U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government, Department of Justice.

NCJRS Virtual Library

The Virtual Library houses over 235,000 criminal justice resources, including all known OJP works.
Click here to search the NCJRS Virtual Library

Death of Fairness - The Arbitrary and Capricious Imposition of the Death Penalty in the 1980s

NCJ Number
105186
Journal
Review of Law and Social Change Volume: 14 Issue: 4 Dated: (1986) Pages: 796-848
Author(s)
R J Tabak
Date Published
1986
Length
52 pages
Annotation
This article examines unfair practices and unfair aspects of the criminal justice system that can be found at each stage of a death penalty case.
Abstract
Too many prosecutors seek the death penalty for political or tactical reasons, demand trials be held in areas steeped in prejudicial publicity, strive to keep biased people eligible for jury service, and make highly misleading closing arguments. Too many attorneys are inexperienced, lack time and resources, and fail to mount adequate defenses. Too many juors vote for the death penalty without really intending that the defendant be executed. Many State judges seem insensitive to the constitutional rights if death-sentenced prisoners. Many Federal judges abuse the writ of habeas corpus by imposing procedural bars, by adopting scheduling rules that turn capital cases into rollercoasters, and by requiring too great a burden of proof that a deprivation of rights may have changed the outcome of the case. Too many State governments provide indigent defendants with underqualified trial and appeal counsel and deny funds for counsel in subsequent proceedings. Too many governors and pardon boards are abdicating their responsibility to consider grants of clemency, and too many citizens are favoring the death penalty without an understanding of its operation. Given these basic problems, it is clear that capital punishment cannot be administered fairly and, therefore, should be abolished. 363 footnotes.