More than ten years after: The long-term stability of informed death penalty opinions

This panel study examined the stability of informed death penalty opinions more than ten years after students participated in a semester long death penalty class. Results for two “abstract” opinion measures indicated that support of the death penalty significantly diminished after exposure to the death penalty class, yet rebounded to initial pretest levels two to three years later. After more than ten years, the data revealed small increases in support of the death penalty from the first follow-up period. Personal involvement measures did not change significantly across the four points in time. The relative importance of four of the eleven reasons for death penalty support or opposition changed significantly over time. Those changes varied across measures. Some increased in importance over time, while others decreased in importance. Finally, race was a significant factor in every opinion measure, as well as in nine of the eleven reasons for death penalty support or opposition.     

The influence of knowledge on reasons for death penalty opinions: An experimental test

Despite more than 50 years of scientific polling and a substantial body of research, an understanding of American opinion on the death penalty remains problematic. This exploratory study sheds further light on the subject by examining the influence of knowledge on reasons that people give for their opinions. Results of the study show that participation in a death penalty class did not affect significantly five of six reasons for opinions regarding the death penalty (general deterrence, retribution, incapacitation, religious reasons, and support for law enforcement). Administrative considerations were the only reason influenced significantly by participation in the class. Implications of the findings are discussed.     

the death penalty: An American history

Stuart Banner's thoughtful book, The Death Penalty: An American History (2002), serves as the basis of this review essay which explores the forces shaping the nation's experiences with capital punishment. The essay traces Banner's account of important death penalty developments throughout American history and examines justifications traditionally offered in support of capital punishment, issues of administration, and execution protocols. It concludes by projecting that, consistent with historical trends and nagged by serious and recurring administrative problems, the death penalty in America will in due course become a thing of the past.     

Confidence in the death penalty and support for its use: Exploring the value-expressive dimension of death penalty attitudes

Recent media and political attention has raised public awareness of a number of issues surrounding the death penalty. Questions regarding innocence, fair trials, and equitable access to counsel and the appellate process are ubiquitous in coverage of the death penalty. Adequate information about public attitudes toward the death penalty in light of these issues is currently lacking. In 2002, as part of the annual Texas Crime Poll, questions were asked about confidence in the administration of the death penalty, support for the death penalty, and support for a moratorium. The results indicate that, although a majority of respondents support the death penalty, a substantial proportion lack confidence in its use and support a moratorium on executions. Of those lacking confidence and those supporting a moratorium, strong majorities maintain support for the death penalty (68% and 73%, respectively). These findings suggest that death penalty attitudes may be largely value expressive.     

Behavioral science and the juvenile death penalty

Behavioral science data included in an amicus brief has been introduced into a recent Supreme Court decision (Thompson v. Oklahoma) involving the juvenile death penalty. However, a close examination of the data fails to provide support for either the pro- or antijuvenile death penalty position.     

论死刑的程序控制

死刑作为剥夺生命的刑罚,是所有刑罚手段中最严厉的一种。虽说人们对死刑应保留还是应废除尚有争议,但是,对死刑应予以控制,应慎重使用死刑,并尽可能地减少适用死刑,却是普遍被肯定的基本共识。而就控制死刑的方法来说,主要有两种,即刑事实体法的控制与刑事程序法的控制。所谓通过刑事实体法对死刑予以控制的方法,即以修改刑法规定的方式,如刑法减少可适用死刑的犯罪的种类,或对适用死刑增加各种各样的限制条件等,以达到慎用、少用死刑的目的。对死刑的刑事实体法的控制,是人们一直重视的控制方法,这种方法的控制效果也比较容易显现。例如,我国《刑法》经过(1997年)修改后,取消了     

A note on taking account of the automatic death penalty jurors

The California Supreme Court'sHovey opinion identified a separate group of “automatic death penalty” (ADP) persons whose exclusion had been overlooked in previous studies of death qualification. Using data unavailable at the timeHovey was decided, this brief article estimates the effect of excluding this group on the attitudinal skewing and conviction-proneness of death-qualified jurors. It concludes that the impact of excluding the ADPs is negligible.     

