Davila 1

Huriel Davila

Dr. Sharity Nelson

ENGL 1302-218

10 May 2022

Capital Punishment: Factors into The Death Penalty

In the modern-day United States, capital punishment, also known as the death penalty,

has been considered the most controversial punishment in the criminal justice system.

Furthermore, there are various reasons for capital punishment being disputed for abolishment or

advocacy. Still, multiple experts and criminologists have looked at the factors that influence

capital punishment on the condemned. The three significant influences discussed by scholars as

inciting incite the death penalty are religion, defendant and victim characteristics, and a reason of

deterrence upon other criminals. These factors possibly prompt prosecutors to push for the death

penalty or follow up with the death penalty after a conviction (Pollock and Johnson 120). This

paper aims to analyze perspectives of religion, racial and demographic characteristics, and the

deterrence theory on the topic of capital punishment in America to determine credibility or truth

on how they affect their sentencing. Analyzing the subject of capital punishment reveals that the

most contentious issues revolve around racial biases, which are prosecutor characteristics and

beliefs.

Scholars have observed that religion may influence capital punishment in both defending

and prosecuting the condemned. Researchers Wendi Pollock and Andrew F. Johnson make a

case for district attorneys being driven by religious beliefs by stating, “These individuals may be

driven by political ideology, individual beliefs, personal bias, and external factors (122).

Similarly, Monica K. Miller and Brian H. Bornstein believe attorneys influenced jurors with their
 Davila 2

beliefs by reporting, “Religious arguments may also be influential because they evoke jurors’

emotions” (677). In contrast, scholars have called for a change in prosecutors from local to state

because religion gets in the way of the trial (Pollock and Johnson 122). Compared to what other

scholars say, religion in courts receives little empirical attention (Miller and Bornstein 677). The

study done by Miller and Bornstein suggests that courts “could be justified in their concerns over

religious appeals. Specifically, appeals by defense counsel can be detrimental to the defendant

and can prevent jurors’ proper weighing of aggravators and mitigators” (682), and one of their

theories is “that a defendant who has converted to Christianity is treated more leniently” (681).

To explain, a mitigation factor can greatly lessen the severity of the crime, but an aggravator can

greatly worsen it. Therefore, they reveal that religion impacts the mitigators or aggravators of a

crime in some way. Their statement tells that the death penalty can be sought after based on

loose ideas or ideologies and can be retracted based on the defendant. Thus, these studies show

that religion influences the death penalty, even if it is a mitigator or an aggravator. Furthermore,

these researchers weigh the religious impact on sentencing someone, to capital punishment. They

agree that it has an effect and analyze that both the defendant and attorney’s religious views can

have a say in their capital punishment trial.

Researchers have concluded that a defendant’s racial characteristics significantly impact a

defendant’s chances of getting the death penalty. Researchers Pollock and Johnson mentioned a

individuals’ demographics contribute to being sentenced to capital punishment because they are

considered non-white (121). These non-white races could be races like Asian, black, or others.

Prosecutors are mentioned as biased towards these non-white races. In support of this, according

to researcher M. Cholbi, African Americans have a higher chance of being sentenced to capital

punishment than a convicted white individual (258). In perspective, white males run a lesser risk
 Davila 3

of being punished by death than if it were any other race, specifically black individuals.

Additionally, researcher Kelly Oliver provides a different view by reporting that some

abolitionists see the death penalty as unequally discriminating against African Americans (138).

This report comes from an additional source of information, but they are practically saying the

same thing. Researchers Pollock, Johnson, Cholbi, and Oliver indicate that race has a significant

toll on how African Americans are treated under the likelihood of being sentenced to capital

punishment. They report capital punishment as being racially motivated based on the

condemner’s characteristics, leading to the crime being seen as a death penalty degree level.

According to research done by scholars, victim characteristics are also found to punish

criminals greatly. Once again, researchers Pollock and Johnson indicate that victims that are

female or white incite prosecutors to seek the death penalty (124). These authors also analyze

that a defendant’s age grants for a higher chance of prosecution (121). Contrary to this source,

Cholbi reports that the age of a victim, instead of a defendant, will act as deciding factor to see if

the condemned is sentenced to a higher punishment (268). Pollock, Johnson, and Cholbi also

consider the victims’ characteristics and report them as a leading aggravator or mitigator in a

death sentence. Research suggests a victim’s demographics is as much an influencer of capital

punishment as is a defendant’s demographic. These articles challenge the conclusion arrived by

the researchers that emphasize defendants’ demographics and highlight the victim as an inciter

that enacts the death penalty as a possible punishment for the condemned.

