Embed
Email

Deterrence and the Death Penalty

Document Sample

Shared by: cuiliqing
Categories
Tags
Stats
views:
1
posted:
11/1/2011
language:
English
pages:
93
Deterrence and the Death Penalty









Llad Phillips

Outline

 The Death Penalty

 Arguments

 Philosophical and moral (lexicographic ordering)

 Practical: Is it a deterrent?

• Impact on the criminal justice system: Detention (prison

building era) dominates



 Operation of the Death Penalty

 Homicide and Executions









Llad Phillips 2

VI. Lecture Six: “Deterrence and the Death Penalty”,

Professor Phillips



Ch. 10 (P&V) "Isolating Deterrence Using the

Simultaneous Equation System"



References: Gary Becker, "Crime and Punishment:

An Economic Approach" Journal of Political Economy,

March/April 1968 (RBR)









Llad Phillips 3

 http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-

7532034279766935521









Llad Phillips 4

What purpose did the execution serve?



 Deterrence? Other Saddams? (The Hague)



 Detention? No



 Rehabilitation? No



 Retribution?









Llad Phillips 5

Llad Phillips 6

1976

Supreme

Court

Reinstates

Death

Penalty









Llad Phillips 7

Economic Conditions and Crime

 California Crime Index Levels Off in the

New Millenium









Llad Phillips 8

CA Crime Index Per 1000 & CA Misery Index in % , 1952-2007





45.00



40.00

CA Misery Index

CA Crime Index Per 1000

35.00



30.00



25.00

Rate









20.00



15.00



10.00



5.00



0.00

1940 1950 1960 1970 1980 1990 2000 2010

Year



Llad Phillips 9

California Homicide rate per 100,000: 1952-2007

16

1980

14



12



10



8



6



4



2

55 60 65 70 75 80 85 90 95 00 05



HOMICIDE

Llad Phillips 10

Damages: US Violence, 1993

Offense Reported

Loss Rate Damages,

Offenses Billions, $

Homicide $1,191,000 24,526 $46.8

Rape $87,000 104,806 $9.1

Assault $15,000 1,135,099 $17.0

Total $72.9



Source: National Institute of Justice, Victim Costs and Consequences (1996)



Llad Phillips 11

Increase in CA Homicides

 2002 to 2003: at least 10 more homicides

 @$1,191,000, increased damages of $11.9

million, minimum

 2003: 2402 homicides, 6.7/100,000

 @$1,191,000, total damages of $ 2.86 billion

 2004: 2392 homicides, 6.5/100,000

 2005: 2503 homicides, 6.8/100,000





http://caag.state.ca.us/





Llad Phillips 12

Llad Phillips 13

Llad Phillips 14

Schematic of the Criminal Justice System

Causes ?

Weak Link



Offense Crime Generation

Rate Per Expected

Capita Cost of

Punishment

(detention,

deterrence)

Expenditures







Crime Control



Llad Phillips 15

Ca Crime Index Per 1000 and Misery Index (percent)1952-2005





45.00

CA Misery Index

40.00 CA Crime Index Per 1000



35.00



30.00



25.00









Rate

20.00



15.00



10.00



5.00



0.00

1940 1950 1960 1970 1980 1990 2000 2010

Year





California Prisoners Per Capita, 1952-2005





0.005



0.0045



0.004



0.0035



0.003

Rate









0.0025



0.002



0.0015



0.001



0.0005



0

1940 1950 1960 1970 1980 1990 2000 2010

Llad Phillips Year

16

Questions About Crime

 Does the Expected Severity of Punishment

Deter Crime?

 expected severity = probability of punishment *

severity of punishment

 e.g. in LA County: 0.005*death penalty

 Why Do We Keep Building Prisons at Great

Expense to Warehouse Convicts?

 Doesn’tdeterrence work?

 Do we have to rely on detention?







Llad Phillips 17

Controversy About the Death

Penalty

 Death penalty is the most severe sentence.

 Does it deter crime?

 Opponents of the death penalty say no.

