Thesis advisor: Arthur Madigan / Catholic moral philosophers and theologians for centuries used Thomas Aquinas's defense of the death penalty as a point of reference in defending the state's right to execute. Recent Church documents such as Evangelium Vitae, however, seem to take a different approach to the question than Aquinas did. In secular contemporary treatments of the death penalty, Aquinas's account is often caricatured or simply overlooked. One of the reasons for this is the lack of a thorough treatment of the death penalty in the thought of Aquinas. This dissertation seeks to address that deficiency. I present Aquinas's account of capital punishment as an example of determining civil punishments through the exercise of practical reason. Aquinas's thought sanctions neither an absolute acceptance nor an absolute rejection of the death penalty; for him, this is not a question that admits of absolutes. Like other punishments, the death penalty is a determination made by human reason. Its justification depends on specific historical and cultural circumstances and on the needs of the political community, as well as on the severity of the offense. Killing a guilty person is not intrinsically evil, in Aquinas's view, but it is nonetheless a last resort, when nothing else can be done for the good of the community. It may be that recent Church documents have avoided making use of the Thomistic teaching on the death penalty, even where this could have made their reasoning clearer, for fear that such arguments would be misunderstood, or in order to make a clearer case for forgoing the penalty. If this dissertation contributes to our understanding of what Thomas actually says about CP, it will be helpful in reconciling the thought of John Paul II with the tradition of Catholic thought on capital punishment, as well as in offering a reasonable way for thinking about punishments in general. / Thesis (PhD) — Boston College, 2009. / Submitted to: Boston College. Graduate School of Arts and Sciences. / Discipline: Philosophy.

Made available in DSpace on 2015-03-03T19:27:57Z (GMT). No. of bitstreams: 0 Previous issue date: 18 / Coordenação de Aperfeiçoamento de Pessoal de Nível Superior / Nesta dissertação abordamos a cidade de Pelotas durante o final da primeira metade do século XIX (1830-1857), a partir da perspectiva das práticas de justiça. Utilizamos os mais variados tipos de fontes, desde processos-crimes, percorrendo jornais, e documentos administrativos da Província e do município. Primeiramente buscamos estudar a forma como foi imposta a questão da pena de morte na cidade; logo partimos para a análise dos projetos e da construção da primeira Casa Correcional da localidade. Paralela a estas instituições, nascia também a Polícia, primeiramente como Guarda Municipal Permanente, depois como Força Policial. Procuramos observar, então, como foram postos em prática estes “modelos europeus de civilização” no que concerne às práticas de justiça, mais especificamente as de punição e disciplina, dando ênfase para as reações das pessoas que viviam na cidade, principalmente a chamada camada “popular”. / The present dissertation approaches Pelotas city during the middle of the XIXth century (1830-1857), from the perspective of justice practices. It makes use of several kinds of sources, since criminal lawsuits, journals, and administrative documents deriving from the Province and from the municipal district. In first place, it approaches the imposition of death penalty, then analyses projects to construct the first “Correction Place” in the area. The birth of the police came with these institutions, at the beginning as Permanent Municipal Guard, later as Police Force. It observes the imposition of these “European civilization models” to the justice practices, specifically the punishment and disciplinary measures, with focus on people´s reactions, mainly the so called “popular” layer of the society

Justice Thurgood Marshall proposed a three-pronged postulate in his dissent in1972 in the Furman v. Georgia (408 U.S. 238) Supreme Court case. The American public is generally uninformed when it comes to the death penalty, and given information a "great mass of citizens" would be against it, unless their underlying beliefs were rootedin retribution (Furman v. Georgia, p. 363). These statements subsequently came to be known as the Marshall Hypothesis, and were deemed testable by researchers. This study examines the influence on death penalty opinion as a consequence of participating in a college class on the death penalty. Students in the class, who were either criminology majors or minors, were asked to take part in a questionnaire regarding their attitudes toward capital punishment at the beginning and at the end of the semester.Over the course of the class, students took part in a pre and post-test designed to measure their knowledge of the death penalty. This study correlated the amount of knowledge gained by each student with their respective death penalty attitudes. Results indicated that many in the class had little knowledge of the practice, application, and corollary effects of capital punishment. Those students who made the greatest amount of knowledge gains also reported a reduction in support for capital punishment. The acceptance of death penalty truths was not found to be related to a reduction in death penalty support. Further analysis, however, showed that those students who accepted these death penalty “truths” were also able to disregard death penalty “myths.” The present study concludes that support for the death penalty is directly reduced through increased knowledge gain, and indirectly reduced through truth acceptance as a function of death penalty “myth” abandonment.

