:: wikimiki.org ::

Death Penalty

Death penalty

Capital punishment, also referred to as the death penalty, is the execution of a prisoner as a punishment for a crime (often called a capital offence or a capital crime), or as a deterrent to crime. Historically, it was most frequently used as a means to suppress political enemies, but it was sometimes considered a form of public entertainment as well. In modern democratic societies it can be used as a tool for political advancement of government officials, as a public display of intolerance of crime. Crimes that earn the death penalty vary greatly from treason and murder to theft. In militaries around the world, courts-martial have sentenced capital punishments also from cowardice, desertion, insubordination and mutiny.

Terminology

The term "capital" derives from the Latin caput, literally meaning "head".^{[http://www.etymonline.com/index.php?term=capital]} Thus, capital punishment is the penalty for a crime so severe that it 'deserves' death, either by decapitation or otherwise. Prisoners who have been sentenced to death are usually kept segregated from prisoners who have not been sentenced to death in a part of the prison known as "death row" pending their execution.

Methods of execution

death rows. The electric chair was developed in the late 1880s by a dentist with support from Thomas Edison (who had a financial interest in having direct current used in providing electricity, whereas the electric chair uses alternating current) and is still in use today.]] Methods of execution have varied over time, and include:
- Asphyxiation (or strangulation), such as by Garrotte
- Blood eagle (possibly a myth)
- Boiling to death
- Burning, especially for religious heretics and witches on the stake
- Brazen bull
- Breaking on the Wheel
- Burial (alive, also known as the pit)
- Crucifixion
- Crushing by a weight, abruptly or as a slow ordeal - see also animals
- Decapitation, or beheading (as by sword, axe or guillotine)
- Disembowelment
- Dismemberment
- Disruption (a form of dismemberment)
- Drawing and quartering (Considered by many to be the most "cruel" of punishments)
- Drowning
- Electric chair
- Explosives
- Exsanguination
- Flaying (skinning)
- Fustuarium - see also for not always lethal successors
- Gassing
- Hanging
- Impalement
- Lethal injection
- Iron Maiden
- Keelhauling (not always lethal) and walking the plank (if not fictitious)
- Pressing
- Poisoning
- Sawing
- Scaphism and similar methods mentioned there
- Shooting can be performed either
- by Firing squad
- by a single shooter (such as the neck shot, often performed on a kneeling prisoner, as in present PR China in significant numbers)
- (especially collectively) by cannon or machine gun
- Snake pit
- Starvation and Dehydration
- Stoning
- Various animal-related methods
- Tearing apart by horses, e.g. Ancient China (using five horses) or "quartering," with four horses, and in The Song of Roland
- Attack/devouring by animals, such as dogs or wolves, as in Ancient Rome and the Biblical lion's den, by rodents (such as rats), by carnivorous fish (such as sharks), by crabs or by insects (such as ants)
- Poisonous bites from scorpions, snakes, spiders etcetera
- Crushing by elephant or trampling by a herd or by horsemen, as practiced by the Mongolian hordes

Scope of use

Some jurisdictions still practicing capital punishment restrict its use to a small number of criminal offences, principally murder, treason and equated mortal sins such as apostasy. Historically—and still today under certain systems of law—the death penalty was applied to a wider range of offences, including robbery or theft and kidnapping. It has also been frequently used by the military for crimes including looting, insubordination, and mutiny. Armies based on conscription have used death penalty as means of motivation (see coercion) and keeping discipline.

History

Traditionally capital punishment has been a method to deliver human sacrifices to deities. For example the judicial hanging was originally a sacrificial rite to Odin. Scandinavian pagan religions demanded human sacrifices not only by hanging, but also by drowning the convict into marsh (see Tollund man); also Kalevala contains a chapter where Väinämöinen sentences the fatherless Son of Marjatta to be drowned into marsh. The purpose of capital punishment can also be seen as means to placate wrathful deities and divert their anger and hatred away from the people and towards the victim. Some Pagan religions also used burning the condemned at the stake; the last recorded such sacrificial burning occurred in Lithuania 1389. In medieval Europe, the method of execution would depend on the social class of the condemned. The nobility would usually be executed in as painless and honorable a method as possible, generally with either sword or an axe (which occasionally failed gruesomely). Those in the working class, serfs, peasants, and possibly the bourgeoisie would usually be executed publicly, in a more gruesome and painful method of execution, typically by hanging or by the wheel. In Scandinavia, the noblemen were beheaded with sword and commoners with axe. Specific crimes would sometimes warrant specific methods of execution: suspected witchcraft, religious heresy, atheism, or homosexuality would typically be punished by burning at the stake. Unsuccessful regicides generally merited a horrible death. A wide range of offences could be punished by death, including robbery and theft, even if nobody was physically harmed in the action. Such methods of execution continued into the modern era. In 1757 in France, Robert-François Damiens suffered a horrible but customary execution for his attempted regicide against King Louis XV. His hand, holding the weapon used in the regicide attempt, was burnt, and his body was wounded in several places. Then, molten lead and other hot liquids were poured on the wounds. He was then drawn and quartered, and what remained of his body was burnt at the stake. Inhumane methods of execution and class inequalities were abolished during the French Revolution, which imposed the guillotine, seen as a painless and instantaneous method of execution, for all. However, during The Terror, other forms of execution, such as massed cannon fire and mass drownings, were also used. Although the death penalty was briefly banned in China between 747 and 759, the first country in the world to officially and permanently abolish the death penalty was the then-independent Granducato di Toscana (Tuscany). The Grand Duke Leopold II of Habsburg, famous enlightened monarch and future Emperor of Austria, was strongly influenced by the book of the Italian Cesare Beccaria Dei Delitti e Delle Pene ("On Crimes and Punishments"), published in 1764. In this book Beccaria aimed to demonstrate not only the injustice, but even the futility from the point of view of social welfare, of torture and the death penalty. On 30 November 1786, after having de facto blocked capital executions (the last was in 1769), Leopold promulgated the Reform of the penal code that abrogated the death penalty and gave the order to destroy all the instruments for capital execution wherever in his land. In 2000 Tuscany's regional authorities instituted an annual holiday on 30 November to commemorate the event. Public executions in early New England were a very solemn and sorrowful occasion, sometimes attended by large crowds, who would also listen to a [http://calebadams.org/sermon.htm gospel message] and [http://calebadams.org/address.htm remarks by local preachers] and politicians. The Connecticut Courant [http://calebadams.org/news_article.htm records one such public execution] on December 1, 1803, saying, "The assembly conducted through the whole in a very orderly and solemn manner, so much so, as to occasion an observing gentleman aquainted with other countries as well as this, to say that such an assembly, so decent and solemn, could not be collected anywhere but in New England." The state of Michigan was the first state in the union to abolish the death penalty, on March 1, 1847. The 150-year ban on capital punishment has never been repealed, and as such the state is considered to be the first democracy in recorded history to have eliminated capital punishment. Currently, 12 states and the District of Columbia ban capital punishment.

Military

Military organizations have sometimes employed capital punishment. In the past, cowardice, absence without leave, desertion, insubordination, looting, shirking under enemy fire and disobeying orders were often crimes punishable by death. The method of execution since firearms came into common use has almost invariably been firing squad. Today most armies no longer utilize capital punishment, and those armies which still retain the death penalty apply it only to the most serious crimes, such as treason or murder.

