The document discusses issues with fairness in death penalty trials for African Americans. It argues that poverty leads to higher crime rates and less access to high-profile attorneys among African Americans. It also notes concerns about cruel and unusual punishment, and that DNA evidence has exonerated people on death row. The author believes the death penalty is acceptable only when backed by DNA evidence, video evidence, or a confession, to avoid executing innocent people.

1. Kristi King
Texas Wesleyan University
Intro Criminal Justice Fall 2011
Blog Comment: Death Penalty

2. There are many issues related to African-Americans not receiving fair trials in the United
States as compared to other races. It is thought that because district attorneys are predominately
white, that their racisms reflect convictions. I do believe that it plays part, but I also think there
are other reasons including the statistics, which consistently rank African-Americans at the
highest rate of poverty in terms of race in the United States. Poverty is synonymous with crime.
So mathematically, there are more African-Americans arrested every year. Though the state will
provide representation if the defendant cannot afford one him or herself, I think it is safe to say
that a court appointed attorney is far from ideal for anyone facing a capitol conviction. Figures
show other races have more money to spend on high profile attorneys, hence acquittal, and visa
versa for those represented by court appointed attorneys. Whatever the case may be, we have
had so many issues in regards to the death penalty since our country was founded especially in
regards to cruel and unusual punishment. Because of these concerns, and the sheer fact that
persons on death row, have been exonerated since DNA advancements, it seems most fitting that
no one in the United States from here on out should be put to death unless there is DNA evidence,
a video of the crime, or a confession. No one should be executed based on eyewitness testimony
alone. Eyewitness testimony is not reliable, and has been proven so time after time. I am all for
the death penalty, but apart from the last twenty of the past two-hundred years, we did not have
the ability to win convictions without eye-witness testimony, circumstantial evidence,
confessions, fingerprints and/or other forms of evidence that are sometimes ambiguous in nature.
Now that we have these advancements to actually prove whether a defendant committed a crime
beyond any doubt, then we should utilize them, which in turn will eliminate the execution of an
innocent person on death row.