This thesis examines Taiwan’s human rights development from 2000 until 2010. It looks at and compares the policies and action of Presidents Chen Shui-bian and Ma Ying-jeou in terms of three indicators of human rights: the implementation of the international human rights treaties (ICCPR and ICESCR), the establishment of a national human rights commission and the status of the death penalty. The case of Australia and its position in relation to the three key areas of this human rights study are analyzed for comparative purposes. Additionally, important historical human rights milestones and the beginnings of Taiwan’s democratization are introduced by way of an overview but the focus of this thesis is on the events of the last decade. In doing so, the overall aim of this study is to assess whether Taiwan has achieved its stated goal of becoming a human rights state.

The impact of race within the American criminal justice system has seen long-term debate and has been studied by numerous social scientists. This dissertation examines the criminal justice system by analyzing data created by the Tennessee courts to determine whether race impacts the administration of Tennessee’s death penalty. This dissertation examines whether race impacts the overall administration of Tennessee’s death penalty, a Tennessee prosecutor’s decision to seek death, and a Tennessee jury’s decision to impose death. The impact of race at each stage is analyzed by logistic regression to isolate the defendant’s race, the victim’s race, and the racial interaction between them. Prior empirical research shows black defendants whose victims are white are more likely to receive death than white defendants whose victims are white. Prior research shows defendants whose victims are white, regardless of the race of the defendant, are more likely to receive death than when victims are black. The regression analyses reveal after controlling for heinousness of crime and the defendant’s dangerousness that race is not a predictive factor in whether defendants are sentenced to death in the overall application of the death penalty. The findings show that white victim murders, irrespective of the defendant’s race, have slight predictive power in whether prosecutors seek the death penalty, but white victim cases have the least predictive power of all variables that impact prosecutorial decisions. Murders involving black defendants and white victims, irrespective of their racial relationship, decrease the likelihood a jury will return a death sentence. When testing the racial interaction of defendants and victims, the only relationship that is a significant predictor in the Tennessee death penalty are murders with white defendants and white victims. Based on qualitative data from interviews with Knox County criminal court judges, this can be explained by heinousness of crime.

This study analyzed case and sentencing data from 632 capital cases involving Black and White defendants and victims, processed in North Carolina from May 1990 through December 2002. Logistic regression analysis of all cases and race-specific data allowed assessment of the variable effects of jury acceptance of statutory aggravating and mitigating factors on capital sentencing outcomes (death versus life). The purpose was to evaluate the role race plays in shaping jury use of legally defined factors in capital sentencing. Significant variance in the effect of jury acceptance of aggravators was observed between Black and White defendants. Black defendants pay a higher premium in terms of the risk of a death sentence than do White defendants whose crimes are comparably aggravated. There was no overall disparity in the effect of jury acceptance of mitigatory factors observed, although certain mitigators reduced the risk of a death sentence significantly more for Black or White. Overall, the aggravators had a statistically significantly stronger effect on sentencing outcomes than did the mitigators, regardless of race, and on cases involving Black defendants, regardless of victim race. Racial invariance was not shown.

