Kirk Noble Bloodsworth was put on death row in the year of 1985.

He was charged with the murder and rape of a nine-year-old girl, called an animal by a Maryland state prosecutor, and, when he was sentenced to death, and entire courtroom stood in a standing ovation (Northwestern). He spent eight years in prison, two of them on death row. During his time in prison, Bloodsworth faced many types of physical and emotional trauma. A pack of D batteries were thrown at his head, inmates with shanks (crudely made knives) tried to attack him, his friend tried to kill himself by stabbing pencils into his eyes. Bloodsworth went through unspeakable horrors for eight years until he was exonerated by DNA evidence. The same prosecutor that called him an animal, said: you could have knocked me over with a feather, and deeply apologized. The governor of Maryland apologized, the Maryland Senate Judiciary Committee apologized, but it was two late for Bloodsworths mother, who had died three months before she could see her son an innocent man (Northwestern). Ever since the 1976 Supreme Court case Gregg v. Georgia, which reaffirmed the constitutionality of the death penalty, states have spent hundreds of millions of dollars pursuing capitol cases, which often have taken decades, and have sentenced 142 people to death who were later found innocent (Death Penalty Information Center (DPIC)). Hundreds of families have been torn apart while going through the death penalty process, yet, still, the homicide rate is higher in states with the death penalty than those without it. Because death penalty litigation and implementation is more expensive than jailing a criminal for life, puts a great emotional burden on the families of crime victims, and leaves the likely possibility of putting a defendant on death row who did not commit the crime for which he or she is being charged, state legislatures in states that implement capitol punishment should repeal the death penalty. Through 18th Century BC Babylon and 16th Century America, and up until the present day,

the death penalty has had a long history of use, as well as a long history of opposition. The first recorded use of death penalty laws was in 18th Century Babylon, under King Hammauri, whose laws allowed the use of capitol punishment for 25 different crimes (DPIC). The death penalty was extremely popular in the medieval era, and Britains use of capitol punishment came to America during the Colonial Era. An abolitionist movement began in America after Cesare Beccaria's essay, On Crime and Punishment, theorized that there was no reason for capitol punishment to be implemented (DPIC). The abolition movement gained more momentum during the 19th Century during which Michigan, Wisconsin, and Rhode Island abolished the death penalty. The 20th Century saw many challenges on the constitutionality of the death penalty, and the ensuing court decisions make up much of the reason the death penalty process is so lengthy and costly today. Though the use of the death penalty dropped during the beginning of the century, the rising fear of communism during World War II and the Cold War saw the return of capitol punishments popularity. (DPIC). From the twenties through the forties, the use of capitol punishment became much more widespread, mainly due to criminologists who held that the death penalty was a necessary part of the criminal justice system (Amnesty). This popularity died down during the sixties and seventies, during which the death penalty was used least often in American history (Amnesty). Many Supreme Court cases in the late sixties and early seventies argued that the implementation of the death penalty is arbitrary and capricious, therefore violating the 8th Amendments ban on cruel and unusual punishment. These cases lead up to the 1972 case, Furman v. Georgia, in which the Supreme Court held that Georgias death penalty law could result in the arbitrary, and unconstitutional, use of the death penalty, thereby suspending the death penalty statute in Georgia, as well as in forty other states (DPIC). The decision left open the loophole that if a state were to create a death penalty statute that wasnt arbitrary, it would be accepted (Amnesty). This led to the

