In grading the position papers, I have noticed that there is
some confusion about the difference between a report and an argument or
position paper. Using the death penalty in Florida as a topic, I will write a
few paragraphs in the form of a report and then a few paragraphs in the form of
a position paper to illustrate the difference.
Report
Although Texas leads the nation in
the number of people executed, Florida leads the nation in the number of people
sentenced to death (Smith 27). There are several reasons for this fact. The
first reason is Florida’s requirement that juries be “death qualified,” meaning
that every person sitting on a jury hearing a first-degree murder trial must be
willing to vote for the death penalty in at least some circumstances. The
result of this rule is that people opposing the death penalty are excluded from
juries. Since women, minorities, and Catholics are more likely to oppose the
death penalty, juries in Florida are often top-heavy with white, Protestant
males.
Another factor leading to a greater
number of people on Florida’s death row is the requirements for opposing the
death penalty may lead to juries that are more prone to convict a defendant.
Much research (Jones 42) shows that people who support the death penalty are
more likely to convict defendants. Often, death penalty supporters are more
concerned about letting a guilty person go free than they are about wrongly
convicting an innocent person (Lee and Burke, 39).
Such jurors may be especially
unconcerned about convicting the innocent if the defendant is a member of a
minority group. One study of attitudes toward the death penalty (Davidowicz
159) has shown that strong proponents of the death penalty are far more likely
to hold negative and even racist views of African Americans than are opponents
of the death penalty.
Argument
While Texas executes more
prisoners, Florida sentences more prisoners to death. The reasons for this high
number of death sentences are complex but include the way in which juries are
selected. Another reason is the low
requirements that must be met when imposing the death penalty. If Florida wants to continue using
the death penalty, the state must reform the rules regulating the death penalty
because they increase the chance of wrongful conviction, especially of minority
defendants.[THIS IS THE THESIS. NOTE THAT THE REPORT DID NOT HAVE A
THESIS.]
The first rule that needs to be
reformed Is the one requiring juries hearing capital cases to be “death
qualified.” This phrase means that all jurors serving on the jury must be
willing to vote for the death penalty in at least some cases. This rule has three effects that lessen the
protection the justice system should afford to the defendants. First, research
has found that such juries are more conviction prone (Smith 57). In other
words, these juries are more likely to find a defendant guilty than are juries
composed at least partially of people opposing the death penalty. Such jurors are more concerned about letting
the guilty go unpunished than they are about possibly convicting an innocent
man (Lee 33). Other research
demonstrates that death penalty supporters are more likely to hold racist views
of minorities than are death penalty opponents. Furthermore, since those
opposing the death penalty are more likely to be members of minority groups,
women, and Catholics, the death qualification requirement means that a
defendant is less likely to have a jury representing a broad cross-section of
the society that is deciding his fate.
The second requirement that needs
to be altered is the limited time-frame for appeals. To hasten the application
of the death penalty, Governor Rick Scott signed a bill providing only a
shorter time for appeals and requiring that attorneys representing death row
inmates keep the government informed of their activities on the prisoner’s
behalf. Limiting the time between trial
and execution means that defendants will have less time to prove their
innocence. This concern is not a hypothetical one: since 1973, twenty-four
death row inmates have been exonerated and freed. A shorter time frame could
increase the risk of executing an innocent person. Requiring regular reports from inmates’
attorneys adds an extra burden on lawyers who may be either working pro-bono or
for organizations that are woefully understaffed and underfunded (Burke 12). Since
their legal activities are part of public record in any case, the reporting
requirement seems more like an attempt at harassment than a genuine attempt to
monitor legal processes.
An
examination of the research on the death penalty shows that Florida’s rules
increase the chances of an inmate’s being sentenced to death. These rules
increase both the chances of a defendant’s being convicted and the possibility
of racial bias being a factor in the sentencing. As if those results were not
bad enough, other rules hinder a defendant’s chances of overturning the
sentence on appeal. In deciding whether or not to change Florida’s death
penalty rules, it is important to remember the twenty-four men who were
sentenced to death and later found innocent. Are we as a society really so
eager to execute the guilty that we are
willing to risk executing the innocent as well?