The bridge connecting pontius pilate's sentencing of Jesus to the new jersey death penalty study commission's concerns over executing the innocent: When human beings with inherently human flaws determine guilt or innocence and life or death
David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Ezio Di Nucci
Jonathan Jenkins Ichikawa
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
The goal of this discussion is to use Pontius Pilate's sentencing of Jesus as a metaphor for our imperfect criminal justice system as it relates to capital punishment. There are few injustices that are more unacceptable than when an innocent defendant is convicted of a crime he did not commit. Such injustices are especially egregious when the defendant is wrongfully convicted of capital murder and faces execution. Such wrongful convictions can be attributed to a variety of reasons with one single denominator; we as humans are imperfect and the way we administer criminal justice is imperfect, Pilate, the Roman Governor of Judea sentenced an innocent Jesus to execution on the cross. The arrest, trial and sentencing of Jesus is instructive for 21st Century capital punishment jurisprudence. First, Jesus was innocent. Second, Jesus represented himself pro se with no legal representation. The trial of Jesus was less a trial and more a murder motivated by greed, ambition and dishonesty. Characteristics that are so inherently human. New Jersey's cutting edge decision to abolish capital punishment was a result of a report filed by the New Jersey Death Penalty study Commission. The Commission was very concerned with the very real possibility of executing an innocent capital defendant, in part because of the fact that simply, we as humans are as imperfect as our criminal justice system.
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server
Configure custom proxy (use this if your affiliation does not provide a proxy)
|Through your library||
References found in this work BETA
No references found.
Citations of this work BETA
No citations found.
Similar books and articles
Jay D. Aronson & Simon A. Cole, Science and the Death Penalty: Dna, Innocence, and the Debate Over Capital Punishment in the United States.
Patrick Lenta & Douglas Farland (2008). Desert, Justice and Capital Punishment. Criminal Law and Philosophy 2 (3):273-290.
Thom Brooks (2004). Retributivist Arguments Against Capital Punishment. Journal of Social Philosophy 35 (2):188–197.
Adina Nicoleta Gavrilă (2011). Should the Death Penalty Be Abolished? Arguments for and Against the Centuries-Old Punishment. Journal for Communication and Culture 1 (2):82-98.
Attila Ataner (2006). Kant on Capital Punishment and Suicide. Kant-Studien 97 (4):452-482.
Larry Alexander (1983). Retributivism and the Inadvertent Punishment of the Innocent. Law and Philosophy 2 (2):233 - 246.
William A. Edmundson (2002). Afterword: Proportionality and the Difference Death Makes. Criminal Justice Ethics 21 (2):40-43.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads3 ( #643,844 of 1,934,424 )
Recent downloads (6 months)0
How can I increase my downloads?