Why do people who have received the death penalty sit on death row for years? Why do we support them with taxs?

The death penalty is a conundrum. It can be summed up in one statement: "death is different." Everything about a death penalty case is more over the top than a life imprisonment case. More attorneys are needed (a minimum of two per side), expert testimony on every possible aspect of the case is de rigueur, jury selection is interminable, and two trials are run at the same time. The first stage is the state circuit court trial. There are two parts to this, the determination of guilt BRD and the sentencing hearing (this can almost be a retrial of the entire case). After that are various appeals for anything even smacking of reversible error, most of which would be determined to be abuse of process in a non-death penalty case. Just to get out of this phase, a death penalty case will pass through the state appeals court, the state supreme court, then off to the federal appeals courts, and ultimately the US supreme court if constitutionality issues are raised during state trial (which they almost invariably are, it's the death penalty after all).

If those state and federal appeals are lost, an almost entirely different tack is taken and phase two is entered. State habeas corpus (post-conviction) cases and appeals are initiated. These can drag on for years. After those have worn out (think of a new set of radial tires for your car, they run out eventually but last a very long time), phase 3 is entered: federal habeas corpus arguments. A death penalty case can actually visit the same US circuit court of appeals twice. Then off to the US supreme court again.

Only then is a REAL execution date set. Various stays and appeals to the governor are argued at this point, the vociferousness of which are determined by public support, politics, and monies available to the defense.

It seems that the death penalty is a juxtaposition. The apparatus to maintain state killing and the apparatus to ensure that it will almost never happen coexist. The public pays for both sides of the argument.

Make up your own mind as to why we participate in this (largely) pointless and expensive thought exercise.

One of the additional costs of issuing the death penalty comes not only from holding them in prison for several years, but appeal dates and processes prolong their sentence. For example, if somebody is convicted, their date is set, for example 2 years away, they appeal, get a court date in 8 months, then get a new execution date in 2 years, that's 5 years wasted already.

In fact a little known statistic about the death penalty, is that the appeal process, the state lawyers and all the legal processes cost more than sentencing somebody to life in prison, so the death penalty costs the inability to retract a sentence and costs the taxpayers more money

You've raised two things in your question: the length of time and the costs.

On costs: Study after study has found that the death penalty is much more expensive than life in prison. The legal process is far more complex than for any other kind of criminal case. The largest costs come at the pre-trial and trial stages. These apply whether or not the defendant is convicted, let alone sentenced to death.

Examples- trial costs (death penalty and non death penalty cases, California):

People v. Scott Peterson, Death Penalty Trial

$3.2 Million Total

People v. Rex Allen Krebs Death Penalty Trial

$2.8 Million Total

People v. Cary Stayner, Death Penalty Trial

$2.368 Million Total

People v. Robert Wigley, Non-Death Penalty Trial

$454,000 Total

This data is for cases where the best records have been kept.

Some factors:

• more pre-trial time will be needed to prepare: cases typically take a year to come to trial

• more pre-trial motions filed and answered

• more experts will be hired

• twice as many attorneys will be appointed for the defense, and a comparable team for the prosecution

• jurors must be individually quizzed on their views about the death penalty, and they are more likely to be sequestered

• two trials instead of one will be conducted: one for guilt and one for punishment

• the trial will be longer: a cost study at Duke University estimated that death penalty trials take 3 to 5 times longer than typical murder trials

The numbers vary from state to state, but they all point in the same direction.

The time:

So far, there are 139 known cases where wrongly convicted people were sentenced to death. They were eventually exonerated and released from death row after an average of 9.8 years. If the process was faster, many of them would now be dead.

The Supreme Court has never ruled it unconstitutional to execute someone who is factually innocent.

The list of people who were were wrongly convicted, sentenced to death and exonerated in time continues to grow- even since DNA technology has been around- innocent people get sentenced to death. And appeals courts are not set up to revisit the critical question of actual guilt or innocence. Their purpose is only to make sure that the trial met constitutional standards of fairness, not that the jury reached the right conclusion.

That is why the appeals process can hinge on technical errors. But it is the only way defendants can get evidence of actual innocence heard by an appeals court. In too many cases, prosecutors (to their great discredit) have fought against post conviction testing of DNA evidence.

Because a lot of politicians and judges are very wasteful of your tax dollars and they are happy to do it.

Can any jurisdiction have a responsible death penalty protocol whereby the costs are similar or less expensive than life without parole cases?

Of course.

Virginia has executed 75% of those sent to death row within a 7.1 year average after sentencing, because of strict timelines for thorough appeals, a process validated through both state and federal courts.

All jurisdictions could copy that protocol and have a death penalty cheaper than a life sentence.

It is crucial to check the claims and methodology of the death penalty cost studies. Often they are either very deceptive or inaccurate, just as some studies which compare the costs of the death penalty vs life without parole.

Instead of an apples to apples comparison, we often find a kangaroos to apples comparison.

1) "Death Penalty Cost Studies: Saving Costs over LWOP"

http://homicidesurvivors.com/2010/03/21/death-pena...