1976 Gregg v. Georgia decision that held that the proposed statutes in Georgia and Texas were constitutional. The decision also made mandatory changes to the death penalty process, by separating the guilt and sentencing parts of a capitol case, as well as adding mandatory appeals to the guilt and sentencing cases (Amnesty). These processes, designed to make the criminal process more accurate in a capitol crime, are a large reason why the death penalty is so costly and extensive now. Pursuing a capitol case is much more expensive than a non-capitol case, therefore states with the death penalty should eliminate capitol punishment and replace it with a life without possibility of parole sentence. The trial and appeals process for a capitol case can be extremely burdensome on the taxpayer. Since 1978, during which Californias death penalty statute was reinstated, it is estimated to have cost the state of California four billion dollars in pursuing capitol cases (Amnesty). If the Governor of California were to commute the sentences of those on death row, the state would immediately save 170 million dollars, with a total savings of five billion dollars over the next twenty years (DPIC). In the state of Maryland, it has cost 186 million dollars for the five executions the state has performed: about 37.5 million dollars per execution (MD Case). In Maryland, it is estimated to cost 3 million dollars for the average capitol case, opposed to 1 million for a comparative non-capitol case (MD Case). Kansas spends about 70% more on death penalty cases than non-death penalty cases. In Tennessee it costs 48% more when a prosecutor pursues a death sentence than when they pursue a life imprisonment sentence (Amnesty). This money is taken out of important crime control programs, such as drug treatment, victim counseling, and mental health treatment. States that spend millions on death penalty trials have less money to prosecute non-capitol cases such as cases involving the drug trade, domestic violence, and child abuse (DP Focus). The money states spend pursuing death penalty cases could be spent on public education, support for crime victims and their families, reinforcing the

police force and emergency services, rebuilding roads and highways, promoting public health, job creation programs, or a number of other worthy causes. Instead states continue to shell over millions towards an onerous, unnecessary, and broken part of the criminal justice system. States should repeal the death penalty and replace it with a life without the possibility of parole sentence. Though many proponents of the death penalty claim to be giving solace and support to the families of victims in using the death penalty, the death penalty can be a drawn out, emotionally draining experience for victims families. The Murder Victims for Reconciliation, a group of family members of crime victims who want the death penalty abolished, state multiple reasons in explaining why the death penalty does more harm to families than good (MVFR). The MVFR posits that the death penalty distracts the criminal justice system from the important issues murder victims families and their communities face, such as victim support and crime prevention (MVFR). They argue that the death penalty process puts millions of dollars into pursuing the case, when the victims families, are largely left economically ignored. Many of these families find that the long process of capitol punishment lengthens the healing process, and often causes stress in the victims family (MVHR). One such victim is Bob Atobee, father of slain Colorado corrections officer Eric Atobee. Atobee said that the death penalty process put an "unspeakable emotional toll" on his family. He once wrote, Given what I know now, I can no longer support Colorados broken death penalty system. Whats more, I will work to end it to ensure that our resources are better used and no family ever has to go through what my wife and I have endured (DPIC). Aba Gayle, the mother of murder victim Catherine Blount, said that, "The District Attorney [in charge of the case] assured me that the execution of the man responsible for Catherine's murder would help me heal, and for many years I believed him. But now I know that having someone murdered by the government will not heal my pain. I beg the government

not to murder in my name, and more important, not to tarnish the memory of my daughter with another senseless killing (CCVADP)." The death penalty provides no solace to the families of crime victims, in fact it often prolongs the suffering, therefore state legislatures should eliminate the death penalty in favor of a life in prison without the possibility of parole sentence that is much quicker and easier for the families of murder victims. The death penalty poses the very great risk that an innocent person could be put on death row or executed. Ever since the death penalty was re-established after the 1976 case, Gregg v. Georgia, there have been 142 people that have been exonerated after being put on death row (DPIC). The sentence of life in prison without the possibility of parole is sufficient in that a criminal will never be a threat to the public again, but if the person sentenced was later found innocent he or she can still be released. The state cannot take back an execution. Many proponents of the death penalty argue that the death penalty is effective in that a dangerous criminal will never be able to harm people again. They seem to believe that sentencing a criminal to life without possibility of parole will give the criminal a chance to leave jail and continue committing crimes yet, in fact, no state has released a person serving life without possibility of parole unless they were found innocent (Amnesty). Most people serving life without possibility of parole die of natural causes, just as most people on death row do (Amnesty). The only difference is that life without possibility of parole is a swift, cheaper, option to the death penalty. If states continue to use the death penalty, there is an ever-present chance of an innocent being executed, while if those states replaced the death penalty with life without possibility of parole, that chance would be completely eliminated. Because the death penalty is hurtful, expensive, unnecessary, and ineffective, states governments should replace the death penalty with a life without possibility parole sentence. The life