Around the present world

murder According to Amnesty International's annual report on official judicial execution, in 2004 there were 3,797 executions in 25 countries. Nine out of every ten executions took place in the People's Republic of China (PRC) which carried out at least 3,400 executions. From 1990 to 2003, the average number of executions per year was 2,242 as reported by Amnesty. The PRC has executed at least 20,000 people between 1990 and 2001, with 1,781 people executed between April and July 2001 in a "Strike Hard" crime crackdown. The higher total in 2004 resulted from a change in Amnesty's method of estimating executions in China. Both methodologies are suspected of yielding low results. (See Capital punishment in the People's Republic of China) Belarus is the only country in Europe that practices death penalty as legal form of punishment. The twelve countries with the most executions in 2004: Conservative American political activist Phyllis Schlafly provides a much higher count of executions in China than Amnesty International: :"...every year China has nearly 10,000 death penalty cases that result in immediate execution. That is five times more than all death penalty cases from other nations combined. China's executions have always been a closely guarded state secret, but these totals were revealed by Chen Zhonglin, a National People's Congress delegate." [http://www.eagleforum.org/column/2004/apr04/04-04-14.html] According to the United Nations Secretary-General's quinquennial report on capital punishment, the highest per capita use of the death penalty is in Singapore, with a rate of 13.57 executions per one million population for the period of 1994 to 1999. The death penalty is meted out for what are considered the most serious of offences. Out of 138 persons sentenced in the period from 1999 to 2003, 110 were for drug-related offences, with the rest for murder and arms-related offences. Executions by hanging occur on Friday mornings in Changi prison, and are seldom publicized. In most countries that have capital punishment, it is used to punish only murder or war-related crimes. In some countries, like the People's Republic of China, some non-violent crimes, like drug and business related crimes, are punishable by death. Capital punishment is used widely in Asia for drug related crimes, including in Indonesia, Malaysia, Saudi Arabia, Singapore and Vietnam. Most democratic countries today have abolished the death penalty, including Canada, Australia, New Zealand, almost all of Europe, and much of Latin America, though in Honduras there is a political debate raging about whether, having been abolished in 1956, it should be restored. Among western countries, the first to abolish capital punishment was Portugal, where the last execution took place in 1846, and the punishment was officially abolished in 1867. In all, 89 countries have abolished the death penalty altogether, another 28 countries have not executed anyone in the last ten years, and 9 officially maintain the death penalty only for "exceptional crimes" (e.g., war crimes). In 1949, Federal Republic of Germany and Costa Rica became the first countries in the world to ban the death penalty in their constitutions. As of 2005, the constitutions of 42 countries prohibit capital punishment. Countries that retain it include Japan, the United States, and a number of countries in Africa, the Middle East, Asia, and the Caribbean. Altogether, 74 countries still use the death penalty. In the United States, the issue of capital punishment is largely left up to the individual states; the federal government reserves the right to perform executions, but does so extremely infrequently. Twelve states have legally abolished the death penalty. Some have reformed the policies, by declaring a moratorium on its use, as has been done in Illinois under Governor George H. Ryan. The most comprehensive source lists less than 15,000 people executed in the United States or its colonial predecessors between 1608 and 1991. [http://users.bestweb.net/~rg/execution.htm] More accurate statistics list 4,661 executions in the United States in the period 1930–2002 with about two-thirds of them occurring in the first twenty years.[http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/cp.htm] Additionally the U.S. Army executed 160 soldiers between 1930 and 1967. The last U.S. Navy execution took place in 1849. (See also: Capital punishment in the United States) Only six countries practice the death penalty for juveniles, that is criminals aged under 18 at the time of their crime. In the 1980s and 1990s, most executions for juvenile crime took place in the United States, although, due to the slow process of appeals, no one under age 19 has been executed in recent years. [http://users.bestweb.net/~rg/execution.htm] [http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/article.php?scid=27&did=206] In 2005, the United States Supreme Court ruled in Roper v. Simmons that the death penalty cannot be applied to persons who were under age 18 at the time of commission of the crime. That decision resulted in 72 convicted murderers being taken off death row. In the United States and ancestor bodies politic since 1642, an estimated 364 juvenile offenders have been put to death by states and the federal government. Although the People's Republic of China accounts for the vast majority of executions in the world, it does not allow for the executions of those under 18. [http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/article.php?scid=27&did=206] Execution of those aged under age 18 has occurred in the Democratic Republic of the Congo, Pakistan, Yemen, Saudi Arabia, Nigeria, and Iran since 1990. [http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/article.php?scid=27&did=208] The United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child, which among other things forbids capital punishment for juveniles, has been signed and ratified by all countries except the USA and Somalia (Somalia at the present time is unable to ratify).[http://www.unicef.org/crc/faq.htm#009] There are a number of international conventions prohibiting the death penalty, most notably the Second Optional Protocol to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, and the Sixth Protocol to the European Convention on Human Rights. However, such conventions bind only those that are party to them; customary international law does not prohibit the death penalty. Several international organizations have made the abolition of the death penalty a requirement of membership, most notably the European Union and the Council of Europe. The European Union and the Council of Europe require abolition of the death penalty by states wishing to join, but are willing to accept a moratorium as an interim measure. Thus, while Russia is a member of the Council of Europe, and practices the death penalty in law, it has not made use of it since becoming a member of the Council. Another example is Latvia which entered a moratorium in 1996. Latvia retains the death penalty in extraordinary circumstances (as does non-EU-member Albania), and is the only member of the European Union not to have ratified the 13th Protocol to the European Convention on Human Rights (which prohibits the death penalty in all circumstances). Latvia's parliament has, however, signed the 13th Protocol. As a EU member Latvia has pledged to abolish the death penalty, and bringing it back to active use could, under articles 6 and 7 of the Treaty of Nice, mean losing voting rights in the European Union. [http://www.guardian.co.uk/eu/story/0,,1599957,00.html] Turkey has recently, as a move towards EU membership, undergone a reform of its legal system. Previously there was a de facto moratorium on death penalty in Turkey as the last execution took place in 1984. The death penalty was removed from peacetime law as in August 2002, and in May 2004 Turkey amended its constitution in order to remove capital punishment in all circumstances. As a result of this, Europe is a continent free of the death penalty in practice (all states having ratified the Sixth Protocol to the European Convention on Human Rights), with the sole exception of Belarus, which is not a member of the Council of Europe. The Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe has also been lobbying for Council of Europe observer states who practice the death penalty, namely the United States and Japan, to abolish it also or lose their observer status.
- See also:
- Capital punishment in Belarus
- Capital punishment in Canada
- Capital punishment in the People's Republic of China
- Capital punishment in Denmark
- Capital punishment in France
- Capital punishment in Germany
- Capital punishment in India
- Capital punishment in New Zealand
- Capital punishment in Singapore
- Capital punishment in the United Kingdom
- Capital punishment in the United States
- Capital punishment in Japan

Views and opinions concerning the death penalty

Support for the death penalty varies widely, and it can be a highly contentious political issue, particularly in democracies that use it. A decreasing majority of adults in the United States appear to support its continuance (though like most political issues, the numbers vary widely depending on the phrasing of the question asked), but a highly vocal, organised minority of people in that country do not, and non-governmental organisations like Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch lobby against it globally. In many parts of Asia where it is maintained including Taiwan, Malaysia, Singapore and Indonesia the death penalty appears to have large amounts of public support, and there is little public movement to abolish it. In countries where it has been abolished, debate is sometimes revived by particularly brutal murders, though few countries have brought it back after abolition. However, some opinion polls in Europe and Canada suggest that the death penalty has similar support there to the United States. Others show that the support of the death penalty dropped significantly in the years after the abolition in Western European countries while in most former communist countries there is still a majority for the reintroduction. A recent poll in Italy showed only 23% of respondents in favour of the death penalty.[http://www.angus-reid.com/polls/index.cfm/fuseaction/viewItem/itemID/9305] In many countries that have abolished it, it is a matter of policy that the government will oppose its use in any country. This is generally based on the idea that the capital punishment is inherently wrong and can never be justified, which is frequently the reason given for maintaining an abolishment of capital punishment. However, controversially, on some specific occasions a government may choose to ignore this policy; for example the Australian government has refused to condemn, and in fact has on occasion even seemed to offer tacit support of, the use of capital punishment against those involved in the Bali bombing. There is an ongoing debate as to whether capital punishment reduces crime rates; ideally, potential offenders would be too scared of the punishment to commit the crime. The counterargument is that it doesn't affect the crime rate, because potential criminals think that they won't be caught, so they do not care about punishment until it is too late. There are even studies that have concluded that the death penalty appears to encourage murder. However, like many questions in the social sciences, actual research data on this question can be (and is) interpreted very differently by people with differing predispositions towards capital punishment. In any event, the actual effectiveness (or lack thereof) is largely irrelevant to many who feel strongly about the debate, as their views are based on other factors.