• Their evidence? Critiques of studies that indicate the death

penalty is a deterrent.



 Why are so few murderers who receive the

death sentence executed in California?

 Deathsentence appeases the proponents.

 Few executions appeases the opponents.







Llad Phillips 18

Llad Phillips 19

France was the

last Western

European Country

to abandon the

death Penalty in

1977

Llad Phillips 20

Llad Phillips 21

Public Opinion: Do You Believe in Capital Punishment?



80





70





60

Percent in Favor









50





40





30

Roper Poll

20 Harris Poll



10





0

1960 1965 1970 1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005

Year





http://www.albany.edu/sourcebook

Llad Phillips 22

Gallup Poll Which is the Better Penalty For Murder?, 1985-2006





70

death penalty

life without parole

60





50





40

Percent









30





20





10





0

1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005 2010

Year







http://www.albany.edu/sourcebook/

Llad Phillips 23

Executions in the US 1930-2007



http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs





Peak to Peak: About 65 years









Llad Phillips 24

Bureau of Justice Statistics



Peak to Peak: 50 years









Llad Phillips 25

Nikolai Kondratieff (1892-1938)

Brought to attention in

Joseph Schumpeter’s Business

Cycles (1939)









Llad Phillips 26

2008-2014:

Hard Winter



Llad Phillips 27

Policy Impact of Opponents to

the Death Penalty

 As an instrument for crime control,

deterrence has been a casualty of the

argument about the death penalty.

 The argument: if the death penalty does not

deter murderers, then deterrence must not work

as a control.

 As a consequence, society relies more and

more on detention for crime control.

 Society builds more and more prisons.



Llad Phillips 28

Homicide in Los Angeles County

 1990-1994: 9442

homicides

 Increasing number of

gang murders

> 40 % of the total

 Only 1 in 3 murders

leads to punishment

 gang killings are harder

to solve







Llad Phillips 29

Clearance Ratio, CA 1997-2004









Llad Phillips 30

Clearance Ratio, US 1976-2005









Llad Phillips 31

Llad Phillips 32

US Homicides by Circumstance: 76-05









Llad Phillips 33

Branching Diagram





unsolved

46%

other

9442 homicides

in LA County 13%

54% dismissed

solved

or not guilty

87% 32%

arrest and

prosecution

(47%)

68%

guilty (32%)







Llad Phillips 34

Branching Diagram, Continued

dismissed

or not guilty

Manslaughter

50% 15 years to life

(7.0%)

Guilty (32%) 25 years to life

50% (5.0%)

1st & 2nd degree

murder (16%)

life without parole

(3.5%)

3.1%

death sentence

( 0.5%)







Llad Phillips 35

Stable



Down

Up









Llad Phillips 37

Who has benefited the most

from the decline in the homicide

rate in the nineties?

Who is the victim, family, friend

or stranger?









http://caag.state.ca.us/ Homicide in California, 1998

Llad Phillips 40

U.S.









