAL PUNISHMENT US STATES.png. The territories are mentioned in the article and also in the chart, but a visual representation nearer to the top with all of the territories would be enjoyable. Helixer (hábleme) 02:47, 31 January 2014 (UTC)

James Coburn - Robbery?

Was James Coburn really executed for robbery? Alabama DoC (http://www.doc.alabama.gov/Executions.aspx) lists the crime as Murder I. Also this Tuscaloosa News piece from 1979 (http://news.google.com/newspapers?nid=1817&dat=19790401&id=aWstAAAAIBAJ&sjid=U4oFAAAAIBAJ&pg=6911,27612) describes his crime as murder. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 155.245.51.110 (talk) 13:16, 6 August 2014 (UTC)

Error on the map

The map is incorrect: Vermont does not have the death penalty and New Hampshire does. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.9.130.35 (talk) 23:11, 17 September 2014 (UTC)

Minimum age

"Juvenile offender" is not necessarily the same as "under 18" -- for example in Texas anyone older than 16 (i.e. 17+) can only be charged as an adult. Does anyone know whether the supreme court limited it to 18, or instead to juvenile offenses (at whatever age the state places the cutoff)? 'Dime' . 'Cadmium' 19:47, 2 February 2014 (UTC)

The Supreme Court decision in Roper v. Simmons states: "The Eighth and Fourteenth Amendments forbid imposition of the death penalty on offenders who were under the age of 18 when their crimes were committed." --84.248.74.189 (talk) 22:01, 17 November 2014 (UTC)

Mass executions committed by the United States

Is there a list of mass executions committed by the United States? I am attempting to ascertain whether the hanging of 30 members of the Saint Patrick's Battalion at Chapultepec was the second largest mass execution committed on a single day after the execution of 38 Sioux at the end of the Dakota War of 1862. Any help would be great. Nulla Taciti (talk) 17:19, 25 March 2015 (UTC)

New Map Request

Is it possible to edit the main map to show states that retain capital punishment, those that have banned it, and those that have a moratorium? That would be similar to the world map on this topic. Right now one must look for the list at the bottom of the article. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.86.109.134 (talk) 17:54, 16 May 2015 (UTC)

That map is already in the article - right near the top. Rmhermen (talk) 02:22, 17 May 2015 (UTC)

Cutting down the article

Looking through the page, I feel that a lot of this information is repeated elsewhere, and as opposed to being a summary article, it has turned into a bit of a random mess of stats. As such, I'd like to see what people think about cutting this article right back to be about the general state of capital punishment in the US, maybe with a per-state summary linking to the specific state articles. How does this sound? Mdann52 (talk) 16:39, 5 August 2015 (UTC)

not sure I agree that it should just be a summary of the current state. I think the article is quite good right now in terms of headings.--JumpLike23 (talk) 17:59, 5 August 2015 (UTC)

@Jumplike23: I didn't mean just today (I meant in general, including history). Mdann52 (talk) 18:20, 5 August 2015 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 3 external links on Capital punishment in the United States. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20051117161203/http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/ESPYdate.pdf to http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/ESPYdate.pdf
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20060827010133/http://deathpenaltyinfo.msu.edu:80/c/states/stats/utah.htm to http://deathpenaltyinfo.msu.edu/c/states/stats/utah.htm
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20061222152731/http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20061215/ap_on_re_us/california_death_penalty to http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20061215/ap_on_re_us/california_death_penalty

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers. —^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 00:07, 19 October 2015 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Capital punishment in the United States. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

• Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20110726054909/http://www.fiqhcouncil.org/Articles/GeneralFiqhIssues/tabid/170/ctl/Detail/mid/569/xmid/4/xmfid/1/Default.aspx to http://www.fiqhcouncil.org/Articles/GeneralFiqhIssues/tabid/170/ctl/Detail/mid/569/xmid/4/xmfid/1/Default.aspx

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 09:28, 28 February 2016 (UTC)

Bias

The history section is very biased against the death penalty to the point where it doesn't seem to provide any information about anything other than abolition. I wanted to know how the process changed over the years. Obviously people weren't on death row for 30 years in the 1800s before being hanged. Also, how did the history of the methods change and what standards were used and when.

Writing a long anti-capital punishment diatribe under the heading of history is not only non-neutral, but is pointless. Can't a section just be made titled "criticism" and leave the history section for actual history or has Wikipedia become so biased and British that its no longer an encyclopedia? 63.152.117.25 (talk) 11:45, 18 May 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Capital punishment in the United States. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit User:Cyberpower678/FaQs#InternetArchiveBot*this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.becker-posner-blog.com/2005/12/more-on-the-economics-of-capital-punishment-becker.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 09:09, 7 June 2016 (UTC)

Debate

I restored this section to the version before the new sections were added, sections which the user has also tried to add (unsuccessfully) to Capital punishment. Please read WP:PRIMARY. zzz (talk) 09:28, 12 July 2016 (UTC)

Primary sources were used only according to Wikipedia rules: "A primary source may only be used on Wikipedia to make straightforward, descriptive statements of facts that can be verified by any educated person with access to the primary source but without further, specialized knowledge.". The grounds stated by Signedzzz are thus not true. Urutine32 (talk) 09:53, 12 July 2016 (UTC)

One example, then:

Death penalty supporters contend that the death penalty is more deterrent than any prison term. In 2005, Nobel laureate in Economics Gary Becker said that capital punishment would be justified even if it required to execute many murderers to prevent a single victim from being killed.[104]

The first sentence is unsourced (i.e., Urutine32's opinion). The second sentence is sourced to a WP:BLOG, becker-posner-blog.com. And how does the WP:PRIMARY source confirm that economist Gary Becker's opinion is typical or characteristic of "Death penalty supporters"? It doesn't, because it is a misuse of a WP:PRIMARY source. I hope that makes sense. zzz (talk) 10:07, 12 July 2016 (UTC)

The first sentence is death penalty supporters opinion examplified by Blecker. And we have already discussed the source in Talk:Capital punishment#Deterrence and I proposed to replace it by <+ref>G. Becker, On the economics of capital punishment, The Economists Voice, 3 (3) (2006), pp. 1–4</ref> I just forgot to make also the change here, and you could have made this change yourself rather making, again, a blanket deletion. Urutine32 (talk) 10:25, 12 July 2016 (UTC)

If you have other examples don't hesitate to state them, so I can make the necessary changes. Urutine32 (talk) 10:27, 12 July 2016 (UTC)

You are, once again, alone to have opposed these changes that were in this article for over a month; just one other user changed them only for correcting grammar. Urutine32 (talk) 10:31, 12 July 2016 (UTC)

Again: how does the WP:PRIMARY source confirm that economist Gary Becker's opinion is typical or characteristic of "Death penalty supporters"? zzz (talk) 11:58, 12 July 2016 (UTC)

This is the general pattern - unsourced statement of opinion, followed by a random primary source (presumably, to "back it up" - which, of course, it doesn't). zzz (talk) 12:03, 12 July 2016 (UTC)

I'm not seeing any non-primary source in what you added. As I told you at Talk:Capital punishment before you were blocked for trying to add exactly the same stuff there: "you need to find sources that discuss the subject and summarise them." No one wants to read your opinions, not even if you find a primary source that "agrees" with you. zzz (talk) 12:20, 12 July 2016 (UTC)

I was blocked for edit warring not for the changes on the merits (you have been blocked many times in the past). Blecker article explains that deterrence is a common death penalty argument, he don't speak in only about himself (I can replace "death penalty supporters" by "some death penalty supporters"; but most the section you deleted already uses such language about other issues).