Scholars have observed that prosecutors and courts alike use the theory of deterrence as a

reason to sentence the condemned to capital punishment. The theory of deterrence is a reason

why a punishment is given. It is believed to stop other criminals from performing criminal deeds.

The last factor that determines if a defendant is sentenced under capital punishment is a reason of
 Davila 4

deterrence. Many prosecutors and courts use the theory of deterrence to push for capital

punishment, but scholars have questioned deterrence theory. According to researchers Gordon P.

Waldo and Wesley Myers, deterrence was not found in crime after an execution (542). In

agreement with this, researchers John K. Cochran et al. found that there was no apparent change

in crime after a study done by them, which lessened the support for deterrence in crime (9).

However, he also found that an increase in stranger homicides was noticed (9). The authors call

it a case of brutalization which is the opposite of deterrence because it increases crime.

Researcher George Schedler mentions this as he states that criminals are not deterred because of

poor publicity (48). Prosecutors then use the theory of deterrence with ignorance of the various

studies shown. Schedler provides a reason for why the death penalty is not deterring criminals

and supports what Cochran et al. found in their study of the increasing homicides.

In conclusion, capital punishment is an everlasting topic in the criminal justice world.

Scholars in the field provide an abundance of analysis on why capital punishment is used as a

punishment for individuals. This topic is undoubtedly essential to the criminal justice community

because researchers have continuously questioned and challenged the court system on the issue

of capital punishment. This study highlights and summarizes the main factors that influence the

death penalty. People constantly watch as the death toll rises in Texas and other parts of the

country because of capital punishment alone. Scholars need to look over the elements analyzed

in this paper and forge their research to provide better coverage of the death penalty. As

mentioned in this paper, prevalent ideas that surfaced in these sources were a matter of

characteristics, religion, and a theory of deterrence. All these authors seemed to agree on the

same thing and supported each other’s statements. They agree that the capital punishment system

is not a perfect process.

 Davila 5

Works Cited

Cholbi, M. “Race, Capital Punishment, and the Cost of Murder.” Philosophical Studies, vol. 127,

no. 2, Jan. 2006, pp. 255–282. ProQuest, doi:10.1007/s11098-005-4958-6.

Cochran, John K., et al. “Deterrence or Brutalization? an Impact Assessment of Oklahoma's

Return to Capital Punishment*.” Criminology, vol. 32, no. 1, Feb. 1994, pp. 107–134.

ProQuest, doi:10.1111/j.1745-9125.1994.tb01148.x.

Miller, Monica K., and Brian H. Bornstein. “The Use of Religion in Death Penalty Sentencing

Trials.” Law and Human Behavior, vol. 30, no. 6, 19 Oct. 2006, pp. 675–684. ProQuest,

doi:10.1007/s10979-006-9056-6.

Oliver, Kelly. “Death as a Penalty and the Fantasy of Instant Death.” Law and Critique, vol. 27,

no. 2, 5 Apr. 2016, pp. 137–149. ProQuest, doi:10.1007/s10978-016-9181-4.

Pollock, Wendi, and Andrew F. Johnson. “Life or Death: What Factors Impact the Decision?”

Crime, Law and Social Change, vol. 75, no. 2, 7 Jan. 2021, pp. 119–139. ProQuest,

doi:10.1007/s10611-020-09929-8.

Schedler, George. “Capital Punishment and Its Deterrent Effect.” Social Theory and Practice, vol.

4, no. 1, 1976, pp. 47–56. ProQuest, doi:10.5840/soctheorpract1976413.

Waldo, Gordon P., and Wesley Myers. “Criminological Research and the Death Penalty: Has

Research by Criminologists Impacted Capital Punishment Practices?” American Journal of

Criminal Justice, vol. 44, no. 4, 16 Apr. 2019, pp. 536–580. ProQuest,

doi:10.1007/s12103-019-09478-4.