Arguments against

Some of the major arguments used by those opposed to the death penalty include:
- The death penalty is not a deterrent; those who are against the death penalty claim that recent studies in the US do not support the view that capital punishment acts as a deterrent. [http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/article.php?scid=12&did=167#STUDIES]. It is also argued that anyone who would be deterred by the death penalty would already have been deterred by life in prison, and people that are not deterred by that would not be stopped by any punishment. This argument is typically supported by claims that those states that have implemented the death penalty recently have not had a reduction of violent crime. A stronger variant of this argument suggests that criminals who believe they will face the death penalty are more likely to use violence or murder to avoid capture, and that therefore the death penalty might theoretically even increase the rate of violent crime. [http://www.csicop.org/si/2004-07/capital-punishment.html].
- The death penalty is unnecessary. This view, espoused by Pope John Paul II, an outspoken critic of capital punishment, holds that modern prisons are secure enough to reliably protect society from further harm by death row prisoners, whereas in centuries past, life imprisonment may not have been feasible. Therefore, the death penalty serves no purpose to society and violates the sanctity of human life.
- Criminal proceedings are fallible. Some people facing the death penalty have been exonerated, sometimes only minutes before their scheduled execution. Others have been executed before evidence clearing them is discovered. While criminal trials not involving the death penalty can also involve mistakes, there is at least the opportunity for those mistakes to be corrected. This has been particularly relevant in cases where new forensic methods (such as DNA) have become available. Since 1973, 119 people in 25 US states have been released from death row with evidence of their innocence.
- Death penalty as armed forces' disciplinarian means usually has the opposite effect than desired, eroding the morale of the troops rather than improving it, and striking a wedge between the commissioned and enlisted servicemen as the latter are likely to consider shooting their own as murder. In extreme cases death penalty may lead into fragging incidents.
- Capital punishment usually costs more money than life in prison due to the extra costs of the courts such as mistrials, appeals, and extra supervisions. Additionally, many (if not a majority) of death sentences are overturned on appeal. So the cost is incurred, regardless of the result. [http://www.tennessean.com/sii/00/04/24/deathcost24.shtml]
- In the US, over 95% of defendants cannot afford legal representation and end up being represented by court-appointed attorneys whose credentials are distinctly mediocre, because of this it could be argued that the prosecution has an unfair advantage. (This is only in major metropolitan areas. In rural areas the public defenders are regular practicing attorney's on a rotational basis. Source?)
- The death penalty brutalizes society, by sending out the message that killing people is the right thing to do in some circumstances.
- It denies the possibility of rehabilitation. Some hold that a judicial system should have the role of educating and reforming those found guilty of crimes. If one is executed he will never have been educated and made a better person. A Christian variant of this argument would be that no one can place themselves beyond salvation, so society should never give up hope of rehabilitation.
- In the US the race of the person to be executed can also affect the likelihood that they receive a death sentence. Death-penalty proponents counter this by pointing out that most murders where the killer and victim are of the same race tend to be "crimes of passion" while inter-racial murders are usually "felony murders"; that is, murders which were perpetrated during the commission of some other felony (most commonly either armed robbery or forcible rape), the point being that juries are more likely to impose the death penalty in cases where the offender has killed a total stranger than in those where some deep-seated, personal revenge motive may be present. A recent study showed that just 44% of Black Americans support the death penalty. [http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/newsanddev.php?scid=23]
- Capital punishment has been used politically to silence dissidents, minority religions (see Falun Gong) and activists. A major exponent of this is the People's Republic of China from which there are many reports of the death penalty being used for politically motivated ends. [http://web.amnesty.org/library/Index/ENGASA170282001?open&of=ENG-392]
- In most Western nations, retribution, or any benefit to the victims, is not stated as a purpose of the criminal justice system.
- Some executions are botched, lethal injection in the US having the highest rate according to Amnesty International. This is often due to the fact that qualified medical professionals are prohibited from taking part. This leads to unqualified staff often taking extreme measures such as cutting into the arms of prisoners when they have been unable to locate a vein in lethal injection procedures. This undoubtedly causes those executed to suffer extended pain. Even those who die instantly suffer prolonged mental anguish leading up to the execution. Other procedures, including the electric chair, cyanide gas chamber and hanging are rarely fast or effective processes and are not designed to minimize pain and suffering.
- The death penalty is a violation of human rights primarily [http://wikisource.org/wiki/Universal_Declaration_of_Human_Rights#Article_3. Article 3] and [http://wikisource.org/wiki/Universal_Declaration_of_Human_Rights#Article_5. Article 5] of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. Some assert that it violates the "natural rights" laid out by 17th-century English philosopher John Locke who set out many of the foundations of American law. The American Declaration of Independence also includes the "right to life" as the first listed of the natural rights. While those against capital punishment might claim this as an irrevocable right, proponents may claim that, as protection from abuse is the basis of such rights, that the right was forfeit by the seriousness of the crimes.
- The death penalty can be turned into a lethal act of revenge by all those involved. Some view the executioners as the "Law's Hitman". It also allows citizens to feel as though they are not morally incriminated by supporting death, because it is death for a "just cause". This psychologically creates a false reality where they are in no ways responsible for a killing. The victim of execution becomes a scapegoat for the overall problem of violent crime.
- An International Gallup poll undertaken in 2000 found that 60% of western Europeans opposed the death penalty. In France, a TNS Sofres poll revealed that twenty years after abolition of capital punishment, 49% of respondents opposed reintroduction of the policy compared with 44% who wanted to reinstate capital punishment. In 2000, a poll in Germany found the percentage of West Germans in favor of capital punishment at just 23% the lowest level in Europe. Just 37% of East Germans favored capital punishment in 2000. (Financial Times, August 22, 2003) A recent US study found that 41% of the public voted in favor of capital punishment, whilst a higher percentage of 44% voted against the death penalty when voters were offered alternative sentences. The most popular alternative to capital punishment being "life without parole" and some form of restitution to the families of victims. [http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/article.php?did=209&scid=23#alt] In the United States it is argued that most other developed nations have eliminated the death penalty.
- Capital punishment causes long term emotional injury to the family and friends of the person executed greater than that experienced by other methods of punishment. The mother, father, spouse and children of a person executed are permanently and deeply affected by the execution event and the human loss even though they may have played no part in the alleged crime. Relatives and friends may also be affected by feelings of guilt if they fear they contributed to the event in some way, say by not raising or protecting the child adequately during development. These feelings may never be resolved because the person they need to communicate with is dead.

Arguments for

Some of the major arguments used by those in favour of the death penalty include:
- Deterrence — it may deter other people from committing capital crimes. Many studies (see above) rebut this claim, while others provide support for it.
- Means of maintaining discipline in the armed forces. This can be best summarized by statement of Leon Trotsky: An army cannot be built without reprisals. Masses of men cannot be led to death unless the army command has the death penalty in its arsenal. So long as those malicious tailless apes that are so proud of their technical achievements — the animals that we call men — will build armies and wage wars, the command will always be obliged to place the soldiers between the possible death in the front and the inevitable one in the rear.
- Prevention — it prevents offenders from ever returning to society (life sentences hold out the possibility, however remote, of eventual release), thereby preventing them from committing further crimes. This argument is no longer salient in States with life without parole statutes, unless the prisoner manages to escape custody.
- Retribution — the death penalty is imposed in pursuit of "Eyes for eyes and teeth for teeth" justice. Although execution of a murderer may not provide full justice for the victim, it is the closest form of justice.
- It shows how seriously society looks at the most heinous crimes.
- People who have committed the most heinous crimes (typically murder) have no right to life.
- The death penalty shows the greatest respect for the ordinary man's, and especially the victim's, inviolable value.
- It provides "closure" for victims' families.
- It is less cruel than prolonged imprisonment, especially under the conditions that might be popularly demanded for heinous criminals. Depending on the State, prisoners spend about six to twelve years on death row.
- It provides extra leverage for the prosecutor to deal for important testimony and information.
- It enjoys popular support (in countries where this applies).
- Life imprisonment is very expensive.
- Just as the virtuous deserve reward proportionate to their good deeds, so too the vicious deserve punishment proportionate to their bad deeds. One might even hold, with Kant, that respect is shown to the criminal as someone who has chosen a particular path in life by visiting the appropriate punishment on the criminal.
- Criminals may be led to rethink and reconcile their lives by the pressing expectation of death.
- It upholds the rule of law, because it discourages vigilantism on the part of the victim's family or friends (in the form of lynching or retaliatory murder). If not controlled, such actions can lead to extremely destructive vendettas or blood feuds. In the U.S., capital punishment is concentrated in States where lynching was more common, although no one has been lynched in the South since 1964.
- Without the death penalty, a person already serving a life sentence may have no reason not to kill in prison.
- If the death penalty were abolished, a criminal would have little or no reason not to kill potential witnesses during the commission of a robbery (assuming that robbery would earn the criminal a life sentence or a very lengthy prison sentence).
- By waiving the threat of a death penalty, individuals can be encouraged to plead guilty, accomplices can be encouraged to testify against their co-conspirators, and criminals can be encouraged to lead investigators to the bodies of victims. The threat of the death penalty can be a powerful mechanism for greasing the wheels of justice.