Also, almost all the materials you restored in "States and territories without capital punishment" is already in the History section, I have explained that in edit summaries from 08:43, 20 May 2016‎ and 17:14, 14 May 2016‎, so your statement according to which this is an "unexplained deletion" is not true. Urutine32 (talk) 18:48, 12 July 2016 (UTC)

I will restore a version of the debate that take Signedzzz objections into account and restore some changes he reverted on wrong grounds.

I emphasize that primary sources will be used only according to Wikipedia rules, only for "straightforward, descriptive statements of facts that can be verified by any educated person with access to the primary source but without further, specialized knowledge".

I Signedzzz reverts again, I will not restore my changes and issue instead a request for comments in Politics, government, and law and in History and geography, since third-opinion and DRN have been completely unsucessful in the past to find any compromise with Signedzzz (see here and here) and only resulted in what a neutral moderator called "personal attacks". Urutine32 (talk) 08:54, 13 July 2016 (UTC)

Showing hiatuses/moratoriums in the map

User:Urutine32 left the following message on my talk page, but I'm going to reply here since I believe the central issue is the lede of this page:

Hello. I wanted to thank you for updating the section of Capital punishment in the United States about executions hiatus.

For the new map you added, I believe personnally the earlier (that I created) was better because it uses the same colors than the world map in Capital punishment and Capital punishment by country, and also because I think the introduction is to soon to explain about moratoriums or executions suspensions, a complex legal or poltical concept.

Thank you. Urutine32 (talk) 19:36, 11 July 2016 (UTC)

To anyone dropping by, I edited the map at the top of the page to include a color for states where application of the death penalty has been suspended by a judge or executive.

I don't have any real opinion about the colors of the map. Bright red and bright green seem garish to me, but I'm fine with any color scheme that meets accessibility standards for colorblind readers.

I strongly disagree with the idea that the lede is too soon to discuss moratoriums. The primary news about the death penalty in the U.S. over the last five to ten years has been the imposition of hiatuses due to to procedural concerns with lethal injection (e.g. Kentucky & California) or substantial concerns about innocence (Colorado, Illinois). The lede should serve to "summarize the most important points [of a topic], including any prominent controversies." I think that hiatuses and moratoriums are a prominent controversy in the topic, and are an important point that goes towards establishing the context around the topic. Fitnr 23:58, 11 July 2016 (UTC)

I don't think so, because whether a state is under a "de facto" moratorium or not is a disputable notion and some organzations might disagree because they have different definitions, or may even themselves recognize the obscurity of the phenomenon: even the abolitionist and authoritative Death Penalty Information Center, for example, says that nine state are under "status unclear" [12]. Urutine32 (talk) 08:19, 12 July 2016 (UTC)

That fact that some states have unclear statuses is very relavant to the topic, perhaps that should be added to the map, or mentioned in the lede. Fitnr 14:39, 13 July 2016 (UTC)

It's relevant I agree, but for the hiatus section not the lede. The lede should only says the most basical and most neutral information: which states have the death penalty and which not. That's what the current map do. The very same DPIC made a map with no different color for states with status unclear or even a judicial suspension of executions: [13]. Urutine32 (talk) 15:54, 13 July 2016 (UTC)

Rfc Deletions in Capital punishment in the United States

Should the content deleted by Signedzzz be restored, with or without appropriate changes to address his concerns?

Signedzzz deleted many changes I made on grounds that I find not true, and I ask for comments because in another case, third-opinion and DRN have been completely unsuccessful to find any compromise with Signedzzz (see here and here) and only resulted in what a neutral moderator called "personal attacks". Urutine32 (talk) 10:55, 13 July 2016 (UTC)

The controversial changes are the following (we have some discussion about them in the earlier section called "Debate"):

1. Here, Signedzzz restored a section whose almost all infos are already in another section (the History one).
2. Here, he deleted all the changes I made to the Debate section on the grounds they are "misuse of primary sources", while to the contrary I believe to have used them according to Wikipedia rules (after rewriting this section to adress this concern), only for: "straightforward, descriptive statements of facts that can be verified by any educated person with access to the primary source but without further, specialized knowledge".
3. I don’t known why he had done this. He wrote the article was "not improved", but under Wikipedia rules you can revert only if the content had become worse.

Urutine32 (talk) 11:03, 13 July 2016 (UTC)

I believe Signedzzz is not likely to respond favorably to any comment, so I dropped my request for comment. As he said to me in another talk page, I don't want also to "waste my time". Urutine32 (talk) 16:35, 13 July 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Capital punishment in the United States. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added {{dead link}} tag to http://bigstory.ap.org/article/1aea52fe83374e08ac08667cf680f83d/death-penalty-repeal-officially-hold-until-2016-election
• Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.google.com/hostednews/afp/article/ALeqM5iUcLhqwlBEQ6-b-J7rzRd2lSuv3g
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20031219035119/http://www.prodeathpenalty.com:80/racism.htm to http://www.prodeathpenalty.com/racism.htm

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 20:14, 9 November 2016 (UTC)

de facto hiatus

It seems like saying that a state has a de facto hiatus on executions just because it has been a few years since the last execution is disingenuous. If I haven't been divorced in 6 years it doesn't mean that I have a de facto ban on divorce. It just means I haven't exercised my option. It feels very much like trying to push an agenda of saying that more states have restricted capital punishment than actually have. --Drewder (talk) 02:44, 12 November 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Capital punishment in the United States. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080124040746/http://wweek.com/editorial/3411/10288/ to http://wweek.com/editorial/3411/10288/

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 17:52, 14 November 2016 (UTC)

Maryland's abolition (banned in 2013)

I have noted in the article that MD's repeal of capital punishment is pending final statehouse action. If and when the governor signs it, note # 2 following the list of no-death-penalty states should be removed (not before). — Preceding unsigned comment added by RobertGustafson (talk • contribs) 03:29, 24 March 2013‎ (UTC)

Note: Maryland banned the death penalty in 2013 as per Capital punishment in Maryland. Facts707 (talk) 19:52, 23 April 2017 (UTC)

RFC: Should the lead section of this article indicate number of persons on death row and number of persons exonerated?

