dp01comment

Comment on �Pro-DP� websites

I have received a number of email messages from students (and others who have found the website for my DP class) asking why I don�t include material from proponents of the DP (especially several pro-DP websites) who offer a variety of arguments in support of the DP.

My usual answer to these inquiries is that I am simply not interested in �arguments� for or against the DP. As a criminologist and sociologist, I am interested in using social science research to analyze the DP as a social institution, that is, I am interested in understanding the history of the DP, how it has changed over time, how it works, its impact on various aspects of society, etc. In my class, my goal is to present the best research-based information available about the DP so that students can make up their own minds about whether or not to support, oppose, or simply ignore the DP and related issues.

More to the point, with regard to the pro-DP websites that are usually mentioned, the authors of these websites usually employ simplistic �schoolchild� arguments and illogic (and sometimes selective �evidence�) to support views that reflect only their own personal biases. They are typically unfamiliar with the social science research on the topics they discuss, and in support of their arguments refer to and quote police, judges, politicians, and even syndicated columnists, most of whom are equally ignorant of the research on the issues. Not surprisingly, opponents of the DP often employ the same methods in their arguments, and with the same results � simply reinforcing their own biases, and appealing to those with similar biases, with misinformation.

Consider the following �debate� on DP discrimination (both arguments are based on roughly accurate statistics):

DP opponent: The evidence is clear that the DP is racially discriminatory: minorities make up only about 20% of the population of the US but make up about 50% of those sentenced to death. Minority �over-representation� on death rows (relative to population) is clear evidence of racial discrimination!

DP proponent: The evidence really shows that the DP is not discriminatory: minorities commit about 55% of all homicides in the US but make up only about 50% of those sentenced to death. Minority �under-representation� on death rows (relative to homicides, which is the proper measure) is direct evidence that racial discrimination is a thing of the past (or maybe that there is some discrimination against white defendants!).

Many people find the first �argument� above convincing - until they hear the second argument, at which point it appears �obvious� that the claim of discrimination is nothing but a �myth� promoted by opponents of the DP to serve their own purposes.

But in fact both arguments are flawed � both draw incorrect conclusions from more or less accurate (but incomplete!) data. In order to accurately understand the issue of DP discrimination, you would need to know how homicide statistics relate to race and ethnicity, the defendant/victim combinations of both homicides and death penalty cases, and historical patterns of racial discrimination.

For example:

Homicides tend to be intra-racial (whites kill whites, blacks kill blacks, etc.). Typically about 80-90% of homicides are intra-racial and about 10-20% are inter-racial (this varies from place to place and over time.)

Historically, minorities (and poor people) have not been executed for killing each other, rather they have been executed for killing white victims (this is a typical historical pattern of discrimination).

If the DP is not discriminatory, relatively few DP cases should involve minorities accused of killing whites � typically minority defendant, white victim cases make up less than 10% of homicides, so all other things being equal (remember this for a moment), they should make up less than 10% of death sentences as well. In fact, though, they make up 30-40% of DP cases, and often more in states with large minority populations and a history of racial discrimination (like most southern states!). Visually the disparities look something like this:

So is this clear evidence of racial discrimination? The answer is still - No.

Remember the qualification �all other things being equal� � in fact there is still another possible explanation for the disparities � minority/white cases might be heavily over-represented not because of discrimination, but because they involve more �aggravated� murders than the other cases (for example, multiple murders, child murders, murders committed in the course of crimes, etc.). Not surprisingly, this question has been the focus of much of the research on discrimination. Once you accurately understand the patterns of disparities, this is the key question. So what has the research found? Overwhelmingly that minority/white cases are not significantly more aggravated than other cases.

Only after going through such an exhaustive and complex research process can we now identify two patterns of discrimination in death sentencing: minorities accused of killings whites are heavily over-represented, while minorities accused of killing other minorities are heavily under-represented, and both patterns are consistent with historical patterns of racial discrimination.