The juvenile death penalty and the Eighth Amendment

The present study investigated the Eighth Amendment tests of societal consensus and proportionality as applied to juvenile death penalties. A sample of former jurors (N=179) voted on whether to execute the defendant in a hypothetical case. Defendant's age (10, 15, 16, or 19) and level of remorse were varied. A large percentage of participants voted to execute the defendant in each condition, but the defendant's age and the participant's attitude toward juvenile culpability significantly predicted the likelihood of execution. Implications for the constitutionality of the juvenile death penalty and future research directions are discussed.     

死刑威慑力的犯罪学分析

Death penalty is the most effective deterrence to grave crimes, which has been the key basis for the State to retain death penalty. In fact, either in legislation or in execution, death penalty can not produce the special deterrent effect as expected. With respect to this issue, people tend to conduct normative exploration from the perspective of ordinary legal principles or the principle of human rights, which is more speculative than convincing. Correct interpretation based on the existing positive analysis and differentiation based on human nature which sifts the true from the false will not only help end the simple, repetitive and meaningless arguments regarding the basis for the existence of death penalty, but also help understand the rational nature of both the elimination and the preservation of death penalty, so as to define the basic direction towards which the State should make efforts in controlling death penalty in the context of promoting social civilization. Zhang Yuanhuang is a professor of law at Beijing Normal University, and a doctoral tutor and director of the Institute of Criminology and Criminal Policy. He has been to Paris II University as a senior visiting scholar. He is an executive director of Chinese Criminological Society and a director of the Chinese branch of International Association of Penal Law. His main publications include: Basic Issues of Modern Criminology (China Procuratorial Press, 1998), Principles of Criminology (Law Press, 2^nd ed. 2008), Criminology (Renmin University of China Press, 2008); and he has more than 70 articles published in law academic journals.     

Should forensic patients be informed of evaluators' opinions prior to trial?

There are several articles in the literature that discuss the problems which occur when persons who have been evaluated by forensic clinicians hear the results of those evaluations for the first time in court. The authors agree that the scenarios presented are problematic but suggest that in many cases the problems can be avoided by sharing the information with the person prior to presenting it in court. They present several case examples to illustrate their point.     

The gender gap in death penalty support: An exploratory study

One of the more enduring observations in the study of death penalty support within the United States is the strong divide between males and females. Men have consistently shown significantly higher levels of support for capital punishment than women. This divide between males and females has appeared in nearly every survey, over time, and across a variety of methodological designs. Using data from the cumulative (1972-2002) data file for the National Opinion Research Center (NORC) General Social Surveys, this study attempted to understand the basis for this gender gap. It examined gender differences in socioeconomic status, gender inequality, gender socialization, religion/religiosity, political ideology, positions on right-to-life and other social issues, fear of crime and victimization experience, experience with the criminal justice system, philosophies of punishment, and attribution styles. The findings revealed that the effect of gender on capital punishment support continued to be robust despite controlling for the effects of all of these explanations.     

A deterrence study of the death penalty in Illinois, 1933–1980

The study analyzes the effect of executions and the death penalty on homicides in Illinois. A forty-eight year time series (1933–1980 inclusive) is used as the basis for this analysis. The first series of results are presented in a graph of executions and homicides by year. A second portion of the analysis compares the mean homicide rates for three time periods—years with executions, years when the death penalty was allowed but no executions were performed, and years in which the death penalty was abolished by the U.S. Supreme Court. No notable differences in homicide rates were observed for these three eras. Finally, a regression analysis was performed which included a lag structure and several relevant controls. The deterrence measure (executions) made no contribution to the variation in homicide rates. Thus, the authors conclude that there is no deterrent effect for the death penalty on homicides in Illinois.