The consensus is that the lead section of the article should indicate the number of persons on death row and the number of persons exonerated. Cunard (talk) 03:48, 7 May 2017 (UTC)

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

---

A debate has begun among editors regarding whether these nationwide numbers should be in the lead. One editor is of the opinion that these statistics should not be in the lead unless certain other content is also included. See immediately prior talk section. Thank you for your thoughts! Facts707 (talk) 16:06, 23 April 2017 (UTC)

Support inclusion - stats of this nature are exactly what readers are looking for of-the-bat. Hiding them deep in pros because of the potential embarrassment they may cause is not our goal here. Critical facts/data of this nature one would expect to see in the lead of an article on this topic. Facts -- Moxy (talk) 16:20, 23 April 2017 (UTC)

The fact that zero of those executed has been posthumously exonerated cannot be less relevant than the number of those who have been exonerated and freed. Harry1835 (talk) 18:25, 23 April 2017 (UTC)

Agree add them both ...dont limit access to information in the lead because its embarrassing. On a side note odd to see the fact only the US out of western nations still has this sources were removed. It was very well sourced with links to lots and lots of info.--Moxy (talk) 18:58, 23 April 2017 (UTC)

I never removed from the lead the fact that the United States is the only Western country currently applying the death penalty, but for a lead a single source is enough (it is strange to have sequence of 10 links, at least in the lead).

I never wanted to have an "un-embarrassing" lead, but a concise one, limited to facts that relates to uniqueness of the U.S. (there are exonerees in all countries...). The fact that it is the only Western country is more "embarrassing", but at least it relates to uniqueness of the death penalty in this country; we can say that about no other.

Harry1835 (talk) 20:43, 23 April 2017 (UTC)

• Support inclusion - Summoned by bot. No convincing argument for removing. Report the facts. Meatsgains (talk) 15:07, 25 April 2017 (UTC)
• Support inclusion - I think we ought to be in the encyclopedia business. No pushing of POV narratives, either way. Harry, take a look at Wrongful execution#United States - Six cases, all of post-1976 executions, mentioned there are persuasive that your statement "zero of those executed has been posthumously exonerated" steps around the strong issue of reasonable doubt as to the guilt of those six people executed. It's also not a statement specifically made in the source cited - WP:SYNTH is an issue there. Absence of evidence isn't evidence of absence - just because our sources don't say "here's a case in which someone was executed and later exonerated" doesn't mean it never happened. "None of those executed have been exonerated afterward" is a fact separate from those mentioned in our sources that must be supported by a reliable source or taken out of our article. loupgarous (talk) 18:48, 26 April 2017 (UTC)

Because there is unfortunately a consensus against my position, I can only give up. I will no longer try to remove these infos from the lead (so the Rfc is no longer necessary). Harry1835 (talk) 20:42, 26 April 2017 (UTC)

Harry, If you can locate a good secondary source which says "zero of those executed has been posthumously exonerated", I'd support that, in the interests of a truly balanced lede paragraph. It's just that we can't reason from the sources cited so far to say that without violating WP:SYNTH, even if it's an entirely reasonable inference - it then becomes a separate fact which needs a reliable source. There's no reason why you can't look for a reliable source (see WP:RS) that says that. I just agree with the other commenters that a lede ought to succinctly present what's in the article, to give the reader reason to read on for the details. I hope you keep working on this and other articles, because we need every perspective that can be supported by reliable sources - you didn't 'lose', and I hope you don't take it that way - my remarks were intended to show you how to make the contribution you intended to in a way that would make the article better. loupgarous (talk) 21:29, 26 April 2017 (UTC)

In 2015 the Washington Post said about one case that it was "among those that have come closest to proving for the first time in the modern era of capital punishment that an innocent person has been put to death in the United States" (my emphasis). (see). Harry1835 (talk) 21:46, 26 April 2017 (UTC)

In the Washington Post article, the observation that this was the first time someone was exonerated after his execution was the reporter's own analysis of what opponents of the death penalty believe. That's a primary source statement by someone with no academic or legal expertise in the subject - close enough for popular journalism but not an encyclopedia. See WP:PRIMARY and WP:WEASEL for why we can't use statements like that.

What we need is something like the reporting on the study by Samuel Gross, a law professor at the University of Michigan Law School and editor of the National Registry of Exonerations, showing that up to 4% of those sentenced to death row are statistically apt to be innocent of the the capital offense of which they were convicted. Two secondary sources on that study are "Many Prisoners on Death Row Are Wrongfully Convicted", by Dina Fine Maron in Scientific American and "US death row study: 4% of defendants sentenced to die are innocent" by Ed Pilkington in the Guardian.

See what I mean? The Washington Post article presents the reporter's own assessment that Willingham’s case is among those that have come closest to proving for the first time in the modern era of capital punishment that an innocent person has been put to death in the United States. He doesn't quote one particular authority on that assessment, so we have to take his word on it. The two articles I use as examples cite one particular study by one group led by an authority on the subject who could be interviewed and quoted. Those are good secondary sources for information like that.

You're closer to the mark, though. If we can get an article written like my two examples saying how many (or few) people are exonerated after their executions in the US after 1976, that'd be something to balance the other figures out in the lede. It would be a professional reporter quoting an authority in the field. I know it's a higher bar to clear than the CNN or Innocence Project figures seem to need, but they're quoting objectively gathered statistics. That's what you need to balance them with - objectively gathered statistics by an authority in the field. Keep trying, you're actually getting close to what we need. loupgarous (talk) 23:22, 26 April 2017 (UTC)

This article I found with Google Scholar, page 760. "no person executed under modern death penalty procedures has been posthumously exonerated" and in a footnote the author specifies "I use “modern death penalty procedures” to refer to procedures that were instituted as a result of the reinstatement of the death penalty following Furman v. Georgia, 408 U.S. 238 (1972)". Harry1835 (talk) 11:48, 27 April 2017 (UTC)

This appears to be usable to support the statement "no person executed under modern death penalty procedures has been posthumously exonerated". Congratulations, you found a paper by a legal scholar citing a review of the legal literature - seems to be as solid or more so than the secondary sources cited for the other statistics in the lede paragraph. Good work, and now you can make that change to the lede, I think. loupgarous (talk) 18:39, 27 April 2017 (UTC)

This is an odd thing to say...this is why it's hard to find a source. Courts do not review claims of innocence when the defendant is dead. Adding this sentence will make it appear that there has been legal cases that have failed....but in actuality noting has been done to advance a process of these cases.--Moxy (talk) 03:34, 28 April 2017 (UTC)

Governors can grant a posthumous pardon, and courts can grant a posthumous exoneration, as for George Stinney. Harry1835 (talk) 11:54, 28 April 2017 (UTC)

Moxy, the source Harry1835 cites for his statistic in the lede paragraph is a legal journal article reviewing case histories of those found to have been wrongfully convicted of capital offenses and sentenced to capital punishment since 1976. I agreed with you that the statistics on capital punishment belong in the lede paragraph of our article. Harry's source is just such a statistic - a fact for which he cites a legal journal article dealing with the history of wrongful capital convictions since 1976, stating the fact as part of a review of the legal literature - a secondary source from a legal scholar with no obvious desire to push POV or misstate the truth.