Llad Phillips 41

Death Sentences Commuted:US

400



350



300 Commuted





250

Number









200



150



100



50



0

1968





1970





1972





1974





1976





1978





1980





1982





1984





1986





1988





1990





1992

Year



Llad Phillips 42

Executions in the United States

Sentenced Commuted Executed

400





350





300



250

Number









200



150



100





50



0

1968





1970





1972





1974





1976





1978





1980





1982





1984





1986





1988





1990





1992

Year



Llad Phillips 43

Administration of Capital Sentences in the US







Stock

Inflow Outflow



Sentenced to Death Prisoners on Sentences

Death Row Commuted,

Executions









Llad Phillips 44

Prisoners on Death Row: US

3000





2500



Prisoners on Death Row

2000

Number









1500





1000





500





0

1968





1970





1972





1974





1976





1978





1980





1982





1984





1986





1988





1990





1992

Year



Llad Phillips 45

The Death Penalty in California

 Fourteen persons were executed between

1978 and 2009

 In January 2009, there were 677 convicts on

death row









Llad Phillips 46

Llad Phillips 47

Llad Phillips 48

Llad Phillips 49

Llad Phillips 50

Llad Phillips 51

Llad Phillips 52

Llad Phillips 53

California Executions: 1893-2004



18

16

14

12

Number









10

8

6

4

2

0

1880 1900 1920 1940 1960 1980 2000 2020

Year









Llad Phillips 54

Llad Phillips 55

Execution Witness Area









Llad Phillips 56

Execution Chamber









Llad Phillips 57

Gas

Chamber









Llad Phillips 58

Split Personality Behaviors

Jack Hirshleifer: “The Expanding Domain

of Economics”



Work and Economic Man

no violence motive: self-interest



Choice



Work and Economic Man

brawl in bars motive: self-interest

with episodes of

antagonism



Llad Phillips 59

Motivation for Violence: Antagonism

Assaulters

Assaulter’s Iso-preference

Income Lines





High

Total or Social Income

Low









Victim’s Income

Work and expect $24,000/yr

no violence



choice Apprehended: lose

0.1 1 month in court and

Work and jail, $22,000

brawl in bars



0.9 Not apprehended

$24,000



Expected income: 0.1*$22,000 + 0.9*$24,000 = $23,800

Questions About Statistical

Studies of Deterrence

 Do we know enough about the factors that

cause crime?

 Can we find variables that will control for

variation in crime generation?

 We have better measures for the factors that

control crime than for the factors that cause

crime.

 Unknown variation in crime generation may

mask the effects of crime control.

Llad Phillips 62

Schematic of the Criminal Justice System

Causes ?

Weak Link



Offense Crime Generation

Rate Per Expected

Capita Cost of

Punishment

(detention,

deterrence)

Expenditures







Crime Control



Llad Phillips 63

Crime Generation

1. variation of offense rate per capita with expected cost

of punishment

2. Shift in the relationship with a change in causal factors





Offense

crime generation function

rate per

capita

OF = f($CR*SV, SE, MC)









Expected cost(severity) of punishment

Crime Generation

1. variation of offense rate per capita with expected cost

of punishment

2. Shift in the relationship with a change in causal factors





Offense

crime generation function

rate per

capita

OF = f($CR*SV, SE, MC)





High causal conditions

Low causal conditions



Expected cost(severity) of punishment

Production Function for the Criminal Justice System (CJS)

1. Variation in expected costs of punishment with

criminal justice system expenditure per capita



Expected

costs of

punishment

production function



$CR*SV =g($EX)





Criminal Justice System expenditures per capita

Four-Way Diagram: Crime Generation & Crime Control



per capita expenditures on CJS









offense rate per capita





Crime Generation





expected cost of punishment

Four-Way Diagram: Crime Generation & Crime Control



per capita expenditures on CJS









per capita

expenditures

on CJS offense rate per capita



Production

Function Crime Generation





expected cost of punishment

Four-Way Diagram: Crime Generation & Crime Control



per capita expenditures on CJS



square







per capita

450

expenditures

on CJS offense rate per capita



Production

Function Crime Generation





expected cost of punishment

Four-Way Diagram: Crime Generation & Crime Control



per capita expenditures on CJS



square 1









per capita

1 450

expenditures

on CJS offense rate per capita

Production

Function Crime Generation





expected cost of punishment

Four-Way Diagram: Crime Generation & Crime Control



per capita expenditures on CJS



square 1









per capita

1 450

expenditures

on CJS offense rate per capita

Production

Function Crime Generation







expected cost of punishment

Four-Way Diagram: Crime Generation & Crime Control



per capita expenditures on CJS



square 1









per capita

1 450

expenditures

on CJS offense rate per capita

Production

Function Crime Generation







expected cost of punishment

Four-Way Diagram: Crime Generation & Crime Control



per capita expenditures on CJS

1

square







per capita

1 450

expenditures

on CJS offense rate per capita

Production

Function Crime Generation







expected cost of punishment

Four-Way Diagram: Crime Generation & Crime Control



per capita expenditures on CJS

1

square



2



per capita

1 2 450

expenditures

on CJS offense rate per capita

Production

Function Crime Generation







expected cost of punishment

Four-Way Diagram: Crime Generation & Crime Control



per capita expenditures on CJS

1

square



2



per capita 3

1 2 450

expenditures

on CJS offense rate per capita

Production

Function Crime Generation







expected cost of punishment

Four-Way Diagram: Crime Generation & Crime Control





per capita expenditures on CJS



1





2



3





offense rate per capita

Source: Report to the Nation on Crime and Justice

Get



Expect









Source:

