Justice is Not "an Eye for an Eye"

The family of Terri Winchell must be repeating some form of the phrase "an eye for an eye" to themselves as the debate for her killer's execution goes on. Even though Terri was stabbed, beaten and raped before she died, her killer must not feel any pain or even be conscious when he dies? It seems odd, but it is good that this country's criminal justice system is trying to eradicate passion and emotion from its regulations.

In our textbook, Article 5 talks about the dangers of passion, anger and vengeance in punishment. The author of the article states over and over that one must not include emotion or passion of anger in the logical reasoning of punishment. Many who see this case as someone who deserves to die a painful death should think about this research. When you resent someone for a cruel and unusual crime such as stabbing, beating and raping a girl causing the loss of her life, you are not clear-headed for the discussion of her killer's punishment. You must take the way the criminal justice strives to be into account instead of living in the "eye for an eye" mentality. It may seem petty to bicker over how much it will hurt for a man to be executed but it is a step in the right direction for reforming our criminal justice system into a logically reasoned set of rules, regulations and sentencings.

Cruel and unusual punishment is a no-no for any citizen. Rapists and murders are included much to the dismay of the families of their victims. I agree with this but the question is to what extent can ending someone's life not be cruel and unusual. In the case of Michael Morales, it seems as if the court appointed doctors are being too "picky" and resting on their laurels. First the gas chamber was ruled too cruel by a California judge, which is understandable, most states use lethal injections. It has become socially acceptable as an institutional way to execute criminals of capital offenses. But then the commonly used lethal injection of barbiturate was found too cruel because it took 45 minutes to kill its victim. A three drug "cocktail" injection was suggested but at the last minute rejected by the court-appointed doctors because it was thought to cause pain and its victim may wake up before it has done its job. The three drug cocktail is supposed to only taking 8-10 minutes to execute its victim.

It seems that in the world of capital executions, you can't have it all. The system is trying, it seems extensively, to make the criminal's last moments pain-free and quick but it cannot always be possible. Possible medical research may prove necessary to find the "perfect" lethal injection that is both instantaneous and pain-free with no possibility of the victim becoming conscious during the execution. Until then, I feel that these criminals will have to do with what is available, and the court appointed doctors need to realize their responsibility to society in an unchangeable circumstance.

Victor, Joseph. Annual Editions: Criminal Justice 05/06, 29^th Edition. Mercy College-Dobbs Ferry, 2005.