Religious attitudes towards the death penalty

Buddhism and capital punishment

The first of the Five Precepts (Panca-sila) is to abstain from destruction of life. Chapter 10 of the Dhammapada states "Everyone fears punishment; everyone fears death, just as you do. Therefore do not kill or cause to kill. Everyone fears punishment; everyone loves life, as you do. Therefore do not kill or cause to kill." Chapter 26, the final chapter of the Dhammapada states "Him I call a brahmin who has put aside weapons and renounced violence toward all creatures. He neither kills nor helps others to kill." This is interpreted by many Buddhists (especially in the West) as an injunction against supporting any legal measure which might lead to the death penalty. However, as is often the case with the interpretation of scripture, there is dispute on this matter. Thailand and Bhutan, where Buddhism is the official religion, practice the death penalty. Other countries where the majority of the population are Buddhist (such as Sri Lanka, Japan, Korea and Taiwan) are also retentionist. Moreover, throughout history, countries where Buddhism was the official religion (most of the Far East and Indochina) practiced the death penalty. The first precept of Buddhism focuses mainly on direct participation in the destruction of life. This is one reason that the Buddha made a distinction between killing animals and eating meat, and refused to introduce vegetarianism into monastic practice (see the Vegetarian section of the Wikipedia article on Buddhism). In Jataka, which tell stories of the past lives of the Buddha, Boddisatva (a previous incarnation of the Buddha) actually kills someone to save another person's life, though because of this action, he was no longer able to achieve enlightment in that particular life. Therefore, few (if any) buddhist groups issue blanket decrees against Buddhists being soldiers, police officers or livestock farmers, and some argue that the death penalty is permissible in certain circumstances. Almost all Buddhist groups oppose the use of the death penalty as a means of retribution.

Christianity and capital punishment

Christians believe that Jesus underwent the death penalty by crucifixion. His trial was affected by popular opinion. His death is frequently depicted in religious art, and the cross, either with or without his body on it, is the primary symbol of Christianity. Christians believe that his death was the price for the sins of the world and brings about their redemption. Christians are divided on the issue of capital punishment—some are in favour, some are against it under all circumstances. As a matter of practice among Christians, there are two broad patterns. Firstly, there is a tendency for Christian opinions to match those of the countries they live in; many Christians based outside the USA are against capital punishment, while some Christians of largely American denominations are in favour of it. Often overlooked is the fact that virtually all of the mainline Christian churches in the United states have maintained official positions against the death penalty since the 1950s and early 1960s. [See http://www.pfadp.org People of Faith Against the Death Penalty] Secondly, various Christian groups, including the more liberal members of the Roman Catholic Church, tend to oppose it while most conservative Protestant groups support it—exceptions to this rule include the Amish and Mennonites; they oppose the death penalty. Pope John Paul II described capital punishment as part of a "culture of death". Many Roman Catholics, especially in America, tended to agree with his view, which is a clear testament to his influence over the Roman Catholic Church of his time. However, the Church as a whole is not completely opposed to the death penalty under all circumstances as a matter of doctrine; rather, John Paul II, as an individual, was opposed to it. Catholics are called to oppose the death penalty if the condemned can be successfully kept behind bars to protect society. If, however, the condemned poses a threat to the well-being of society and is not likely to be able to be kept behind bars then capital punishment is permissable. However, this last exception in the modern day world seems extremely rare. Those in favour of capital punishment often point to passages in the Old Testament that advocate the death penalty such as Genesis 9 which states, "Whoever sheds the blood of man, by man shall his blood be shed; for in the image of God has God made man." Those against tend to select their passages from the New Testament that advocate love, forgiveness, and mercy. In Matthew 5:38-39, Jesus says, "You have heard that it was said, 'Eye for eye, and tooth for tooth.' But I tell you, Do not resist an evil person. If someone strikes you on the right cheek, turn to him the other also…"You have heard that it was said, 'Love your neighbour and hate your enemy.' But I tell you: Love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you, that you may be sons of your Father in heaven." In John 8, a story is told of a woman who was caught in the act of adultery. The Old Testament Law demanded that she be put to death by stoning; Jesus saves her life by requiring that the first stone be cast by someone who has never sinned, and rather than take that role himself, simply tells the woman not to transgress again. (It should be noted that the passage in question is absent from some early manuscripts, which may indicate that it is a later addition to the text.) Another verse quoted often by supporters of capital punishment is Romans 13:4, "...But if you do evil, be afraid; for [the governing authority] does not bear the sword in vain; for he is God's minister, an avenger to execute wrath on him who practices evil." - supporters point to the fact that a sword is a instrument used for killing, not scourging. Interpreting the Bible as a story of man's redemption through repentance to Christ, some Christians argue that by executing a murderer we are cutting short his life and taking away his opportunity to repent. Some conservative Christian groups who believe in a literal Hell argue that all who die without repentance automatically go there, and point out that many serial killers, including Jeffrey Dahmer and Ted Bundy, became born again Christians in prison. The less forgiving might observe that the families of their victims are unlikely to be comforted by the prospect of these men entering heaven. It should be pointed out that Christianity is based on the teachings of Christ, few would contest this. Therefore advocating the Old Testament over the New Testament has been argued by groups such as Quakers and some non-Christian critics to show inconsistency in the views of pro capital punishment Christians.

Judaism and capital punishment

The Jewish view of all laws in the Bible is based on the reading of the Bible as seen through Judaism's corpus of oral law. These oral laws were first recorded around 200 CE in the Mishnah and later around 600 CE in the Babylonian Talmud. The laws make it clear that the death penalty was only used in very rare cases. The Mishnah states that "A Sanhedrin that puts a man to death once in seven years is called destructive. Rabbi Eliezer ben Azariah says: a Sanhedrin that puts a man to death even once in 70 years. Rabbi Akiba and Rabbi Tarfon say: Had we been in the Sanhedrin none would ever have been put to death" (Mishnah, Makkot 1:10).
- if there were two witnesses to the crime
- if the witnesses verbally warned the person that they were liable for the death penalty
- if that person then acknowledged that he/she was warned, yet then went ahead and committed the sin regardless.
- Further, an individual was not allowed to testify against him/herself. As such, the death penalty was effectively legislated out of existence. Today, the State of Israel only uses the death penalty for extraordinary crimes. The last – and only – execution in Israel took place in 1962 against convicted Nazi war criminal Adolf Eichmann. In Orthodox Judaism, it is held that in theory the death penalty is a correct and just punishment for some crimes. However in practice the application of such a punishment can only be carried out by humans whose system of justice is nearly perfect, a situation which has not existed for some time. Rabbi Aryeh Kaplan writes: "In practice, however, these punishments were almost never invoked, and existed mainly as a deterrent and to indicate the seriousness of the sins for which they were prescribed. The rules of evidence and other safeguards that the Torah provides to protect the accused made it all but impossible to actually invoke these penalties…the system of judicial punishments could become brutal and barbaric unless administered in an atmosphere of the highest morality and piety. When these standards declined among the Jewish people, the Sanhedrin...voluntarily abolished this system of penalties." (Kaplan, Handbook of Jewish Thought, Volume II, pp. 170-71) Rabbi Yosef Edelstein, Director of the Savannah Kollel, writes: :So, at least theoretically, the Torah can be said to be pro-capital punishment. It is not morally wrong, in absolute terms, to put a murderer to death.... :However, things look rather different when we turn our attention to the practical realization of this seemingly harsh legislation. You may be aware that it was exceedingly difficult, in practice, to carry out the death penalty in Jewish society... :....I think it's clear that with regard to Jewish jurisprudence, the capital punishment outlined by the Written and Oral Torah, and as carried out by the greatest Sages from among our people (who were paragons of humility and humanity and not just scholarship, needless to say), did not remotely resemble the death penalty in modern America (or Texas). :In theory, capital punishment is kosher; it's morally right, in the Torah's eyes. But we have seen that there was great concern—expressed both in the legislation of the Torah, and in the sentiments of some of our great Sages—regarding its practical implementation. It was carried out in ancient Israel, but only with great difficulty. Once in seven years; not 135 in five and a half. In Conservative Judaism, the Rabbinical Assembly's Committee on Jewish Law and Standards approved a 1960 responsa by Rabbi Ben Zion Bokser on capital punishment. It states, in part: :The Talmud ruled out the admissibility of circumstantial evidence in cases which involved a capital crime. Two witnesses were required to testify that they saw the action with their own eyes. A man could not be found guilty of a capital crime through his own confession or through the testimony of immediate members of his family. The rabbis demanded a condition of cool premeditation in the act of crime before their would sanction the death penalty; the specific test on which they insisted was that the criminal be warned prior to the crime, and that the criminal indicate by responding to the warning, that he is fully aware of his deed, but that he is determined to go through with it. In effect this did away with the application of the death penalty. The rabbis were aware of this, and they declared openly that they found capital punishment repugnant to them…There is another reason which argues for the abolition of capital punishment. It is the fact of human fallibility. Too often we learn of people who were convicted of crimes and only later are new facts uncovered by which their innocence is established. The doors of the jail can be opened, in such cases we can partially undo the injustice. But the dead cannot be brought back to life again. We regard all forms of capital punishment as barbaric and obsolete…" :Proceedings of the Committee on Jewish Law and Standards 1927-1970 Volume III, p.1537-1538

Islam and capital punishment

Islamic scholars state that whilst the Qur'an professes the basic principle that everyone has the right to life, this principle allows for an exception when a court of law demands it. Their precept is "Do not kill a Soul which Allah has made sacred except through the due process of law." This exception authorizes the administration of capital punishment when Islamic law dictates. This is the line taken by most if not all countries where Islam is the state religion or the principal religion (e.g. throughout the Arab world, Indonesia, Malaysia etc.). Islamic scholars also point out that Sharia (Qur'anic law) contains many safeguards to prevent miscarriage of justice. Sharia also has a clear injunction that strict equivalence must be observed; therefore if a woman kills a man, or a man kills a woman, or a slave kills a free person, or a free person kills a slave, capital punishment cannot be applied. One notable characteristic of Sharia is that the family of a murder victim can pardon the murderer. In Islam, the victim and/or the victim's family are the judges for all crimes; they decide what the punishment shall be under the supervision of a person who knows the Qur'an.