without possibility of parole prevents a dangerous criminal from posing a threat to the public again, is a swift and cost effective solution, and poses no danger of executing an innocent person (Amnesty). State legislatures should direct the funds saved from repealing the death penalty into more worthwhile causes, such crime victim support and crime prevention techniques. These moves would place attention on working to end the causes of crime, and, when crimes do strike, making sure that the victim and their loved ones are cared for (MVFR). The death penalty is an alarming example of the criminal justice system placing more attention on avenging a crime than attempting to reduce crime in the first place. The death penalty continues to burden the taxpayer, with the average capitol case costing 1 million dollars (rising at the rate of inflation) (Amnesty). Every year more people on death row are found to be innocent. In 2012, three people were exonerated after being put on death row; in 2009, nine people were exonerated (DPIC) The death penalty is a broken part of the criminal justice system, and should be repealed. As the death penalty process continues to burden the taxpayer, break apart families and communities, and put innocent men and women on death row, most states do nothing. Most states continue to ignore the true needs of crime victims and their families. Most states continue to put innocent people on death row. Most states waste the taxpayer dollar on a completely useless facet of the criminal justice system, while other important parts of the system are left largely unfunded. By not acting, states all across the country are actively weakening their own criminal justice systems, destroying the lives of families already weakened by tragedy, and putting innocent citizens through unspeakable ordeals in the prison system. Because death penalty litigation and implementation is more expensive than jailing a criminal for life, puts a great emotional burden on the families of crime victims, and leaves the likely possibility of putting a defendant on death row who did not commit the

crime for which he or she is being charged, state legislatures in states that implement capitol punishment should repeal the death penalty.

Works Cited "Death Penalty Cost." AmnestyUSA.org. Amnesty International, n.d. Web. 3 Feb. 2013. <http://www.amnestyusa.org/our-work/issues/death-penalty/us-death-penalty-facts/deathpenalty-cost "Death Penalty Cost." AmnestyUSA.org. Amnesty USA, n.d. Web. 6 Mar. 2013. <http://www.amnestyusa.org/our-work/issues/death-penalty/us-death-penalty-facts/deathpenalty-cost>. Death Penalty Focus: Working for Alternatives to the Death Penalty. Death Penalty Focus, n.d. Web. 3 Feb. 2013. <http://www.deathpenalty.org/>. "Death Penalty: The High Cost of the Death Penalty." Death Penalty Focus.org. Death Penalty Focus, n.d. Web. 6 Mar. 2013. <http://www.deathpenalty.org/article.php?id=42>. "History of the Death Penalty." Death Penalty Information Center. Death Penalty Information Center, n.d. Web. 3 Feb. 2013. <http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/history-death-penalty "History of the Death Penalty." Procon.org. N.p., n.d. Web. 6 Mar. 2013. <http://deathpenalty.procon.org/view.resource.php?resourceID=003096>. "Home." Murder Victims' Families for Human Rights. N.p., n.d. Web. 6 Mar. 2013. <http://www.mvfhr.org/>. "Kirk Bloodsworth." Northwestern Center on Wrongful Convictions. Northwestern Law School, n.d. Web. 6 Mar. 2013. <http://www.law.northwestern.edu/clinic/wrongful/exonerations/mdBloodsworthSummary.html

>. Maryland CASE. Maryland's Death Penalty: Still Here, Still Unfair. More Arbitrary and Costly. Mt. Rainer: Maryland CASE, 2011. Print. "Murder Victims for Reconciliation." Murder Victims for Reconciliation.org. Ed. Richir Outreach. Murder Victims for Reconcilliation, n.d. Web. 6 Mar. 2013. <http://www.mvfr.org/>. "Victims Stories." California Crime Victims for Alternatives to the Death Penalty.org. California Crime Victims for Alternatives to the Death Penalty, n.d. Web. 6 Mar. 2013. <http://www.californiacrimevictims.org/stories.html>.

