of BAe a alban roe? I <2 The Jewish Tradition and FLusiDa sTATECapital Punishment UNIVERSITY LIBRARIES ELIE SPITZ YAN 97 2001 TALLAHASSEE, FLORIDA Jewish sacred text is viewed by th Jewish people's relationship and tal Jew like myself as a product of the cof what is ethical ‘ages have precedent value for con temporary Jewish courts. Moreover, ‘mentary and insight which provides us wi ‘experience and a connectedness to the wellspring of our people's past. time, we must approach the wisdom of our sages with bifoca noting their enduring holdings while appreciating the unique variables of our own time. ‘Asa system of erimin: regard to punishment in general and the death penal ment was not an ethical problem for the Bible, Indec ‘a whole range of offenses, from witchera {or execut system today. “There are three overarching ob be found in the Bible tives for punishment al order ‘condor le presents God the Creator as deeply invested in the Immoral practices are abhorrent to God and cause God to feel angry: ‘he Lewish Tradition and Cepital Punishment 3s because he zealously took up God's (Num, 25:13). ‘The execution of moral offenders appeased God because it was a correction of the moral order. It was not ‘offender who needed punishment, but the revolted by the crime of murder. In the Book of Numbers, reflecting the earlier language of he sory of Cain and Abe Gen, 410-1), God dears You shall ; for blood pollutes the land, and the land can d upon it except by the blood of him who moral God demands punishment of wrong- der, which is imprinted in creation specific need for execution for the Even before Abraham arrived on the biblical scene, God “Whoever sheds the blood of man, by man shall his blood jem interpreting these words as connoting compen: ing, because retribution was inherently inexact and therefore unjust (BT Baba ‘Talmud, however, never rejected execution as an st punishment. Professor Moshe Greenberg suggests that talion for ‘murder was indeed a moral step in the Near East. The death penalty prevented the rich person from bu > “people should hear and be afrai ing an execution the Bible even commande mn the corpse of the offender should be hung for Although te corps had tos taken down when igo dak, ot of reaps for the deterrent val are quite rare. M system through interpretation of the Bi capital cases. the Talmud, who developed a legal imposed an array of restrictions onoF ‘To obtain a capital conviction two eres forewarsed the pote Crime, Circumstantial evidence, no matter how compelling, Substitute for the required second witness. The witnesses were questioned only ‘when separated from each other. Questions of identifi and differences even in such marginal matters as the color of the accused's garme ic constituted reason for exclusion of a witness's 1. David Bleich, “Capital Punishment in a Noachide Code”). A confession by a suspect was inadmissible (BT Sanh. 9) “These extraordinarily strict demands, meant fo prevent mistaken ident {ora situation in which execution would have become very rare. We do how rare because the Romans eliminated capital punishment at least forcy year before the Temple was destroy jurisprudence no longer had standing to impose the death pena the “rules of evidence” and the famous statement in Mishnah Makkot (1:10): that puts « man to death once in seven years is called destructive. ben Azatiah says: Or once in seventy years. Rabbi Tasfon and Rabbi death, ‘thus multiplied the murderers ‘This debate as to the detertent effect of capital punishment became moot for ‘destruction of the Temple. For according to the agreed the required sentencing court ich includes the Noachide law for non ‘permits executions. The Noachide law, which binds non-Jews to force (BT Sanh, 56-60; Maimonides, Mishneh Torah, for us as Ametican Jews: should our government begin executions agai earnest? ‘While not condemned by safeguards since execution ‘impose the same stringent re good reasons why we as U.S. citizens should do so. We live ‘option which ous tradition lacked, namely, prisons. dition 48 immoral, the death per versible. Although rabbinic aut IW perstasi This Jewish demand for:Ms References chide Code,” In Jesh Law in Our Siminat woud not be guitess and escape : ans Bloch RD ye palace United Synagonse, 1985 the strongest argument for the take into account the plight of he murderer ‘and even gain freedom down the road, "The Bible is clear: midat keneged midah, measure should be met wit sentence without probation, which is appropriate for vere-enough punishment that can be e: ither, evidence that quick sentencing does risonment, Moreover, our rabbis emphasized the need for a swi {quick implementation of the sentence, Toward that end the American syste jor repair. The solution is quicker and surer sentences rather than these times of ris we rust do the dramatic and “up the ant ‘our punishments, even if only to see whether it makes a difference. ‘The rabbinic response to increased crime was just the opposite, The Talmud in Avodah Zarah (Bb) relates that: Proponents of the death penal ‘years prior tothe destruction of the Second Temple. the Sanhedrin moved ihe Temple and met in the marketplace, so as not to judge ca ‘What ‘was the eason? Because they recognized the protiferation of they were unable to judge properly thos they relocated so as not to pass the death ‘This passage of Talmud suggests that when the crime rates increases, far from further implementing the death pen: (errent effect and thus the jus mand addressing the problem of erime, but capital punishment is the wrong address. In conclusion, our tradition teaches us sing to the 1e death penalty should not be used f ‘we shoul t and as sentencing ‘on death row. Today ute for the ince their speed to serve as a de