In arts and entertainment

Literature

In the short story by Edgar Allen Poe, The Black Cat, the narrator is writing the day before he is put to death. In The Stranger (L'Etranger) by Albert Camus, the main character is sentenced to death for shooting and killing an Arab on the beach. In The Chamber by John Grisham, a young lawyer tries to save a klansman on death row who is awaiting his execution in the gas chamber. In An Occurrence at Owl Creek Bridge by Ambrose Bierce, the main character is sentenced to be hanged, but escapes back to his home. Near the end of his journey, it is shown that his entire escape sequence was a vision in the seconds before the rope breaks his neck. There have been at least three film adaptations.

Art

The electric chair was used to promote the electric industry in the

Execution (legal)

Color Key:

Blue: Abolished for all crimes
Green: Abolished for crimes not committed in exceptional circumstances (such as crimes committed in time of war)
Orange: Abolished in Practice
Red: Legal Form of Punishment

]] Execution is a term used to refer to the termination of life pursuant to a judgment at law (see Capital punishment), and more broadly to killings with legal or quasi-legal justifications given, and to extrajudicial killings. Once used in referring to the execution of any legal sentence ("execute" meaning "to carry out fully : put completely into effect"), and applied as such to the execution of a death sentence (by an executioner), it has come to be used to refer to the act of killing itself. Formal military executions are typically by firing squad (for violations of orders in wartime or the laws of war) or by hanging (typically for cowardice, or commission of atrocities or other crimes). Methods of execution which involve, or have the potential to involve, a great deal of pain or mutilation are considered to be torture and unacceptable to many who support capital punishment. The term is also used to refer to illegal killings, such as the killing of prisoners of war (see Summary execution) and hostages, political assassinations and gang murders.

Execution through history

- Crushing by elephant was a common sentence for those condemned to death throughout south and southeast Asia, particularly India, for over 4,000 years.
- From 600 BC through the 20th Century crucifixion has been used as a method of execution.
- The execution of criminals was a form of entertainment in ancient Rome. Usual forms of execution included burning at the stake, crucifixion, or ad bestias (when the prisoner is left alone in the ring with one or more wild animals).
- Between 1283 and 1871, men convicted of treason in England were hanged, drawn and quartered, while women found guilty of treason were burnt at the stake.
- The headman's axe was used in Germany and England in the 16th and 17th Centuries.
- The French Revolution is famous for its pioneering of the guillotine.

Books

- Geoffrey Abbott - Execution: A Guide to Ultimate Penalty (2004)

External links

- [http://users.bestweb.net/~rg/execution.htm Before the Needles, Executions in America Before Lethal Injection, Details of thousands of historic executions and lynchings]
- [http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/2365751.stm Account of an execution]
- [http://www.soundportraits.org/on-air/execution_tapes/ Full execution Tapes]

Civil law

In the context of civil law, execution is the process of enforcing a judgment for money damages. Processes available for execution include garnishment, attachment, and levy. Category:Death penalty Category:Human rights abuses Category:Violence ja:刑罰の一覧 simple:Execute

Punishment

Punishment is the practice of imposing something unpleasant on a wrongdoer as a response to something unwanted that the wrongdoer has done. In psychological terms this is known as "positive punishment". "Negative punishment", on the other hand, is when something is removed from or denied to the punishee. A prisoner, for example, is both positively and negatively punished. He has an unpleasant thing imposed on him and also his freedom is removed. If the behavior does not decrease then it is not considered "punishment" in psychology terms.

Scope of application

Most often, criminals are punished judicially, by fines, corporal punishment or custodial sentences such as prison.
- Children, pupils and other trainees are also punished by their educators or instructors (mainly parents, guardians, or teachers, tutors and coaches). The same used to apply to wives and unmarried daughters as they were not legally emancipated from 'paternal' (or succeeding marital) discipline.
- Slaves, domestic and other servants used to be punishable by their masters; in fact, even modern employees can still be subject to a contractual form of fine or demotion.
- Most hierarchical organizations, such as military and police forces, or even churches, still apply quite rigid internal discipline, even with a judicial system of their own (court martial, canonical courts).
- Punishment may also be applied on moral, especially religious, grounds, as in penance (which is voluntary) or imposed in a theocracy with a religious police (as in a strict Islamic state like Iran or under the Taliban) or (though not a true theocracy) by Inquisition.
- In a wider sense, often termed penalty, punishments can be incurred for infringing the rules of a game, as in sports, hazing (e.g. in paddle games) etcetera. These include:
- Being sent off or sent to the "sin bin" - time in sin-bin varies from game to game (45 seconds in water polo, 2-10 minutes in ice hockey, 10 minutes in rugby, etc.)
- The other team gets a shot at the goal.

History and rationale

Michel Foucault describes in detail the evolution of punishment from hanging, drawing and quartering of medieval times to the modern systems of fines and prisons. He sees a trend in criminal punishment from vengeance by the King to a more practical, utilitarian concern for deterrence and rehabilitation. A particularly harsh punishment is sometimes said to be draconian, after Draco, the lawgiver of the classical polis of Athens. But as the adjective Spartan still testifies, its wholly militarized rival Sparta was the harshest a state of law can be on its own citizens, e.g. crypteia. In operant conditioning, punishment is the presentation of a stimulus contingent on a response which results in a decrease in response strength (as evidenced by a decrease in the frequency of response). The effectiveness of punishment in suppressing the response depends on many factors, including the intensity of the stimulus and the consistency with which the stimulus is presented when the response occurs. In parenting, additional factors that increase the effectiveness of punishment include a verbal explanation of the reason for the punishment and a good relationship between the parent and the child. Punishment can be divided into Positive punishment (the application of an aversive stimulus, such as pain) and Negative punishment (the removal or denial of a desired object or condition).

Types of punishments

This is just a typology with some well-known examples. For a more exhaustive traetment follow the links, and for a more extensive list, use the :category:punishments.

Judicial and similar, i.e. for crimes

- Socio-economical punishments: :
- fines or loss of income :
- confiscation :
- demotion, suspension or expulsion (especially in a strict hierarchy, such as military or clergy) :
- restriction or loss of civic and other rights, in the extreme even civil death
- physical punishments (see that article) : :
- corporal punishment s.s. Though the words physical and corporal simply derive from the Latin viz. Greek words for body, CP is often used more specificly to refer only to various forms of painful beating on body parts, usually taking the form of whipping or caning with various implements, and markings such as branding or mutilations such as amputation and castration. Legality of these varies from country to country. However it can be defined more widely: :
- capital punishment is the most extreme form of punishment as it ends all bodily functions for good (used by a substantial number of countries, ironically including some that declare mere beating inhumane - see use of death penalty worldwide) :
- various uncomfortable positions, such as in too confined spaces or being tied down long in an unnatural position that puts muscles under increasingly painful stress, e.g. [http://www.geocities.com/pen_kop/pow.htm| lying with the English] imposed on Boer boys emprisoned on Bermuda 1899-1902 in a cruel experiment of Anglicizing 'reeducation' : "they were made to lie down on their backs on the ground with one army blanket beneath and one on top, their outstretched legs tied by the feet to pegs hammered into the ground, while their arms were stretched out above their heads, with their hands manacled and also tied to a peg in the ground. In this excruciating position they had to spend the night before receiving the following morning the prescribed number of whip lashes across the bare back [i.e. buttocks] while naked and held over a barrel. One Tommy held his ankles, another would clasped his hands together behind the boy's head and pushed it downwards" for such 'rebellious' misdeeds as speaking and singing their native Afrikaans (condensed translation from Penkoppe van die Tweede Vryheidsoorlog [Penkops of the Second War for Independence] 1899 - 1902 by Pets Marais) :
- custodial sentences include imprisonment and other forms of forced detention (e.g. involuntary institutional psychiatry) and hard labor are in fact also physical punishments, even if no actual beatings are in force internally :
- forms of deprivation of sleep, food etcetera, though these are often unofficial or accessory :
- excessive physical efforts such as prolonged calisthetics, holding up a heavy object :
- banishment, restraining order :
- clinical castration for sexual assault is being tried in a few countries but may lead to charges of eugenics, since the individual is rendered infertile as a result
- public humiliation often combines social elements with corporal punishment, and indeed often punishments from two or more categories are combined (especially when these are meant reinforce each-other's effect) as in the logic of penal harm