Llad Phillips Report to the Nation on Crime and Justice 78

Four-Way Diagram: Crime Generation & Crime Control



per capita expenditures on CJS

1

square



2



per capita 3

1 2 450

expenditures

on CJS offense rate per capita

Production

Function Crime Generation







expected cost of punishment

Causal conditions account for more variation than control









Source:

Llad Phillips Report to the Nation on Crime and Justice 80

Schematic of the Criminal Justice System

Causes ?

Weak Link



Offense Crime Generation

Rate Per Expected

Capita Cost of

Punishment

(detention,

deterrence)

Expenditures







Crime Control



Llad Phillips 81

Summary

 The death penalty stirs strong emotions.

 To attack the death penalty, opponents have

attacked the concept of deterrence.

 Proponents of deterrence have lost the

argument to proponents of detention.

 Weakness: not understanding causes of crime.

 Detention is the principal instrument of

crime control policy today in the U.S. and it

costs big bucks



Llad Phillips 82

Llad Phillips 83

Llad Phillips 84

Prisoners Sentenced to Death:US

350





300





250





200

Number









Sentenced

150





100





50





0

1968





1970





1972





1974





1976





1978





1980





1982





1984





1986





1988





1990





1992

Year



Llad Phillips 86

Executions in the US

40



35

Executed

30



25

Number









20



15



10



5



0

1968





1970





1972





1974





1976





1978





1980





1982





1984





1986





1988





1990





1992

Year



Llad Phillips 87

California Homicide Rate Per 100,000 People



16



14



12



10

Rate









8



6



4



2



0

1940 1950 1960 1970 1980 1990 2000 2010

Year



Llad Phillips 88

California Department of Corrections:

http//www.cdc.state.ca.us/









Llad Phillips 92

California Executions Since 1978







Name Date Received Date Executed Time on Death Row

Robert Alton Harris 3/14/79 4/21/92 13 years, 1 month

David Edwin Mason 1/27/84 8/24/93 9 years, 7 months

William George Bonin 3/22/82 2/23/96 13 years, 1 month

Keith Daniel Williams 4/13/79 5/3/96 17 years

Thomas M. Thompson 8/23/84 7/14/98 14 years, 1 month

Kelvin Malone 6/22/81 1/13/99 (Missouri) 15 years, 6 months

Jaturun Siripongs 5/2/83 2/9/99 15 years, 9 months

Manuel Babbitt 7/15/82 5/4/99 16 years, 10 months

Darrell Keith Rich 1/23/81 3/15/00 19 years, 1 month

Robert Lee Massie 5/28/79 3/27/01 21 years, 10 months

Stephen Wayne Anderson 7/30/81 1/29/02 20 years, 6 months



Related docs
Other docs by cuiliqing
7 Recipes from Joe A.
Views: 2  |  Downloads: 0
Re-installingXPMode
Views: 3  |  Downloads: 0
telefonica_en
Views: 4  |  Downloads: 0
3220 Chap 6 demos
Views: 2  |  Downloads: 0
chap history.docx
Views: 3  |  Downloads: 0
Subcontractor Bid Form - The Fountains
Views: 1  |  Downloads: 0
English
Views: 1  |  Downloads: 0
DESIGNER'S SCHEDULE USE
Views: 1  |  Downloads: 0
Security Service Providers
Views: 45  |  Downloads: 0
By registering with docstoc.com you agree to our
privacy policy

You are almost ready to download!

You are almost ready to download!