Disparities in the administration of capital punishment are a prominent social and political issue. While the focus of death penalty disparity research initially lay with the defendant and how the defendant’s race or ethnicity affects sentencing outcomes, only marginal support for offender effects has been found. A consistent finding, however, is that victim race has a significant effect on capital sentencing outcomes. Recent examinations of the joint effects of victim characteristics indicate that victim gender also has some influence in capital sentencing decisions. While these prior studies have examined the interactive effects of victim gender and victim race the current study proposes that victim-related variables other than race may be important components in understanding the female victim effect. This analysis is focused on understanding the joint effects of victim gender in terms of identifying an “innocent female victim” effect. Based on prior studies and theoretical perspectives, three hypotheses are proposed and tested here using a sub-population of capital cases in North Carolina between the years 1990 and 2007: 1. Cases with a female victim and male defendant will be more likely to result in the death penalty than other defendant-victim gender dyads, 2. Cases with a female victim and stranger defendant will be more likely to result in the death penalty than other dyads, and 3. Cases with a female victim who was not involved in illegal activity at the time of her victimization will be more likely to result in the death penalty than other dyads. The results indicate that victim conduct (illegal activity) and victim gender both play a role in jury sentencing recommendations, but regardless of victim conduct, cases with a female victim are the most likely to result in the death penalty. Therefore, this study finds marginal support for an “innocent female victim” effect in jury decisions to recommend the death penalty, but consistent support for a “female victim” effect. Conclusions and implications of the findings are discussed.

The potential influence of extralegal characteristics on the outcome of post-Furman capital cases (1972) has been a focus of criminal justice researchers and legal scholars. Much of this literature has assessed the impact of victim and defendant race on the likelihood of receiving the death penalty while a relatively underdeveloped body of research focuses on how victim sex may affect capital sentencing decisions. The present study uses focal concerns theory and the chivalry hypothesis to test the potential mediating effect of theoretical variables on the relationship between victim sex and juror capital sentence decision-making. In addition, it uses victim sex specific logistic regression models to examine if different theoretical and/or control variables are important predictors of receiving the death penalty for male victim cases versus female victim cases. Findings demonstrate that victim rape mediates the relationship between victim sex and juror death penalty decision-making. In addition, findings reveal that sex specific models better explain juror decision making than the full model including victims of both sexes and that different extralegal and legal characteristics predict juror decision to choose the death penalty in cases with male victims versus female victims. Theoretical and legal implications as well as directions for future research are discussed.

Several justifications exist for the death penalty, yet it is only recently that the concept of “closure” has come to serve as a rationale for American capital punishment. This contemporary justification promises murder victims’ families that the execution of their loved one’s murderer should provide them with “closure”—a contested word that typically denotes an end to the pain associated with their loved one’s murder. How and when this new narrative came about has garnered little scholarly attention, particularly as murder victims’ families begin to challenge closure as relevant to their healing. The goals of the current study seek to: 1) elucidate how closure entered the American death penalty debate; 2) illustrate the myriad meanings assigned to closure, identifying how various stakeholders have trafficked in the term’s use; 3) examine how closure has been used politically to legitimize death penalty practices and the state’s right to take life; and 4) critically analyze claims that closure has “symbolically transformed” the American death penalty today. The study employs discursive textual analysis of nearly 2500 American newspaper stories from 1989 to 2008, legislative hearings, legal case histories, academic and popular sources, and archival materials from American death penalty and victims’ rights groups during this twenty year period. The findings illustrate that closure entered death penalty discourse in the late 1980s, and reached a tipping point in news coverage in 2001 with Timothy McVeigh’s execution. While the term was used in nearly every way imaginable, the findings illustrate it was most prominently used in supporting secondary victims’ “right to view” the executions of their loved ones’ murderers and in justifying Timothy McVeigh’s execution for his role in the Oklahoma City Bombing. I argue that the media’s sensational portrayals of such historical moments allowed them to serve as “galvanizing events” ushering in closure as a powerful symbol in justifying the state’s right to take life and the view that executions are a form of “therapeutic justice.” Despite closure being used to support certain death penalty practices, the analyses presented here provide little support for the notion that closure has “symbolically transformed” American capital punishment today as has been suggested by some scholars. Closure is a small blip in print news coverage and does not resonate strongly with Americans’ support for capital punishment in national opinion polls. The study concludes with a critical examination of the role of closure as a contemporary, and empirically unchallenged, justification for the death penalty—one that serves as an empty promise for murder victims’ loved ones. / text

Mémoire numérisé par la Division de la gestion de documents et des archives de l'Université de Montréal