For children

Common punishments imposed by educators (parents, guardians or teachers etcetera; traditions differ greatly in time, place and cultural sphere) are :
- corporal punishment as above - mainly spanking in various mode) (banned in some countries, in others even prescribed by law) and uncomfortable and/or humilitating positions, e.g. kneeling, holding a heavy object up; as this is disapproved of by many modern educators, and banned by certain legislators, there is an increase of alternative punishments, physical or other, such as:
- time-outs such as corner-time or even locking up in a dark place
- writing lines or an imposed essay (often on a 'fitting' subject)
- mild forms of custodial sentences
- detention, often combined with tasks as study, (extra) homework etc.
- grounding in general or specific refusal of permisson to participate in some fun activity or to see a friend (usually seen as a bad influence)
- temporary removal of privileges (e.g. telephone, TV or computer use)
- confiscation (usually temporary) of a toy or other personal item, separation from a pet
- denial of treats such as dessert, favorite meal, even no dinner
- extra chores
- writing lines or an imposed essay (often on a 'fitting' subject)
- fining, usually by deduction from the allowance

Other

- penance
- psychological punishments

Possible reasons for punishment

See also: Criminal justice

Deterrence

Deterrence means dissuading someone from future wrongdoing, by making the punishment severe enough that the benefit gained from the offense is outweighed by the cost (and probability) of the punishment. Deterrence is a very common reason given for why someone should be punished. However, it is sometimes claimed that using punishment as a deterrent has the fundamental flaw that human nature tends to ignore the possibility of punishment until they are caught, and actually can be attracted even more to the 'forbidden fruit', or even for various reasons glorify the punishee, e.g. admiring a fellow for 'taking it like a man'.

Rehabilitation

Some punishment includes work to reform and rehabilitate the wrongdoer so that they will not commit the offense again. This is different from deterrence, in that the goal here is to change the offender's attitude to what they have done, and make them come to accept that their behaviour was wrong.

Incapacitation

In the prison system, imprisonment has the effect of confining prisoners, physically preventing them from committing crimes against those outside, i.e. protecting the community. The most dangerous criminals may be sentenced to life imprisonment, or even to irreparable alternatives -the death penalty, or castration of sexual offenders- for this reason of the common good.

Restoration

For minor offences, punishment may take the form of the offender "righting the wrong"; for example, a vandal might be made to clean up the mess he has made. In more serious cases, punishment in the form of fines and compensation payments may also be considered a sort of "restoration".

Retributive justice, or Retribution

Retribution is the practice of "getting even" with a wrongdoer - the suffering of the wrongdoer is seen as good in itself, even if it has no other benefits. One reason for societies to include this judicial element is to diminish the perceived need for street justice, blood revenge, and vigilantism.
- A specific way to elaborate this concept in the very punishment is the mirror punishment, a penal form of 'poetic justice' which reflects the nature or means of the crime in the means of (mainly corporal) punishment. Often this implies punishing the part of the victim's body used to commit the crime. Extreme examples include the amputation of the hands of a thief, as still permitted by Sharia law, or during the Middle Ages in Europe; or disabling the foot or leg of a runaway slave. Other examples include the punishment of adulterous women by the insertion of irritating substances, such as hot pepper, into their vagina, e.g. the French song Les Radis by Georges Brassens tells of an adulterous woman being punished by the public insertion of a large radish into her rectum. A less extreme example is the American tradition of putting soap into a child's mouth for using inappropriate language (called "washing your mouth out with soap"). Another method is to mirror the physical method of the crime, e.g. executing a murderer with his own weapon, or more far-fetched, such as boiling alive a counterfeiter (because bullion is boiled to mint).

References

- Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy:
- [http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/punishment/ Punishment]
- [http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/legal-punishment/ Legal Punishment]
- Category:Core issues in ethics Category:Learning Category:Social philosophy Category:Sociology ja:刑罰

Crime

A crime in a broad sense is an act that violates a political or moral law of any one person or social grouping. In the narrow sense, a crime is a violation of criminal law; in many nations, there are criminal standards of bad behaviour. However, not all violations of the law are considered crimes, for example most traffic violations or breaches of contract.

Definition of crime in general

:This section describes usual criminal classifications applicable at present in Western countries. They may differ significantly with those applicable in other cultures; also, they may differ significantly with earlier practices. Most people who use this word are not "crime" specialists. Generally the word indicates a social concept of the person, where a specific social act is generally considered a deliberate and conscious choice of the choices known to be available to the user of the word. For instance, historically left-handedness, epileptic fits and emotional tantrums have been considered "crimes".

General rules

A crime can be the action of violating or breaking a law. According to Western jurisprudence, there must be a simultaneous concurrence of both actus reus ("guilty action") and mens rea ("guilty mind") for a crime to have been committed; except in crimes of strict liability. In order for prosecution, some laws require proof of causation, relating the defendant's actions to the criminal event in question. In addition, some laws require that attendant circumstances have occurred, in order for a crime to have occurred. Also, in order for a crime to be prosecuted, corpus delicti (or "proof of a crime") must be established. It may also be a crime to conspire in order to commit other crimes, or helping others to commit crimes (which makes one an accomplice); in some systems the simple association for organizing a crime is punished. The attempt to commit a crime (including attempted murder) may to be punished when the actus reus of the full crime is not completed (in California, USA e.g., the punishment can be half of that for the crime itself [http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/cacodes/pen/654-678.html]).

Trial

It is commonly believed that preconceived notions are dominant in all areas of presumed fact. These notions can be based on ethnicity and skin colour, sectarianism, sexual orientation, gender, apperance, occupation and education. Participants in a criminal trial may make use these biases in order to achieve their own goals. (For example, a prosecutor in a case of child murder may want to have more women with young children on the jury.) Since mistakes can be made by the courts and legal process, many appeal mechanisms are available to most legal decisions. The death penalty, which cannot be corrected after the fact if a mistake has occured, has been on the decline for the past several decades. In general, in most western systems, the definition of a crime requires the existing intention of committing it (voluntas necandi) in the author, therefore it is usually not officially "punished" when this intention is missing or when the author has not a complete mental sanity or is under a certain age. Depending on the level of psychological education of the Law Enforcement groups, some underage defendants (of varying ages around the world) can sometimes be tried "as an adult" because their character is considered adult, whatever the rationale is behind this. In another example, there generally exists an insanity defense: a assumed deviant person may not officially be penally responsible for his or her actions. A defendent who uses with the insanity defense may be judged guilty like a normal criminal. It is less common to succeed with psychiatric condemnation, and then to be "involuntarily committed" to treatment or corrections. See also Corrections.

Reasons

Crimes are viewed as offenses against society, and as such are punished by the state. They can be scholastically distinguished, depending on the passive subject of the crime (the victim), or on the offended interest, in crimes against:
- Personality of the State
- Rights of the citizen
- Public administration
- Administration of justice
- Religious sentiment and the pity for dead
- Public order
- Public faith
- Public economy, industry and commerce
- Public morality
- Person and honour
- Patrimony Or they can be distinguished depending on the related punishment (then, on the degree of offense that the forbidden behaviour caused), in delicts and violations. The definition of a crime generally reflects the current attitudes prevalent in a society. For example, possession of drugs was not always a crime, while the Prohibition Era made alcohol illegal.

Classification

Crimes can be divided into several (overlapping) categories: computer offenses[http://news.pc-news.org/2005/08/10/microsoft_to_fight_crime_with_spammers_money/], crimes against persons, crimes against property, crimes against state security, drug offenses, sexual offenses, and weapon offenses. Crimes are also be grouped by severity, some common categorical terms being: felonies, indictable offenses, misdemeanors, and summary offences. For convenience, infractions are also usually incuded in such lists, although they are not subject of the criminal law, but rather of the civil law. An inchoate offense is a planned or attempted crime, which the offender was not able to carry out prior to arrest. The following are crimes in many jurisdictions:

Aiding and abetting

It may be a crime to aid someone else in committing a crime, or induce him or her to commit one.

