In the last few decades, it has been observed that the judicial systems have been convicting individuals without enough evidence. Some victims have greatly suffered after they have been convicted with little evidence. One would argue that executing a suspect without enough evidence poses morality issues. Execution should be based on the significance of the evidence. It is immoral to execute an individual when sufficient evidence does not exist, since an individual innocently suffers. Executing someone without sufficient evidence does not make moral sense. The court systems need to embrace fairness as one of its key objectives. Executing someone with little evidence does not just undermine fairness, but also morality.
I do not believe that the issues that have emerged with the execution of capital punishment will come to an end soon. This is because these issues have prevailed with the knowledge of governments and the executing bodies, and they have shown little effort to solve the issue.
Even if governments came up with measures to address the issues concerning capital punishment, capital punishment should not be applied frequently. On the one hand, capital punishment can be described as an immoral and discriminatory form of punishment. Human beings do not possess the right to take away the lives of any human beings. In relation to this, it comes out clearly that Governments should not take away the life of any individual. Governments should not ignore the dignity and the precious gift of life. The frequent use of capital punishment as a form of punishment will indicate how governments have devalued human life. On the other hand, some religious books (written with research synopsis), such as the Bible warn against judging others and strictly condemn killers. For this reason, capital punishment should be applicable. The modern world presents a more civilized world. Courts should embrace the humanitarian factor. Everyone should understand that criminals should not be treated in the similar manner that they treated their victims. Lastly, capital punishment is a lenient punishment for criminals contrary to what many people think. One cannot compare the sufferings that a criminal would go through when serving a 40-years jail term to capital punishment. This proves capital punishment as a lenient form of punishment.
From the moral perspective, I do not think that it was right to prosecute Todd Williams. This case of Todd Willingham can be viewed as a total failure or miscarriage of justice. One cannot imagine how a court can make such a serious ruling without sufficient evidence. The court system ought to exhibit fairness and equity to all people, victims and suspects included. The court did not show any fairness to Todd. The fire experts carried their investigations using the wrong methods. This clearly indicates that the fire experts presented false evidence. It is beyond reasonable doubt that the court acted immorally in sentencing Todd Willingham.
I believe that the court wanted to find justice for the murdered children. However, it seems immoral to find justice by executing an innocent person. One cannot ignore the fact that judges never considered the testimony given by his wife. His wife clearly indicated that Todd never harmed his children and he could not have killed them. The intensity of the immorality comes out clearly when Todd got executed even after the report indicating his innocence.
I do not believe that the conviction of Todd was good from the utilitarian viewpoint. In the utilitarian point of view, the benefits of the action taken outweigh the consequences. However, in this case, the action taken seems to be immoral and it does not provide any good.