As I stated above, we're in the encyclopedia business, not cherry-picking of facts or POV-pushing business. If we document the number of wrongly-convicted people on death row, it's just as important to state no one executed since 1976 haa been exonerated after death. Exoneration, as Harry correctly says, can be accomplished by executive pardon - and has been in the past. Even if you had a source for your statement that "Courts do not review claims of innocence when the defendant is dead", it's WP:SYNTH and probably WP:OR to go from there to saying "Adding this sentence will make it appear that there has been legal cases that have failed....but in actuality noting has been done to advance a process of these cases", and deny the statistic "no person executed under modern death penalty procedures has been posthumously exonerated" when it is backed by a WP:RS source. The opposite is true. Keeping a fact backed by a reliable source out of one of our articles because an editor reasons but cannot cite a reliable source that it is somehow misleading is POV-pushing WP:SYNTH. loupgarous (talk) 08:53, 2 May 2017 (UTC)

---

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Add content about exonerations

I think it is necessary to add content about exonerations and have done so in the Lead and in the body of the article.Parkwells (talk) 00:31, 30 March 2017 (UTC)

I agree we must have content about exonerations in the body of the article, but not in the Lead, to respect the rule that "The lead should be written in a clear, accessible style with a neutral point of view." (see: Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Lead section). As it would be POV to write in the Lead "over 250 death row convicts were condemned for a murder committed after a prior homicide conviction" (even if it is true, see pages 1 and 12). Harry1835 (talk) 10:27, 30 March 2017 (UTC)

Since the total number of executions are given in the Lead, I disagree that it violates POV to give the total number of exonerations. This is part of the current world of capital punishment: that some inmates are exonerated and shown to have been wrongfully convicted. The guidelines for the Lead also call for it to "explain why the topic is notable, and summarize the most important points, including any prominent controversies". This would suggest not only that exoneration be included in the Lead, but also a statement about controversies over use of lethal injections: refusal of doctors to participate and refusal of European companies to ship drugs to the US for this purpose, as they classify that method of execution as torture. Parkwells (talk) 15:52, 30 March 2017 (UTC)

@Parkwells: Sorry about the delayed commentary. I agree that mention and enumeration of exonerations should be in the lede, to provide initial, necessary context. I am particularly familiar with many cases that go to the core of the issue. I've met with Ray Krone, for instance, whose story is on point, his conviction being the consequence of faked forensics. Darryl Hunt got two non-DP convictions for a killing, but even when (as with Krone) he was conclusively exonerated and the real killer conclusively identified by DNA evidence, the families of the victims persisted in an obviously misguided determination to see the both punished or killed. Texans Cameron Todd Willingham almost certainly was wrongfully executed and Ruben Cantu was convicted and legally killed, though certainly innocent, because law enforcement wanted retribution for something for which a jury rightfully would have not found him guilty. Richard Glossip is probably innocent, saved only because of execution protocol deficiencies in another case.(See: Oklahoma's Insane Rush to Execute - The Intercept) James Joseph Richardson's conviction, his DP (saved only by Furman v. Georgia) and 21 years in the pen were the result of staggering investigative and prosecutorial ineptitude which allowed the killer of his seven children to evade consequences. Gary Ridgeway probably killed over a hundred young women, but the prosecution found it expedient to allow him to live, because his revelations as to the circumstances of his crimes and his disclosures as to the location of the bodies of his victims were found to be paramount, and the prosecution made a plea bargain, to give some closure to the families of victims. Activist (talk) 08:14, 24 May 2017 (UTC)

It is impossible to summarise in a balanced way the debate on this controversial topic without giving too much infos for a Lead. The debate section itself is only a summarization of the debate.

That would require us to add in this Lead a lot of other infos which are no less relevant than those you put foward at 15:52; just some examples:

• The statistics I gave at 10:27 about prior homicide convictions.
• "17 of the 24 studies published in peer-reviewed journals about deterrence conclude that the death penalty is more efficient than life in jail in preventing murder" (see)
• Since 1972, 11 states — including three in 2016 — have organized popular votes dealing with the death penalty through the initiative and referendum process: all resulted in a vote for reinstating, retaining or strengthening capital punishment.

And these are only some examples, I can find a lot more.

Harry1835 (talk) 17:37, 30 March 2017 (UTC)

Nonsense, listing the number of executions in the lead without an idea of the number of current death-row inmates or exonerations is selective and misleading. I have restored that information. Also very relevant to the lead is that the US is the only western world country to still do executions. Facts707 (talk) 02:56, 23 April 2017 (UTC)

I hope this discussion to be quiet and polite.

I agree it is relevant that it is the only Western country because it relates to the uniqueness of the U.S. with this respect.

If you add the exonerations number I would be right to add to this lead the three infos I cited at 17:37, 30 March 2017 (and a fourth: zero of those executed has been posthumously exonerated).

Harry1835 (talk) 10:22, 23 April 2017 (UTC)

Yes I agree this dicussion should be polite. The infos you described are details about 1) punishments presumably imposed based on prior convictions of some persons; 2) details about support for the death penalty in a small minority of states; and 3) studies in which a small majority (17/24) conclude that the death penalty is "more efficient" than life in jail for "preventing murder". These are details and can be included but not in the lead - they are clearly not representative of the overall situation in the United States. In contrast, the number of death-row inmates and persons on death row who were exonerated are nationwide statistics that go to the heart of the article and the situation in the United States. I am restoring my edits, and since there are two editors who agree with this approach according to the talk section and just yourself opposed, I would request that you stop reversing my changes until either 1) more editors are invited to comment; or 2) the issue is brought up for arbitrtation. Have a nice day, Facts707 (talk) 15:54, 23 April 2017 (UTC)

What about the fact that zero of those executed has been posthumously exonerated? How it could be less relevant than the number of those who have been exonerated and freed? Harry1835 (talk) 18:22, 23 April 2017 (UTC)

And we can also relativize the number of exonerees in the same way you did about the other infos I put forward. After all, these 158 are also a "small minority" or "some" of the over 7800 persons who have been sentenced to death during the same period (see). Harry1835 (talk) 20:57, 23 April 2017 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Capital punishment in the United States. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20130115131421/http://www.drc.ohio.gov/Public/press/press342.htm to http://www.drc.ohio.gov/public/press/press342.htm