Study

Matters related to criminal behavior in society are studied in the field of sociology in the sub-field of criminology, and a person who studies this is called a criminologist. The mental state and acuity of criminals is assessed by psychologists, especially in cases wherein the insanity defense is being utilized. The study of crime, in general, across a number of functional diciplines is often known as crime science. This draws on statistics, environmental design, forensics, policing, sociology and other sciences to analyse the crimes, rather than the offenders, and provides ways and means to prevent, detect and solve crimes.

History

The first civilizations had codes of law, though these codes were not always recorded. The first known written codes were written by the ancient Sumerians, and it was probably their king Ur-Nammu (reigning on Ur in the 21st century BC) the first legislator of which we received a formal system in 32 articles; it has to be recalled that this is not among the eldest laws, since not all the ancient laws are penal rules. In the antiquity, in fact, codes mostly contained both civil and penal rules together. Sumerians however later issued other codes as the one known as "code of Lipit-Istar" (last king of the 3rd dynasty of Ur, Isin - 20th century BC). This code contains some 50 articles and has been reconstructed by the comparison among several sources. In Babylon the code of Esnunna before, and the code of Hammurabi (one of the richest ones of ancient times) after, were used and reflected society's belief that law was derived from the will of the gods. Similarly, some codes of conduct of religious origins or reference have been included in penal codes, forbidden behaviours resulting in real crimes in the states ruled by theocracy even in more recent times. In India, the British had notified 150 tribes such as the Phase Pardhi as criminal in 1871. Though this was repealed in 1952, the criminal stigma still surrounds these groups, and are usually rounded up on suspicion of crime.

Natural law theory

An alternative view of crime is derived from the theory of natural law. In this view, crime is the violation of individual rights. Since rights are considered as natural, rather than man-made, what constitutes a crime is also natural, in contrast to laws, which are man-made. Adam Smith illustrates this view, saying a smuggler would be an excellent citizen, "had not the laws of his country made that a crime which nature never meant to be so." Natural law theory thus distinguishes between criminality and illegality, the former being derived from human nature, the latter being derived from the interests of those in power. The two concepts are sometimes expressed with the phrases "malum in se" and "malum prohibitum". This view leads to a seeming paradox, that an act can be illegal that is no crime, while a criminal act could be perfectly legal. Many Enlightenment thinkers such as Adam Smith and the American Founding Fathers subscribed to this view to some extent, and it remains influential among so-called classical liberals and libertarians. A crime malum in se is argued to be inherently criminal; whereas a crime malum prohibitum is argued to be criminal only because the law has decreed it so.

Other uses of the word worldwide

In other cultures (and legal systems) the word crime is used specifically to designate a homicide (the killing of a human being by another). The use of the word crime in any other situations is perceived merely as a means to emphasise the gravity of the specific offence to the law (such as in aggravating circumstances).

External links

- [http://www.nationmaster.com/graph-T/cri_tot_cri Crime incidence by country] Category:Criminal law
- ja:犯罪 simple:Crime

Murder

:For other uses of the word "murder," see Murder (disambiguation). In the criminal law, murder is the crime where one human being causes the death of another human being, without lawful excuse, and with intent to kill or with an intent to cause grievous bodily harm (traditionally termed "malice aforethought"). In some common law jurisdictions, an accused is not guilty of murder if the victim lives for longer than a year and a day after the attack. This reflects the likelihood that, if the victim has survived so long after the initial attack, there will be other factors contributing to the cause of death and so break the chain of causation). Subject to the local statute of limitation, the accused can still be charged with an offense representing the seriousness of the initial assault. But, with the advance of modern medicine, the majority of countries have abandoned a fixed time period and test causation on the facts. In most countries murder is considered the most serious crime, and invokes the highest punishment available under the law. As with most legal terms, the precise definition varies between jurisdictions.

Murder and other illegal killings

Some instances of premeditated, intentional killing may be treated as justifiable homicide which excludes liability for murder and, in some countries, all criminal liability for the death. This may include:
- killing a non-surrendered enemy combatant in time of war;
- executing a person in accordance with a legally imposed sentence of death; or
- in a more limited number of countries, killing a person who represents an immediate threat to the lives of others, i.e. in self-defense. In most countries, if one person intentionally kills another, the killer might be charged with murder, or with some lesser offense depending upon the circumstances:
- In the United States, an intentional killing with provocation may sometimes charged as voluntary manslaughter rather than murder.
- Unintentionally causing a death due to recklessness or criminal negligence is treated in most countries as the lesser crime of manslaughter or criminally negligent homicide.
- In some jurisdictions, killings under extreme provocation or duress may be a legal exculpation (see excuse and crime of passion).

Mitigating circumstances

Most countries allow conditions that "affect the balance of the mind" to be regarded as mitigating circumstances. This means that a person may be found guilty of "manslaughter" on the basis of "diminished responsibility" rather than murder, if it can be proved that the killer was suffering from a condition that affected their judgment at the time. Depression, post-traumatic stress disorder and medication side-effects are examples of conditions that may be taken into account when assessing responsibility. The defenses of insanity or mental disorder may apply to a wide range of disorders including psychosis caused by schizophrenia, and excuse the person from the need to undergo the stress of a trial as to liability. In some jurisdictions, following the pre-trial hearing to determine the extent of the disorder, the verdict "not guilty by reason of insanity" may be used. Some countries, such as Canada, Italy, the United Kingdom and Australia, allow post-partum depression, or 'baby-blues', as a defense against murder of a child by a mother, provided that a child is less than a year old (this may be the specific offense of infanticide rather than murder and include the effects of lactation and other aspects of post-natal care). Those who successfully argue a defense based on a mental disorder are usually referred to mandatory clinical treatment until they are certified safe to be released back into the community, rather than prison.