Annotated Bibliography "Death Penalty Cost." AmnestyUSA.org. Amnesty International, n.d. Web. 3 Feb. 2013. <http://www.amnestyusa.org/our-work/issues/death-penalty/us-death-penalty-facts/deathpenalty-cost>. Good, simple, write up on the cost of the death penalty. Information from multiple states. Very easy to read and understand. Don't have to dig through to get important facts and statistics, they are right in your face. Will definitely use the facts from this article in my paper. "Death Penalty Cost." AmnestyUSA.org. Amnesty USA, n.d. Web. 6 Mar. 2013. <http://www.amnestyusa.org/our-work/issues/death-penalty/us-death-penalty-facts/deathpenalty-cost>. An easy-to-read, short piece with a lot of facts. Good for my part about death penalty cost. Many great statistics, very useful. Not very in-depth. Death Penalty Focus: Working for Alternatives to the Death Penalty. Death Penalty Focus, n.d. Web. 3 Feb. 2013. <http://www.deathpenalty.org/>. This source is good mainly because of its focus on the alternatives to the death penalty, not just on reasons why it is bad. It goes through the issues with the death penalty, but also gives suggestions on what could be done better if the death penalty is not in place. May use this source if I decide to argue that the money not being spent on the death penalty, if it were to be repealed, should be given the the families of the vitims. Readable, informative. "Death Penalty: The High Cost of the Death Penalty." Death Penalty Focus.org. Death Penalty Focus, n.d. Web. 6 Mar. 2013. <http://www.deathpenalty.org/article.php?id=42>. Not the most developed site. Has a few good statistics. I mainly used this site as background for other sources.

"History of the Death Penalty." Death Penalty Information Center. Death Penalty Information Center, n.d. Web. 3 Feb. 2013. <http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/history-death-penalty>. Also a very good source. The Death Penalty Information Center provides scholarly reports, and great overviews of those reports in order to contribute to the conversation about the death penalty. Has a lot of good information about the history of the death penalty. Easy to read, but extremely informative. Has links to other sources about the death penalty, which is also very helpful. "History of the Death Penalty." Procon.org. N.p., n.d. Web. 6 Mar. 2013. <http://deathpenalty.procon.org/view.resource.php?resourceID=003096>. Very, very in depth. Has some good tidbits that I used in my paper, as well as gave me a good overall view on the entire history of the death penalty. I found it very interesting, used many of the facts it gave. Good source. "Home." Murder Victims' Families for Human Rights. N.p., n.d. Web. 6 Mar. 2013. <http://www.mvfhr.org/>. Had some good complaints victims families had about the process. Also had stories, which were very powerful. Used the stories in my piece, and used the general complaints in my paper. "Kirk Bloodsworth." Northwestern Center on Wrongful Convictions. Northwestern Law School, n.d. Web. 6 Mar. 2013. <http://www.law.northwestern.edu/clinic/wrongful/exonerations/mdBloodsworthSummary.html >. Maryland CASE. Maryland's Death Penalty: Still Here, Still Unfair. More Arbitrary and Costly. Mt. Rainer: Maryland CASE, 2011. Print. An extremely thorough review of the death penalty, with concentration on the death penalty in Maryland. Gives great examples of death penalty cases in

which the juries made a mistake, and also gives good statistics on those who are given the death penalty. Goes through all of the faults in the death penalty. Great source. "Murder Victims for Reconciliation." Murder Victims for Reconciliation.org. Ed. Richir Outreach. Murder Victims for Reconcilliation, n.d. Web. 6 Mar. 2013. <http://www.mvfr.org/>. The best site I found about murder victims families. Went in depth about the problems, and horrors, that victims families went through. Had stories and quotes, as well as overall problems. I liked its point about more important places money could go towards. "Victims Stories." California Crime Victims for Alternatives to the Death Penalty.org. California Crime Victims for Alternatives to the Death Penalty, n.d. Web. 6 Mar. 2013. <http://www.californiacrimevictims.org/stories.html>. Mainly just used this for stories. Had very impactful stories, in a very easy to read, well developed site. Good source Max Foley-Keene Blue Group