Sipple: Death penalty should still be option for certain ‘heinous’ crimes


Delaware is seeking to eliminate the death penalty, and I generally agree with that move. The main reason is that there are numerous cases where an innocent person has been executed or nearly executed. Thankfully, we have groups like the Innocence Project that have successfully gotten individuals exonerated and saved their lives.

But what I think we need is a new verdict. Right now, it’s “beyond a shadow of a doubt” to convict. That should remain, with no death penalty. I would suggest we add a verdict of “beyond a shadow of a doubt,” for which the accused would get the death penalty.

A person goes into a theater and kills innocent people. A person goes into a school or a supermarket and kills for no reason other than to kill. That person should be convicted beyond a shadow of a doubt. Appeals should be kept to a minimum.

While I agree that the death penalty has not been much of a deterrent, I think it should still be an option on the more heinous crimes.

Stan Sipple


Reader reactions, pro or con, are welcomed at civiltalk@iniusa.org.

Members and subscribers make this story possible.
You can help support non-partisan, community journalism.