Casey Anthony Death Penalty

As a species, humans can be vengeful and spiteful. Especially when it comes down to the justice and injustice when a wrong has been committed. For instance, on August 5, 2008, Casey Anthony was formerly charged with child neglect and slaughter of her baby. This caused quite the stir up among people who felt Ms. Anthony’s baby will not receive the justice that she deserves due to the fact there was no concrete evidence. Many believed that Casey should receive the death penalty to make up for the loss of her baby’s life because various people thought Casey was the one who allegedly killed her own child. It’s practically a humanly instinct to ask “Eye for an eye?” After a multitude of trials, the jury reached a verdict that Casey Anthony was not

Supposedly capital punishment was created to deter criminals from committing horrible acts of rape and murder, however, today judges and the jury are eager to make anyone the scapegoat for the crimes committed; even the innocent. Nowadays, the judicial system becomes more discriminatory, toward gender, income, and race, in capital crime cases because of the desire to find, what is hoped to be, justice. When someone is convicted of any crime and is in the process of being arrested it is a law that his or her Miranda Rights must be stated before the arrest takes place. One of the major rights stated is “ If you cannot afford an attorney one will be appointed to you.” Now, if the person being arrested has a higher income normally the attorney hired is very experienced and can make the most guilty person sound innocent. On the other hand, if the person being convicted has a lower income and has to receive their attorney from the court there is a high chance of losing the case. John Gross of the National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers stated, “Many of us don 't consider them to be realistic if you expect quality representation” (qtd. in Bromnell 2013). This demonstrates that if someone who is convicted cannot afford a lawyer than they have a very likely chance of losing the case. This is discriminatory toward the lower wage income population. Also, there have been many situations where the court has been discriminatory toward certain people depending on gender and race. A study by professor David Baldus of the University of Iowa Law School and his colleagues commenced when racial lines arises in McCleskey v. Kemp, a black man was convicted in a Georgia trial court of armed robbery and murder. This court case helped bring up some of these statistics: “Fewer than 40% of Georgia homicide cases involve white victims, but in 87% of the cases in which a death