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 13:20, 30 July 2017 (UTC)

Alabama the second state to approve nitrogen?

http://www.al.com/news/index.ssf/2017/04/alabama_senate_votes_to_allow.html

The Alabama Senate approved a bill to allow nitrogen gas as an alternate execution method on April 18, sending it to the State House of Reps. The House Judiciary Committee approved the bill but I have not found any word yet on its progress through the full House. A similar bill was approved by the Mississippi House in February but has yet to be approved by the Senate. E. Brown 01:13, 23 August 2017 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 6 external links on Capital punishment in the United States. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20091211212953/http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/cp.htm to http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/cp.htm
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080522175848/http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/article.php?did=180 to http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/article.php?did=180
• Corrected formatting/usage for https://www.google.com/hostednews/afp/article/ALeqM5iUcLhqwlBEQ6-b-J7rzRd2lSuv3g
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080221191021/http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/article.php?&did=2347 to http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/article.php?&did=2347
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20131102084023/http://motherboard.vice.com/blog/will-the-eu-kill-americas-death-penalty to http://motherboard.vice.com/blog/will-the-eu-kill-americas-death-penalty
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20140118085043/http://cfr.vlex.com/vid/26-4-other-execution-procedures-19676580 to http://cfr.vlex.com/vid/26-4-other-execution-procedures-19676580

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 08:54, 4 September 2017 (UTC)

Women's History section

This page lacks a substantive section on specifically female capital punishment. The female sides of historical and contemporary concepts are unique and nuanced, and therefore, should stand on their own as subsets. In order to add this historical information, I will consult the following working bibliography. This list may change as my research moves forward. Please let me know if you have any feedback/suggestions for further reading!

1) Whitehead, J.T. & Blankenship, M.B. Am J Crim Just (2000) 25: 1. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02886807 2) Carroll, JE. Images of Women and Capital Sentencing among Female Offenders: Exploring the Outer Limits of the Eight Amendment and Articulated Theories of Justice (1996) 3) Streib, Victor L. Rare and Inconsistent: The Death Penalty for Women (2005) 4) Rapaport, Elizabeth. “The Death Penalty and Gender Discrimination.” Law & Society Review, vol. 25, no. 2, 1991, pp. 367–383. JSTOR, JSTOR, www.jstor.org/stable/3053803. 5) Bohm, Robert. DeathQuest: An Introduction to the Theory and Practice of Capital Punishment in the United States (2016) 6) Johnson, Elmer. Selective Factors in Capital Punishment (1957) 7) https://deathpenaltyinfo.org/women-and-death-penalty 8) Shapiro, Andrea. Unequal before the Law: Men, Women, and the Death Penalty (2000) 9) https://www.aclu.org/blog/mass-incarceration/women-death-row 10) http://guides.ll.georgetown.edu/c.php?g=261307&p=1753689 (Awhistorywiki (talk) 04:24, 11 October 2017 (UTC))

States with and without the death penalty

As far as I can see, the article does not have lists of the states that do and do not have the death penalty at present. I suggst that such a list would be useful. See https://deathpenaltyinfo.org/states-and-without-death-penalty - 31 states in the former category, 19 in the latter. https://deathpenalty.procon.org/view.resource.php?resourceID=001172 - 32 states in the former category, 18 in the latter - it counts Delaware in the former but says that "On Aug. 2, 2016, the Delaware Supreme Court ruled in the case Rauf v. State of Delaware that the state's death penalty statute violates the Sixth Amendment of the United States Constitution by giving judges too much leeway in sentencing. Delaware has 14 prisoners on death row. The executions of these prisoners, as well as all pending capital murder trials, are now on hold in the state until the Delaware Attorney General decides whether or not to appeal the case." See Capital punishment in Delaware. Alekksandr (talk) 17:22, 2 December 2017 (UTC)

States listed by abolition date

How about adding such a table to the page? I don't know how to do it, but I feel it would be useful for a recap: this information is currently not available in such a coincise manner Finedelledanze (talk) 13:04, 1 March 2018 (UTC)

Methods

There isn't any information on the time it takes for an execution to be completed or if there have been any botched attempts during the execution process. BenMadison (talk) 21:16, 29 March 2018 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by BenMadison (talk • contribs) 21:00, 29 March 2018 (UTC)

Late executions

Quite recently I read about a man that became executed in a state (which wasn't Texas or Florida). The crime he had committed (murder and rape, I think) was done in the mid-1980's. A delay of about 30 years or more. In itself, a so long waiting to be executed doesn't stand to any reason, does it ? What's the normal (or average) waiting time in the US ? Put as a question, but no dealt with, not thoroughly at least. Isn't this regarded as a problem in the US ? The long Death Row times. China seems to execute "a bunch of people" once in a while, but then very soon after the sentence. And with a bullet, to my knowledge. Perhaps less safe on the guilty or not issue, but also perhaps, a bit more normal. It's difficult to see any point in years after years of waiting.
Watched a TV-documentary , a black young man had (according to the prosecutor) first killed his former or present (that part was a bit unclear to me) girlfriend's dad, then waited 3½ hour for the wife to come home - and then killed her too. But of the three jurors interviewed , all (or at least two of them) wished to have heard the accused. I think his lawyer had given the accused the advise not to speak. Two of the three interviewed jurors didn't wish to give him the capital punishment - which then should have been resulting in lifetime instead, but they had been persuaded (they said). So in practice our statement "Of the 31 states with the death penalty, 28 provide the sentence to be decided by a jury, and 28 require a Of the 31 states with the death penalty, 28 provide the sentence to be decided by a jury, and 28 require a unanimous sentence. sentence." isn't true. (When a jury is discussing guilt , I assume they have to consider each and every evidence the prosecutor has presented, and the same regarding what the defense has put forward. That can take some time, or should take some time. (No premature voting, as people then tend stick to what they have said first) But when the jury just is to decide the sentence, a voting would be proper. That part is subjective. (Cannot understand lawyers who advise silence, just by the way.) And where the rules calls for an unanimous jury, 11 vs 1 then clearly is not unanimous. I feel there is more to be stated in that section (Sentencing). Boeing720 (talk) 11:15, 18 August 2018 (UTC)

Citations needed

Capital Punishment Suspended: The entirety of the first and second paragraphs have no references connected to them to prove the statements they contain as facts.

Capital Punishment Reinstated: First paragraph has no connected references or links to an article articulating these facts. Last statement made in this section lacks a reference to prove it.

Supreme Court Narrows Capital Offenses: First paragraph has no source.

Repeal Movements and Legal Challenges: Second to last paragraph (basically a sentence) is the only place so far that any sort of “racial bias” has been involved throughout the article.

