The US should adopt a revised death penalty system

The "death penalty" is the execution of a criminal convicted according to the laws of a state or the federal government, i.e. death penalty - putting a condemned person to death http://www.thefreedictionary.com... In the system proposed, for the death penalty to be imposed, a jury must first find the accused guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. Then in the penalty phase of the trial the jury must find that there was guilt beyond a reasonable doubt based upon forensic evidence, as well as any other aggravating circumstances as required by law were met. "Based upon forensic evidence" means the evidence presented must include substantial forensic evidence, such as DNA, fingerprints, or ballistics testing proving the accused committed the crime. A person found guilty based solely upon a confession or the testimony of crime witnesses could not be executed, but at most sentenced to life imprisonment without parole. The purpose of requiring the higher standard of evidence is to further reduce the probability of a false conviction. False convictions in the past are most often the product of faulty identification or other faulty testimony by witnesses, and occasionally by false confessions. A small number of such erroneous convictions have been discovered as a result of cases being reopened when DNA technology became available and proved the error. Because DNA testing is now commonplace, the certainty of convictions is now higher than it was in the past. The new system makes forensic evidence a requirement for execution in the first place. The reasons for imposing a death penalty are: 1. Some crimes are so heinous that any sentence short of execution is unjust. Examples: http://findarticles.com... to argue against the death penalty, one must assert that there are no crimes that require the death penalty for justice to be served. 2. Having the possibility of the death penalty encourages guilty felons to plead guilty to a sentence of life imprisonment and to reveal the extent of their crimes. Whether or not a plea deal is offered is up to the prosecutor. For example, a plea deal was offered in the Kibbe serial murder case http://cbs13.com... in order to get a guilty plea and to get the killer to reveal the extent of his crimes. 3. To deter a convict under a life sentence from killing a guard, fellow inmate, or a hostage in an escape. Moreover, "life without parole" in practice results in murderers being paroled or released. If the person cannot be executed, there is no additional penalty for killing someone. While many murders are crimes of passion, a convict under life sentence can contemplate committing further murders without fear of additional punishment. If an innocent person is wrongly executed that is grossly unjust, however if a killer is not executed and kills again the person he kills is also an unjust victim. There is greater justice if more innocent lives are saved by having a death penalty than by giving killers a free pass to kill again. The positive balance is ensured by forensic evidence virtually eliminating wrong convictions. While wrong executions are already rare, murders by convicts under life imprisonment are not rare. Jeff Jacoby, writing in the Boston Globe, gives numerous examples and notes "Life without parole offers no protection from jailhouse killers to those inside prison walls such as guards and other inmates. In 2001 and 2002, the Bureau of Justice Statistics reported last year, 129 inmates in state prisons and jails were victims of homicide." http://www.boston.com... Googling "convicted killer kills again" produces many dozens of other examples. 4. The higher standard for conviction makes expensive and lengthy appeals less viable. This lowers the cost of carrying out the death penalty. Appeals are based on errors in law, but the error in law must be ruled sufficient to cause doubt of the conviction. For example, an appeal might argue that if the instructions to the jury were made differently, the jury might have arrived at a different verdict. With hard forensic evidence to overcome, convictions are more likely to withstand appeals. 5. To provide an overall sense of justice in the system that deters general crime. Many murders are crimes of passion are not likely to be deterred, but potential criminals considering lesser crimes are likely to be deterred by the certainty of the justice system providing justice in capital cases. A potential criminal while contemplating the commission of a crime will get the message from an enforced death penalty that society is serious about maintaining an effective justice system. For these reasons, a revised death penalty system should be adopted.