The crime could have been proved and for that reason the offender was tried. The offender committed a crime, society judges it from lords formed for it “the judges.” If the criminal is executed due to the application of the death penalty, the court takes an attitude that also makes him a criminal. Undoubtedly it is an attitude with contradictions, since the court is implicitly suggesting that to execute the neighbor is a legal fact as a solution of social problems, which are not solved from the execution of people. In fact with this attitude it would seem that we go back to prehistory.
Those in favor of the death penalty insist that it is the best way to intimidate them, but they do not consider the insensitivity of criminals, especially those of high danger, who lack morality. The offender knows that death is one of the potential risks that run when they commit offenses and kill. However nothing intimidates them as people with good feelings and morals think. Passionate criminals exist and at that moment the criminal becomes blind with unconscious behavior, since he does not think about the consequences.
The death penalty is feared by good people who by being peaceful, moral and honest can be involved in a crime in a circumstantial way, as can happen to occasional criminals. This occasional crime caused by circumstance of life can lead them to be executed. The death penalty is a failure because it does not protect the innocent, it does not respect civilization or it has the capacity to stop the actions of criminals (Edmund Brown)
The death penalty is not an exemplary act. It shows that the crimes still exist in the countries where it is applied. This inhuman punishment indeed exists in several states of the United States without being able to demonstrate the reduction of crime rates. Iscariots are an example of hopelessness and folly, since most of them lack life expectancy beyond the age of 30, no one thinks of old age as a possibility of life. With such thoughts it is impossible to believe that they can be intimidated by the application of the death penalty. Without giving value to life it is impossible to think that they would stop being hired criminals.
Also given the impossibility of being applied to minors under 18 years of age there is a risk that hired killers will be hired to commit the crimes. In short, there would be no possibility of condemning to death the true leaders and ideologues.
It is not possible to leave aside the great possibility of an inefficient investigation by the judges, who sanction and dictate the death penalty, sometimes, as has been wrongly done by sanctioning as guilty those who were actually innocent. Judicial infrastructure may be better or worse depending on each country, however none of them is exempt from making mistakes, since judges are human beings who as such can commit them.
In 1974 in a pub in Birmingham a bomb exploded causing the death of 21 people. This fact was investigated by the London justice, which condemned 6 Irish for suspected members of the IRA. Sentenced to life imprisonment, the London court acknowledged their mistake only at the beginning of 1991. Throughout this time, the convicts suffered torture of all kinds, without London justice being able to find the true perpetrators of that attack.
If these six Irish suspects had been given the death penalty as a fair punishment for the aberrant act they had allegedly committed, there would be no possibility for the judges to back down by acknowledging their error.
If an accused person can be wrongly convicted of the death penalty in a country with a solid legal and criminalist infrastructure, in countries without this characteristic, worse facts would occur.
Likewise in the thought of the death penalty as the just punishment to the criminal prevails a feeling of revenge over the objective to avoid that the murders continue.
As well as killing those who kill, one could think of granting proportionality to the sentence in terms of crimes committed against the environment, raping who violated, burning the house of a pyromaniac and ultimately would be applying in our time the law of the Talon. In any case, it does not mean tolerating or accepting criminal acts, but rather maintaining the values that overlap those of the condemned. Revenge carried out by the state is repudiated.