Lethal Injection Era: Second to last paragraph has no citation for the fact they stated. First sentence of the next paragraph has no citation for being such a strong statement. — Preceding unsigned comment added by MayoStephanie (talk • contribs) 03:46, 13 October 2018 (UTC)

Sodium Chloride in the lethal injection

I was under the impression that the sodium chloride is administered through the IV simply to clear the line after the anesthetic in preparation for the paralytic. It is nothing more than a standard IV fluid. Can anyone confirm? If so the article is inaccurately listing the reasons for the fluids administered. -Rob^talk 10:55, 6 January 2019 (UTC)

Nevermind, I misread. It is potassium Chloride that stops the heart. -Rob^talk 13:15, 6 January 2019 (UTC)

Vermont, Connecticut, Maryland and New Mexico

Due to facts that Vermont has death penalty for treason and the latter mentioned states have still death row inmates, all these states should be marked in the map as death-penalty states or signify their special status other way.

I think Vermont's case merits special attention, since treason against the state (as opposed to the federal government) is largely non-operative, the last case of which was John Brown in VA c. 1859. If anybody knows whether treason against the state has been abolished de jure, as opposed to de facto, I would invite them to edit as such.Spencerkberry (talk) 02:43, 13 November 2018 (UTC)

Based on a 2015 ruling of the Connecticut Supreme Court, all remaining death row inmates in that state were entitled to be resentenced to life without parole. On December 6, 2018, Richard Roszkowski became the last of the former death-row inmates to be formally resentenced. Connecticut should now be changed to "green status" on the map, as their death row is now empty and the law abolished. M4CD0N4LD-D4N (talk) 20:01, 31 January 2019 (UTC)

States that have abolished capital punishment

This section has disappeared. Why? It contained relevant information and a useful timeline with the abolition chronology that is not found elsewhere on Wikipedia. Can we please revert it? Finedelledanze (talk) 15:11, 4 February 2019 (UTC)

California begins formal moratorium

As of today, California governor Gavin Newsom signed an executive order, putting in place an official moratorium/suspension of the death denalty in the state. Also included in this executive order was the closing of San Quentin's death chamber. [14] Could somebody please update the map changing California from yellow to blue?
(Also, see my note above about Connecticut needing to be changed to green) M4CD0N4LD-D4N (talk) 20:17, 13 March 2019 (UTC)

Only Western country

I removed the sentence referring to the US as the "only Western country currently applying the death penalty" because there may be disagreements about the definitions of "Western country" and "applying death penalty". Some may say that Latin America, which contains some countries with capital punishment, is part of the Western world, while some may not. Also, it does not specify whether it refers only to fully retentionist countries or if it refers to partially retentionist countries as well. All these issues need to be clarified if anyone wants to re-add this statement to the article. - Alumnum (talk) 01:17, 1 April 2019 (UTC)

Alumnum, "Applying" means it is actually used in practice, regardless of if it remains in statute or not. There is no country in Latin America that is actively using capital punishment. This article states "The last execution in the Caribbean, and the last in the Americas outside the United States, was in Saint Kitts and Nevis in 2008. In Central and South America, the death penalty exists in Belize and Guyana, though it has not been used for years." This map shows what countries are generally considered part of the "Western World". Regardless of if Latin America is included or not, the United States is still the only Western Country to actively be applying capital punishment. There really isn't any ambiguity here, but if you want to propose some other wording to further clarify, then please do so. There's no need to delete sourced, relevant, and notable information, though, when a little clarification, if any, is all that is needed. Vontheri (talk) 03:37, 1 April 2019 (UTC)

Also, if your issue is with the terminology "applying", then why did you leave the word in your edit in the part "The United States is one of 54 countries worldwide applying death penalty,"? It seems more like you aren't comfortable with the implications of the reality that the United States is the only western country still using execution, and want to censor that information. Vontheri (talk) 03:41, 1 April 2019 (UTC)

No. Wikipedia is not censored and the only things to worry about here are accuracy and clearness. That passage links to an article that explains clearly what it means. But what you explained here isn't in the article, so it won't be clear to the average reader. I insist that "Western country" is a relative term and needs to be replaced by something more specific. As to that map, it originated from a book and does not represent a universal agreement about what the Western world is; as you said, it is generic. The article about the Western world says that there are many definitions of "west".

"Actually used in practice" does not specify a time range; Cuba and Guyana for example are red coloured in the map and 2008 and 2003 seem pretty recent to me, at least compared to countries where the last execution has taken place in the 19th century. I think a simple solution to express what the sentence is trying to convey is to replace it by something like "applying death sentence in the last 10 years" or mention the fact the the US applies it at least yearly.

I'm unsure about what to do with each phrase. Please do not think I'm trying to censor information or reflect a political view. I'm just highlighting that a tricky sentence needs to be clarified. I agree that the sentence points to a relevant remark, I just don't think it's doing it in the right way. Even if sources use that wording, it doesn't mean we need to. - Alumnum (talk) 04:10, 1 April 2019 (UTC)

In Europe, there is one country which has not abolished the capital punishment: Belarus. See Capital punishment in Europe.

A number of partially regognized or self-declared European states have yet to abolish it. They include Abkhazia (legal, but it has never executed anyone), Transnistria, South Ossetia, Northern Cyprus (legal, but it has never executed anyone), the Donetsk People's Republic, and reputedly the Luhansk People's Republic. Luhansk is also reputedly carrying out summary executions, with no trials involved. Dimadick (talk) 09:46, 1 April 2019 (UTC)

So just to be clear 6 great source that lead our readers to academic infomation was removed because a few dont understand a term??? Editwaring to remove sources is never a good idea...very disaponting to see BRD not being followed.Moxy (talk) 11:22, 1 April 2019 (UTC)

Editwaring? I haven't even edited the article so far. Dimadick (talk) 11:29, 1 April 2019 (UTC)

Then one can assume Its a comment not directed towrds you .......I have a real problem when sources are deleted because someone does not understand a term....move the source fix the term but never remove academic sources because of a lack of understanding that the sources explain. Not sure how an editors POV here out weights "Northwestern University Press" - "Oxford University Press" - "Columbia University Press." - "Victoria University" "Polytechnic Institute" - "Washburn University," POV.--Moxy (talk) 11:37, 1 April 2019 (UTC)

Federal moratorium

How should we handle William Barr ordering the BOP to schedule the execution of 5 inmates? I've added a short paragraph referring to it but not updated the table [15]. I don't know that much about how these sort of things work in the US except that the schedule means that the executions will happen before the next presidential election. Even so, I imagine there are a bunch of things which could delay or prevent these executions like the fact that Trump's cabinet has not exactly been the most stable group, and until they happen, it would be true no one has been executed since 2003. OTOH, to me it seems a little weird to just say there is a defacto moratorium at the federal level, without noting that the government is in the process of trying to execute people. And I'm not sure it would be obvious to people looking at the table that they need to read later to know it's not so simple. Maybe a footnote saying executions have been scheduled for December 2019? Nil Einne (talk) 06:26, 26 July 2019 (UTC)

Seems off topic

This article seems very POV, slanted in favor of death penalty abolitionists, with zero history of the death penalty, only history of abolition of the death penalty. 65.96.53.130 (talk) 22:53, 27 July 2019 (UTC)

Update

Can someone update with Delware having the light green color because they don't practice capital punishment anymore either? --Stephen"Zap" (talk) 20:58, 17 December 2019 (UTC)

Hillary

The article has this, which seems to be supposure with an anti-Trump twist:

Various commentators predicted that the death penalty would likely have disappeared in the United States if Hillary Clinton had been elected U.S. President in November 2016 and allowed to appoint a liberal Supreme Court Justice to replace the late Antonin Scalia. Because Donald Trump won and citizens in three states voted the same day for ballot measures supporting capital punishment, columnists came to the conclusion that it will remain indefinitely.