Country-specific murder law

United Kingdom

About 850 murders per year (reported in 2000) are committed in the United Kingdom. This is low compared to the United States with 12,000. These are only raw numbers which do not take varying populations into account: a better perspective can be gained by comparing murders per year per hundred thousand population (1 in the UK, 4 in the USA, and 63 in Colombia - [http://www.nationmaster.com/graph-T/cri_mur_cap source]). In English law, murder is divided between several offences, including:
- Murder - the killing of another person having either the intention to kill (with "malice aforethought") or to cause grievous bodily harm.
- Infanticide - the intentional killing of an infant under 1-year-old by a mother suffering from post-natal depression or other post-natal disturbance.
- Causing death by dangerous driving (of a motor vehicle) was introduced because jurors, many of whom were drivers, thought the charge of manslaughter to carry too great a level of stigma for the degree of fault actually shown by some drivers and refused to convict when the charge was manslaughter. Now "motor manslaughter is considered an acceptable charge for the more seriously dangerous examples of driving resulting in death. English Law also allows for transferred intent. For example, in the circumstances where a man fires a gun with the intent to kill person A, or at least maim them but the shot misses and kills an otherwise unconnected person B then the intent to kill transfers from person A to person B and a charge of murder would stand. The accused could also be charged with the attempt to murder A. As to mens rea, following R v. Woollin http://www.parliament.the-stationery-office.co.uk/pa/ld199798/ldjudgmt/jd980722/wool.htm, the model direction to be given to juries is a modified version of that proposed by Lord Lane, C.J. in R v Nedrick [1986] 1 W.L.R. 1025, namely: :Where the charge is murder and in the rare cases where the simple direction is not enough, the jury should be directed that they are not entitled to infer the necessary intention, unless they feel sure that death or serious bodily harm was a virtual certainty (barring some unforeseen intervention) as a result of the defendant's actions and that the defendant appreciated that such was the case, the decision being for the jury to to decide on a consideration of all the evidence. Most common law jurisdictions, including the British Commonwealth countries, do not allow the defense of necessity and limit duress. Comparatively recent adaptations to the English law of murder include the abolition of the "year and a day rule", and the proposed introduction of an less restrictive regime for corporate manslaughter.
- See also Scottish Criminal Law for differences with English Law.
Canada
Canada has about 550 murders per year, a number that is fluctuating. This is equivalent to numbers in most of the western world, except the U.S. which has triple the number per capita. The main methods of murder in Canada are shootings (30%), stabbings (30%), and beatings (22%). Canada has four types of crime that can be considered murder:
- first degree murder - the intentional killing of another person with premeditation, in the furtherance of another serious criminal offense (kidnapping, robbery, etc.), or the killing of a peace officer
- second degree murder - the intentional killing of another person without premeditation (ie killing in the heat of the moment)
- manslaughter - the killing of another person where there is no intent to kill
- infanticide - the killing of an infant by a mother while still recovering from the birth, and the mother's mind is "disturbed" (there are exceptions to the above - certain types of murder are always first degree murder, such as the killing of a peace officer, and certain types of killings are murder regardless of intent, such as a death resulting from sexual assault) The maximum penalties for murder are:
- first degree murder - mandatory life imprisonment without the possibility of parole for 25 years (can be paroled under the "faint hope clause" after 15 years imprisonment, but such a reduction is rarely given and is not available for multiple murders)
- second degree murder - mandatory life imprisonment without the possibility of parole for 10-25 years (parole eligibility determined by the judge at sentencing) (exception: if the person had committed another murder in their past, parole eligibility is 25 years)
- manslaughter - maximum life imprisonment; if firearm was used to commit the offence, the minimum penalty is 4 years' imprisonment
- infanticide - maximum 5 years imprisonment
- There is a clause where persons convicted of multiple murder, and deemed unable for rehabilitation, to be declared a 'dangerous offender' upon examination of doctors and psychiatrists (usually for sexually related murder). Persons declared as dangerous offenders have an undetermined prison sentence, although it usually means an increase of 10 years (possibly to 35 or more years). For every murder in Canada there are about 1.5 attempted murders. Attempted murder carries the same consequences as murder itself; it is the intent, not the result, that determines the sentence. About one in three Canadian murders are committed by a family member. One in eight is gang related. About 80% of murderers in Canada are caught within a year. (All statistics are from the 2001 census)
The United States
In the United States, murder, or "homicide", is normally a crime only under state law, and a murder suspect will be arrested and held by local officials and tried in a local court on behalf of the state. For murders that are federal crimes (e.g. a killing of a federal official or on federal property), the trial would occur in a federal court. Approximately 16,000 cases of murder or nonnegligent homicide occur each year in the US according to official FBI crime statistics; among solved cases, almost half of murders are committed by a narrow social group of black males age 17 to 50 (constituting less than 3% of general US population) [http://www.fbi.gov/filelink.html?file=/ucr/cius_03/xl/03tbl2-5.xls]. Traditionally, and still in some states, the following terminology is used: ;First-degree murder (or murder in the first degree, or colloquially, murder one) refers to :a murder that is premeditated (or planned beforehand), or murder which occurs after some degree of reflection by the murderer. This reflection can be years or less than a second. First degree murder is done with malice (i.e., with intent to kill). ;Voluntary Manslaughter, :refers to homicide done in the heat of the moment by an actor demonstrating legally adequate provocation, mitigating the crime from murder. ;Involuntary Manslaughter, :occurs without the specific intent to kill, but usually after an act of criminal negligence or some other act resulting in a person's death. This would in some cases include a death caused by drunk driving or someone dying as the result of an assault in which case the perpetrator didn't have the intent to kill or inflict serious bodily injury. In some other states, the definitions have been adjusted to reflect factors like a perceived need for greater deterrence, rather than the usual distinctions listed previously. For instance, the murder of a police officer, or a murder committed while serving a life sentence, is in some states a first-degree murder regardless of other circumstances.
Felony murder statutes
Many jurisdictions in the United States have also adopted felony murder statutes, according to which anyone who commits a serious crime (specifically, a felony), during which a person dies, is guilty of committing murder. This applies even if one does not personally cause the person's death. For example, a driver for an armed robbery can be convicted of murder if one of the robbers killed someone in the process of the robbery, even though the driver was not present and did not expect the killing to occur. In a few cases, some robbers have been found guilty of felony murder for the deaths of their accomplices.
Capital murder
Capital murder is murder which is punishable by death. In 38 states and the federal government itself, there are laws allowing capital punishment for this crime. Depending on the state, a murder may qualify as "capital murder" if (a) the person murdered was of a special class, such as a police officer; (b) "special circumstances" occurred in the crime, such as multiple murder, the use of poison, or "lying in wait" in order to murder the victim. Capital murder is quite rare in the United States compared to other murder convictions, but it has generated tremendous public debate. See also capital punishment and capital punishment in the United States.
Cultural references
In California, 187 is a well-known slang term for murder, and it often appears in music made in that state. The number refers to section 187 of the California Penal Code which covers murder.
Germany
In Germany the term Mord (murder) is officially used for the premeditated killing of another person: # for pleasure, satisfaction of the sex drive, greed or other "low motives", # insidiously (an unsuspecting victim) or cruelly, by means dangerous to the public (for example with a bomb), # to cover up or facilitate another criminal offense. A killing which is not a murder may be either Totschlag (manslaughter) or fahrlässige Tötung (negligent homicide). Also, if the death is not a foreseeable consequence of an intended or not intended act of violence, it might be classified as Körperverletzung mit Todesfolge (injury resulting in death). The penalty for Mord is lifelong imprisonment, the penalty for Totschlag is five to fifteen years imprisonment.
The Netherlands
By Dutch law, murder (moord) is punishable by a prison sentence of up to twenty years, which is the longest prison sentence the law allows. Under special circumstances, such as multiple murders or prior convictions, a life sentence may be imposed. In addition to a prison sentence, the judge may sentence the suspect to TBS, or "terbeschikkingstelling", meaning detention in a psychiatric institution. TBS is imposed for a number of years (most often in relation to the severity of the crime) and thereafter prolonged if deemed necessary by a committee of psychiatrists. This can be done indefinitely, and has therefore been criticised as being a life sentence in disguise. In 2003, 202 murders were committed in the Netherlands.
Finland
Finnish law calls the crime of causing the death of another human being "manslaughter" (tappo). The minimum sentence is eight years of imprisonment. Attempt is punishable. The crime of murder (murha) is defined as a manslaughter:
- with a firm intent (i.e. it is planned), or
- done in an especially brutal or cruel way, or
- while endangering public safety severely, or
- of a government official keeping the law and order. The only sentence for murder is life in prison. However, the president can and usually will give a pardon (when requested) some time after 12-15 years. Involuntary confinement to a psychiatric institution may also result. It ends when the psychiatrist decides so, or when a court decrees it no longer necessary in a periodical review. There is also the crime of "death" (surma), which is a "manslaughter" under mitigating circumstances, with the punishment of four to ten years. Involuntary manslaughter (kuolemantuottamus) has a maximum punishment of two years of imprisonment or fine (see day fine).
Israel
Israel had 174 murders in 2004 (up from 135 in 1996 and down from 234 in 2001). There are five types of homicide in Israel: # Murder. The premeditated killing of a person or the intentional killing of a person whilst committing, preparing for, or escaping from any crime is murder. The mandatory punishment for this crime is life imprisonment. Life is usually commuted (clemency from the President) to 30 years from which a third can be deducted by the parole board for good behaviour. Terrorists are not usually granted pardons or parole other than as part of deals with terrorist organizations or foreign governments and in exchange for captured Israelis (or their bodies). # Reduced sentence murder. Where the murderer did not fully understand his actions because of mental defect (but not legal insanity or imbecility), or in circumstances close to self-defence, necessity or duress or where the murderer suffered from serious mental distress because of long-term abuse, the court can give a sentence of less than life. # Manslaughter. The deliberate killing of a person without premeditation (or the other circumstances of murder) is manslaughter for which the maximum sentence is 20 years. # Negligent killing or vehicular killing. Maximum sentence is 3 years (minimum of 6 months for the driver). # Infanticide where a woman killed her baby of less than 12 months and could show she was suffering from the effects of the birth or breast-feeding. Maximum sentence is 5 years.
Vikings (8th to 11th centuries)
The Viking culture had no concept of murder. If you killed someone, then it was up to you to pay the family fair compensation (weregild) for the labor lost by the member's death. If the perpetrator refused to pay weregild, it was up to the family of the slain to extract it from the perpetrator, or take his life. The only other type of killing with consequences in Viking culture was "unjust killing', i.e., while the victim was sleeping, or if the victim's back was turned. While there were no more financial repercussions for this other than the normal rules of weregild, the killer in question suffered from a tremendous loss of trust.
Other uses of the word
The word "murder" is sometimes used colloquially to mean some forms of mistreatment, e.g. a bad singer "murdering" a song, or describing something difficult to handle as "absolute murder". Sometimes during sports play an opponent may tell his rival "I'm gonna murder you!", "I'm gonna kill you!", "I'm murdering you!" or "I'm killing you!". A murder is also the name given to a flock of crows (see also Collective nouns for birds).
Murder demographics
Murder occurrences vary wildly among different countries and societies. In the Western world, murder rates in most countries have declined significantly during 20th century and are now between 1-3 cases per 100,000 people per year. Murder rates of Japan and Iceland are among the lowest in the world, around 0.5; rate of United States is highest among all developed countries, at 5.5 (2000). On the other