2) "Duke (North Carolina) Death Penalty Cost Study: Let's be honest"

http://prodpinnc.blogspot.com/2009/06/duke-north-c...

(NOTE: A 2009 study, by one of these authors, found that by ending the death penalty NC might save $11 million , or about 1 penny ever third day/person. I have not read it, yet, but based upon this professors prior study, reviewed here, the death penalty likely saves money.)

3) Cost Savings: The Death Penalty

http://homicidesurvivors.com/2009/05/07/cost-savin...

4) See 4th comment down within comments:

The California Death Penalty Fraud:

Posted by dudleysharp on August 19, 2010 at 4:35 AM | Report this comment

Rebuttal to ACLU:

and A Rebuttal to "Cut This: The Death Penalty"(1)

Death Penalty vs Life Costs in California

http://www.eastbayexpress.com/ebx/are-capital-puni...

More cost reviews upon request.

What are the costs of not having the death penalty?

"The Death Penalty: More Protection for Innocents"

http://homicidesurvivors.com/2009/07/05/the-death-...

27 recent studies finding for deterrence, Criminal Justice Legal Foundation

http://www.cjlf.org/deathpenalty/DPDeterrence.html

"Deterrence and the Death Penalty: A Reply to Radelet and Lacock"

http://homicidesurvivors.com/2009/07/02/deterrence...

"Death Penalty, Deterrence & Murder Rates: Let's be clear"

http://prodpinnc.blogspot.com/2009/03/death-penalt...

A Death Penalty Red Herring: The Inanity and Hypocrisy of Perfection, Lester Jackson Ph.D.,

http://www.tcsdaily.com/article.aspx?id=102909A

What is the cost of not seeking justice?

ETHICAL/RELIGIOUS SUPPORT FOR THE DEATH PENALTY

"Death Penalty Support: Religious and Secular Scholars"

http://prodpinnc.blogspot.com/2009/07/death-penalt...

One the death penalty is carried out, it's final. You can't give the person their life back if it's later found they didn't deserve to be executed. So if the government is going to play God and decide who lives and who dies, shouldn't they have a duty and responsibility to make sure as much as possible that the person they are about to execute really and truly deserves it?

You know, Maria, I was questioning myself on the same thing. Because of the precedents when eyewitnesses were proven wrong, or when accused self-confessions were proven to be false, I have to conclude that if there are cases, we can't state with 100% accuracy the guilt, we have to think about other ways as opposed to assuming Lord's job.

Let's demand of our politicians to ensure to reform the Law, for example, giving also a life sentences for fraudulent suits or for false accusations involving court proceedings (such as that recent case of a whore, who falsely accused La-Cross athletes), with consequent life sentences to the accusers.

Then, let's demand that all, who have life sentences MUST work as much as it takes, to cover taxpayer's expense. What do you think?

Liberals exploit criminals for political gain, so, most oppose anything and everything that will expedite the process to execute those who are in states, where liberals have not led bans to execute murderers. Liberals exploit minorities and poor people who commit murder at many times the rate of people who are educated, thus, criminals qualify as a protected group by liberals.

Liberals claim any form of execution is cruel and unusual punishment, so they oppose every form of execution when lethal injections can end life without suffering, that's how animals are euthanized, no one wants their pet to suffer.

Liberals also manipulate the legal system, creating ridiculous amounts of appeals and too many rights for murderers.

Hollywood is constantly churning out movies to create the perception that innocent people are executed frequently. The liberal media will usually portray murderers who are members of preferred minorities more sympathetically. The media will make a story about an innocent person executed, front page news, they want you to think the law punishes their "preferred minorities" more harshly, refusing to acknowledge the truth, their "preferred minorities" commit more crime than other demographics.

If you ever look through a collection of killers who are in death row, you will see monsters who have done horrific crimes and wonder why liberals want someone who raped and murdered a child to escape capital punishment.

Liberals do not consider the cost to house and maintain murderers, they think funding is unlimited and if it causes strain on our capitalist society, then they can tell us why capitalism is a failure.

There are a lot of factors involved in our society's inability to execute murderers but the most common is certainly liberals who collectively do everything in their power to make our capitalist society fail.

EDIT- to house_broken- yes, you are right, over 50+ years ago, what you said was true, however in the last 50 Years, its the reverse, your ideology's civil rights plan, is "getting even" rather than equality for all, your preferred minorities get more favorable treatment, but don't forget they commit a highly disproportionate amount of the crimes; your ideology has done nothing good for minorities you want to get even instead of following Dr King's message to forgive and heal wounds, sadly you oppose fairness for all people regardless of their color or race.

I believe its mainly to hyper thoroughly check that they are infact guilty. Executing someone is a big deal. They wait years so as to see if any new evidence etc comes forward that might mean the person is actually innocent.

Well they are still entitled to make any and every appeal - and no doubt most of them do that, since death is utterly final and of course they want to avoid that end to their life. We support them because that is what civilized countries do.

Thanks to America's overtly racist history, many innocent people were falsely imprisoned based on their skin color. These same people were not allowed to testify against whites.

Moreover, the inmates on Death Row are disproportionately minorities.