This conflicts with Hillary's declared belief in the Death Penalty, even allowing for her opinions famously varying according to her audience:

Clinton is not in favor of abolishing capital punishment "because I do think there are certain egregious cases that still deserve the consideration of the death penalty, but I'd like to see those be very limited and rare, as opposed to what we've seen in most states." She has encouraged the federal government to rethink the use of capital punishment, citing concerns over the frequent and discriminatory application of the punishment. Clinton sponsored the Innocence Protection Act, which requires DNA testing before administering federal executions. In regards to the Justice Department's decision to seek the death penalty for Dylann Roof, Clinton's spokesperson said "she respects the Justice Department decision."

in Wikipedia's own https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Political_positions_of_Hillary_Clinton#Capital_punishment

'Various commentators' may have suggested that she would disappear the Death Penalty [ whilst remaining staunchly in favour of 'limited and rare' capital punishments ]: I don't see that thrusting their biases in the article serves any purpose. One could equally say that 'some people think that Romney might have restricted gun rights severely had he been elected, even when he had signed in “The Right to Bear Arms Day” in Massachusetts. Claverhouse (talk) 07:55, 27 April 2020 (UTC)

Total Stats

Could someone also add a per-year execution? I have the numbers for 2011 but now I am searching for 2010 due to a youtube video where I thought the numbers shown were wrong. But I can not find a simple summary on wikipedia right now. 2A02:8388:1641:8380:0:0:0:4 (talk) 19:11, 20 June 2020 (UTC)

Singapore?...

Along with Japan, Taiwan, and Singapore, the United States is one of four advanced democracies and the only developed Western nation that applies the death penalty regularly. But is Singapore indeed an 'advanced democracy'?... BasileusAutokratorPL (talk) 19:49, 26 November 2020 (UTC)

BasileusAutokratorPL Singapore is an advanced democracy-"advanced" refers to advanced or developed economy. While a misconception exists that Singapore is not a democracy-idk why JoeSmoe2828 thinks the economy is undeveloped. I'm not gonna waste a lot of time on an uncontested fact other than note Singapore ranks higher in edu, HDI and GDPperCap than all 3 other countries. Democracy Index is determined unilaterally by The Economist using a method of determination they refuse to disclose or open for peer review. Moreover, DI ranked all 4 as "flawed democracies", even though Singapore ranked lower than the others I don't see how this metric is a basis for exclusion?OgamD218 (talk) 14:09, 5 December 2020 (UTC)

@OgamD218: Agreed. "advanced democracy" doesn't mean its democracy is "advanced", the term is mostly referred to a country's economy as well as metrics such as the HDI. Also this statement by JoeSmoe2828 – "Singapore is not really a democracy period, no less an advanced one" – reeks of absolute ignorance, elections are regularly held there (this year even) and organizations such as Freedom House has noted that elections conducted there are free and fair. Not everything has to be strictly adhered to Western liberal democracy, especially considering its an Asian country. BottlersFee (talk) 04:50, 9 December 2020 (UTC)

Ohio suspends death penalty

The map should be updated to show that Gov. Mike Dewine indefinitely suspended all executions until a new method is chosen. https://www.cleveland.com/open/2020/12/ohio-will-stop-executions-until-lawmakers-pick-alternative-to-lethal-injection-gov-mike-dewine-says.html#:~:text=Ohio%20Politics-,Ohio%20will%20stop%20executions%20until%20lawmakers%20pick%20alternative,injection%2C%20Gov.%20Mike%20DeWine%20says&text=COLUMBUS%2C%20Ohio%E2%80%94No%20more%20executions,Gov.%20Mike%20DeWine%20said%20Tuesday. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.209.246.134 (talk) 14:23, 11 December 2020 (UTC)

Execution hiatus

Should it be noted in the table that Wyoming doesn't have anyone under a sentence of death in the state?

http://www.nydailynews.com/news/crime/death-penalty-overturned-wyoming-lone-death-row-inmate-article-1.2017755

I agree. I went and added that. JoeSmoe2828 (talk) 08:27, 3 January 2021 (UTC)

Vermont has death penalty for treason

Not sure how to change the map but the maps needs to be changed First map should be red and second map should be Yellow

see 13 V.S.A. § 3401

🌸 1.Ayana 🌸 (talk) 17:39, 26 September 2020 (UTC)

Make it purple. Capital punishment in statute, other unique circumstances apply. 2A00:23C7:E284:CF00:58BD:D02D:B750:7872 (talk) 11:08, 25 October 2020 (UTC)

Apparently Vermont has the death penalty for treason on the books, but this was struck down in 1972 due to Furman v. Georgia. So, Vermont should still be green, though it would be useful to mention the statue in the article. JoeSmoe2828 (talk) 08:21, 3 January 2021 (UTC)

Just because Vermont has capital punishment on the books does not mean that it is a legal penalty. As JoeSmoe2828 stated, the punishment was struck down by the SCOTUS in 1972. This is just a case where the Vermont Legislature has not bothered to remove those statutes from the codified law of Vermont. This is the same case in Washington state, where the Washington State Supreme Court struck down capital punishment in that state and the Washington Legislature just hasn't bothered with removing those statutes off its compilation of codified statutes. Capital punishment may still be on the books in New York and Delaware too since their judicial institutions have also struck down capital punishment as was in force at the time but I am not familiar with the law of those states, so the legislatures therein may have removed those capital statutes off the codified books. Also, there is a chance that in some state there still is a crime that is punishable by death in the statutes at large and not the codified statutes since nobody has bothered to waste their time to look. So there is a chance that some abolitionist state could still have capital punishment as a legal penalty and nobody has a clue that it's there. ~ Fluffy89502 (talk) 05:29, 25 January 2021 (UTC)

What about judicial errors?

