|
|
Death Penalty in America,
Legal Studies 485, Spring 2003 |
04-10-03, Group Discussion Questions
1. A jury which is selected to sit on a capital case must be what’s called a “death qualified” jury. What does this mean? (P. 334) Here are some of the questions potential jurors for the Kristen Gilbert case had to answer on a written questionnaire:
- Do you have an opinion about the death penalty? If so, what is your opinion?
- Has your opinion about the death penalty changed over time? If so, how?
- Is it your opinion that the death penalty should never be imposed, regardless of circumstances? If so, please explain.
- Is it your opinion that anyone who commits a murder intentionally should get the death penalty, regardless of circumstances? If so, please explain.
- Is it your opinion that anyone who intentionally murders two or more people should get the death penalty, regardless of circumstances? If so, please explain.
- Do you believe that the death penalty should be carried out more than, less than, or about the same as, it is now being carried out in the United States? Please explain your answer.
- Do you belong to, or have you contributed money to, any organization that takes a position for or against the death penalty, or any organization that supports the rights of victims of crime? If so, please specify the organization and describe the nature of your support or involvement.
Do you think these questions should be part of the jury selection process? Explain. How might the requirement of a “death qualified” jury skew jury verdicts? Do you think people who support the death penalty would be more or less likely to convict?
2. The author characterizes the jury’s role in the sentencing phase of a capital trial as deciding a “moral question that has not “true” or “false” answer: Is the defendant a person who deserves to live or to die?” Do you agree with the author that the law “gives the jury no definitive guidance.” (P. 335) How might you change this?
3. Look at Table 24-1. What are the topics that jurors discussed a “great deal” or a “fair amount”? Do you see any differences in topics discussed by juries that give life sentences and juries that gave the death penalty? How do you account for this?
4. According to the authors, over 60% of the jurors discussed the future dangerousness of the defendant a “great deal” or a “fair amount” in their deliberations. Why do the authors think this is a problem? (pp. 338-339)
5. The author concludes that jurors avoid taking personal responsibility for their decision by believing that the law required their decision. (P. 342) If this is true, what is its impact on the argument that jury decisions are representative of community standards on the death penalty?