Death Penalty no thanks (but thank you, Niluccio, for this piece)

Noose in Abu Ghraib prison, Iraq (AP)

 Amnesty International believes that the death penalty is ulitmate inhumane violition of human rights. Sheffield Amnesty group work consistently in opposing the death penalty around the world, especially in the USA and in Belarus (Europe's last executioner.)  Thanks to Niluuccio for  the piece below explaining our implacable opposition to the death penalty.

Following Guido Fawkes’ little blaze (ahem) of publicity with his “bring back hanging” e-petition campaign, there’s been a lot of stuff (including from him) about the supposed “deterrence” of having a noose in the criminal justice system.
Crime rates are high because we don’t have judges with black caps and men like Albert Pierrepoint to dish out justice. Apparently.
So, if you’re looking for evidence to support an argument that capital punishment is a deterrent against serious crime – then you can find it. This chap on the Telegraph site will run you through some. Equally, if you’re looking for evidence to support an argument that capital punishment is not a deterrent against serious crime, then, yes, you can find that as well.
This is precisely why abolitionists like Amnesty have for so long said that there is no proven "deterrent effect" attaching to the death penalty. Because there isn’t.
In this sense it’s fallacious to say that capital punishment “works”. It works to kill people, yes (and not always quickly or painlessly, and not even always guilty people either), but it doesn’t work in the criminological sense of deterrence.
In the absence of the deterrence argument capital punishment's proponents should either drop their support or give other reasons for it. The major alternative "pro" argument is that perpetrators of the most serious crimes "deserve" the "ultimate" penalty – death at the hands of the state. Actually, if you listen closely, the "just desserts" viewpoint is never far away from death penalty debates. "Heinous" criminals don't deserve to live. Why should they when their victim has been cruelly killed?
In a sense, this would at least be an honest argument about ethics, societal norms and what values a decent society lives by. On the abolitionist side Amnesty and others argue that the death penalty is wrong, full-stop. It's a human rights violation in its own right. 
Everything else is subsidiary to this: the arbitrariness of its application (poor people, ethnic minorities and the badly-represented being more likely to die, as in the US); the error rate (confidence-sapping miscarriages like the Birmingham Six here or the 139 US death row prisoners released on grounds of innocence since 1973); its politicisation (Ken Saro-Wiwa and others in Nigeria; executions after protests in Iran); or even the means of extinguishing life (is a lethal injection "better than" hanging?).
In the end all of these (individually quite powerful reasons to be opposed) are themselves "utilitarian" arguments. They still skirt around the central question: is it right to invest the governing authority with the powers to judicially kill?
In the end you’re either for or against it on essentially moral grounds. I’m against.
Meanwhile, cases like Troy Davis’ in the USA just ram the point home to me: it’s wrong anyway (a justice system should dispense justice not death), and it leads to horrendous cases like this where a man has spent 20 years on death row for a crime he may not have committed. What more evidence do you need to oppose Guido’s ill-judged idea to unearth a relic of the past?

http://blogs.amnesty.org.uk/blogs_entry.asp?eid=7876

News from Georgia,USA

Why the war to save Troy Davis isn't over

On March 28, 2011 I woke up elated about my 10 year anniversary as a cancer survivor. I looked outside and it was cold and gloomy, the sun was nowhere to be found. It's about 9:30 a.m. and the phone rings, it's my brother Troy Davis' lawyer and from the tone in his voice I knew, it was not good news.

My heart sank to a heavy place as I listened to his monotone voice saying,  "We just received news that the United States Supreme Court has denied Troy's appeal." Knowing that the appeals for Troy have always been an uphill battle and the lawyers have always stated that from a legal standpoint. Yet today I also heard optimism in the statement, "We will seek and exhaust all legal
means available to us." I know from a legal standpoint denial by the Supreme Court is nothing a lawyer finds optimism in, yet I felt the readiness for yet another battle.

My first concern was my mother and my brother Troy. I cannot imagine facing three execution dates and the possibility of a fourth. I knew Troy would be more concerned about our family than himself, but I also knew that as much faith and spirituality as my mother has, she is still a mother and we are fighting for my brother's very existence. In this fight Troy is no longer voiceless and my family is no longer invisible, yet the court still refuses to hear what we have to say. Innocence does matter and beyond a reasonable doubt should be of utmost.

One thing for certain is that the global concern about this case is growing and yet the highest court in the United States is not willing to address the issue of innocence and new evidence. We live in country that is supposed to promote democracy and human rights for other countries yet it is not unconstitutional for us to execute innocent people in the U.S. if the courts feel they received a fair trial.

I am both enraged and empowered, for this battle to save Troy is a war of life and death for me! Until there is no breath left in my body I will fight for Troy, fight against the injustice of the death penalty, because this battle is bigger than Troy it is a war against a system is not impartial, a system that cares less for fairness and more for finality. In no way have we ever diminished the loss and hurt of the McPhail family, yet both families have been victimized. Being a mother and having Stage 4 cancer I understand the importance of life and I am willing to give my life to spare my brother's. No matter the final outcome of this case, my war against the death penalty is far from over and I will no longer be a victimize by this system in the United States, that justice depends on your ability to pay for it.

The hearing held in June 2010 in Savannah was like a puppet show, it was entertaining to some, upsetting to others, yet once the judge opened his mouth and looked at my brother with disgust I knew that no matter what Troy's lawyers had to present the judge had already made his decision to deny Troy, so he was just going through the motions like a puppeteer. I saluted the witnesses, even though they were criminalized by the state prosecutor for recanting their trial testimony. When they testified against Troy all those years ago, the police treated them like heroes, even though they had the same criminal history in 1989. It also seemed amazing that all the police who testified had amnesia about their role of misconduct with the witnesses, yet the judge chose to believe them over recanted testimony of the very witnesses they used to secure a conviction and death sentence for my brother.

The Georgia Parole Board said they will not execute when there is doubt. The case of Troy Anthony Davis is full of doubt.

As Troy said to me, "It's not over 'til God says it's over, this fight for justice did not begin with me and will not end with me."

The battle for Justice and the War to save Troy wages on! My name is Martina Correia and I am on Death Row because that is where my brother lives, our lives intertwined. If Troy is executed he will become even more powerful, because people all around the world are saying, "I AM TROY DAVIS," and his story will be heard.

(source:  Opinion, Martina Correia, The Grio)