Death Penalty Final Response

            I believe that the abolishment of the death penalty in Illinois was just. Besides the issue of morality, the death penalty has been met with the conflict of factual evidence. Governor Ryan of Illinois ordered a blanket commutation right before the end of his term. After originally having supported the death penalty, Ryan was shocked to see how many innocent people have been executed and how easily their innocence could have been proven. As he began to see the flaws in our justice system, a group of people at Northwestern University pushed him all the way to the side of pro-life. In his speech, he said “Together they spared the lives and secured the freedom of 17 men - men who were wrongfully convicted and rotting in the condemned units of our state prisons.” Ryan recognized that if students and a professor from a college could prove the inmates innocence, something was going very wrong. I agree with his decision to a blanket commutation as the death penalty does not deter murder and after seventeen men on Illinois’ death row had already been proven innocent when their cases were re-opened, many more were sure to be innocent.

            The Illinois’ legislature decision was based mostly off of this new idea that Ryan had discovered; fact over morality. Morality is a difficult argument because everyone’s morals are different, but one cannot disprove fact. As case after case was given a new trial, innocence was proven and it was only just to abolish capital punishment. Juries began voting more for innocence and lesser sentences. Richard Dieter, executive director of the Death Penalty Information Center, said "The life-without-parole option is not going away." As the legislation of Illinois began to understand how unreliable the justice system was, they realized they could not do much but abolish capital punishment entirely. I believe that this act was just because it is not fair to take the life of an innocent person. We say that murder is murder, and execution is different. But if the person we are executing is innocent, then I consider it murder. In the movie Deadline, Scott Turow, a practiced lawyer and author, said “even the people who believe in the death penalty don’t believe in killing innocent people.”

            Also interviewd in the movie was Gabriel Salachai, who was pleading for innocence. He was always working, never did drugs and was trying to make money to support himself. Salachai said that he only confessed because “I couldn’t take the beatings any more.” This is one of the things that gets overlooked when it seems so evident; race. Salachai was given a document to sign that was written in English and a detective read it aloud to him in Spanish. In my opinion, that is not just. Salachai was not sure of what he was singing, his confession was beaten out of him, we don’t know whether or not the jury or evidence was biased, what more does it take to make this case unjust? As Governor Ryan accepted more and more of this evidence proving the inaccuracy and unjust system of capital punishment, he decided that the death penalty “should be a decision without error.” I agree with his decision upon coming to terms with the fact that it is impossible for the decision to be made without error. Error is inevitable, and therefore the death penalty needed to be abolished. I agree with Ryan’s and the Illinois legislature’s decision because the death penalty system in it of itself is unjust and no innocent person should be murdered.