In the German Wikipedia, it is mentioned that because of a faulty method (95% wrong results) 17 innocent peoples died (executed or in prison) . I tried to find out about other cases, and I can't find any mentioning of innocent victims of death sentences here.

Did I overlook anything? Or is there really no mentioning of this aspect of American death sentences (and why?)? --Helmut w.k. (talk) 12:42, 31 October 2020 (UTC)

@Helmut w.k.: Innocent people have been executed in the United States if that is what you are asking. Examples include Joe Arridy and possibly Thomas Martin Thompson. ~ Fluffy89502 (talk) 05:32, 25 January 2021 (UTC)

Federal government

Federal government should be blue on the map now, due to the Attorney General placing an official moratorium. JoeSmoe2828 (talk) 01:39, 6 July 2021 (UTC) https://thehill.com/homenews/administration/561255-garland-imposes-moratorium-on-federal-executions

JoeSmoe2828 (talk) 03:06, 6 July 2021 (UTC)

More Citations needed tag - section October 2021

The reason the more citations needed tag - section was inserted is because the whole first paragraph lacks reference citations of any kind when reporting what is supposed to be independently verifiable as being factual information. 98.178.191.34 (talk) 01:58, 29 October 2021 (UTC)

Louisiana should be moved to “ Capital punishment in statute, but executions informally suspended”

Louisiana has not carried out executions because they cannot obtain lethal chemicals, so it should be put in the purple category since it isn’t a formal suspension, but it is still indefinitely suspended. TheXuitts (talk) 22:08, 9 November 2021 (UTC)

advanced democracies

What is an advanced democracies? You mean they are rich? Sounds very "racist"--169.0.0.223 (talk) 05:25, 21 December 2021 (UTC)

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment

This article is or was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Awhistorywiki.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 16:43, 16 January 2022 (UTC)

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment

This article is or was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Reedkross, MayoStephanie. Peer reviewers: Kfill, Carsonfirestone, Cgouvia, Wardmc1996.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 18:37, 17 January 2022 (UTC)

Juvenile capital punishment section ignores American Indian youth

The Juvenile capital punishment section does not consider American Indian Youth. One boy, a 12 year-old, was executed after the Dakota War, or Sioux Uprising, of 1862, in Minnesota, with the personal approval of Abraham Lincoln (during the Civil War, obviously). He was hanged with, I think, 38 of his fellow defendants in Mankato, MN. This was not mentioned in the source, which reveals bias in the source, not truth in its content. If we include legal execution of American Indian youth, how does this affect the totals given? I don't know the answer. I am a scientist, not a historian. I am not really qualified to answer this question, or else I would simply make the fix myself. Dcs002 (talk) 04:31, 26 April 2022 (UTC)

Why are there two keys on the colorful map?

What is “Federal Govt.” and “Military”? 2603:6010:DC04:12F4:BCF6:7710:6555:7B92 (talk) 17:02, 23 November 2022 (UTC)

Wiki Education assignment: BlackLivesMatter

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 6 September 2022 and 16 December 2022. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): MichelleDiazPU, Carrington24, Sr1313, Jalencjones, Tahjowens (article contribs). Peer reviewers: Avery Shunneson, Jasonbb1233, Adisriram123, Epickerill, Harharharley, Ryan9butler, AZRG, Nc2428, Dc9018, Irj456, Theestallion123, Alexisborjas.

— Assignment last updated by Lm1214 (talk) 19:26, 8 December 2022 (UTC)

Change in capital sentencing in Florida

In Florida, SB 450 was passed, allowing the jury to consider death for the defendant if only 8 out of 12 jurors concur. Because of this, not only Alabama can sentence a defendant to death by a non-unanimous jury, but Florida can. The bill was effective the same day it was signed: 20 April 2023. This change must go under the "Legal process" section and the "Sentencing" subsection. HarukaAmaranth (talk) 22:17, 13 July 2023 (UTC)

Where and what states still allow hanging by death and still legal today

Where, which, and what states in the USA does the sentenced to death by hanging and is it still legal today and still used 2603:8080:66F0:27A0:E04F:EE29:C569:2A8F (talk) 13:48, 28 October 2023 (UTC)

Methods

In the Methods section of the article I read "In 2009, Ohio approved the use of an intramuscular injection of 500 mg of hydromorphone (a 333-fold lethal overdose for an opioid-naive person)." Is this a mistake? 1/333 of 500 mg equals 1.5 mg. I don't think that is enough to kill an opioid-naive person, no matter how it is administered. I think probably intravenous injection may be the method of administration with the strongest effect. I recently had a medical procedure where I was injected with 2 mg of hydromorphone. I was told this would help ameliorate some of the pain. The Nurse Practitioner told me this was not at very large dose, but it should be enough to help with the pain. The procedure was quite painful despite the dose I was given. I didn't have any noticeable feeling of being "high" from this dose. Obviously it was far from a lethal dose. I have now and then had opioids prescribed for pain, and I had had fentanyl administered intravenously for another medical procedures, 3 months before the procedure during which I was given hydromorphone, so I was not completely naive in regard to opioid use, however I had never taken anywhere near the kind of doses that drug abusers take on a daily basis, several times each day. In short while I might have developed some degree of tolerance to hydromorphone, it would have been only a slight tolerance. Any overdose for me would not have been a lot more than the dose needed to risk the life of someone who was completely opioid-naive. I have read that a bag of heroin containing one dose for injection, is about 100 mg of heroin, but I have not confirmed that number with multiple sources. Anyway, the point I am trying to make is that 1.5 mg of intravenous hydromorphone does not seem like it is anywhere near a lethal dose. So I am wondering if the person who wrote that meant that 500 mg intramuscular hydromorphone was 3.33 times the lethal dose. That would calculate to the lethal dose being 150 mg, and not 1.5 mg. Nomenclator (talk) 22:46, 17 November 2023 (UTC)

Methods-New Execution in Alabama with Nitrogen Hypoxia

Should we add the Nitrogen Hypoxia execution today conducted in Alabama to most recent executions with methods other than lethal injection. Foward123456 (talk) 02:38, 26 January 2024 (UTC)

Idaho should be in red (or maybe blue)--the state conducted a failed execution in 2024

Link: https://www.cnn.com/2024/02/28/us/thomas-creech-idaho-execution-fails/index.html JohnAdams1800 (talk) 20:30, 16 March 2024 (UTC)

Renaming page 'Death penalty in the US'?

Capital punishment is not the most common term for this concept. Death penalty seems much more widely used (at least in the US) and capital punishment sounds like a sentence for bank fraud if one wasn't familiar with the term. could not find discussion on the name in the archives on this page Superb Owl (talk) 17:08, 30 June 2024 (UTC)

Abolitionist States

It would be great if there was a section of the states that have abolished the death penalty and the year in which they did it, thanks and good job Mar9112 (talk) 02:16, 5 July 2024 (UTC)