The Death Penalty and Miscarriages of Justice

The death penalty represents the state’s ultimate power over life. Its supporters argue that it deters crime and delivers justice for victims. Yet history repeatedly shows that human systems are fallible, and wrongful executions cannot be undone.

One of the most haunting British examples is Timothy Evans, hanged in 1950 for the murder of his wife and child. Three years later, the real killer, his neighbour John Christie, confessed to multiple murders in the same building. Evans was posthumously pardoned, but the tragedy helped turn public opinion against capital punishment.

In the United States, organisations such as the Innocence Project have uncovered more than 190 death row exonerations through DNA evidence and re-examination of flawed trials. These cases reveal how unreliable eyewitnesses, coerced confessions, and inadequate defence work can all lead to fatal errors.

Proponents claim that improved forensic science has made wrongful convictions rare, yet no system can guarantee perfection. Once carried out, an execution ends any chance of correction. Even a single mistake undermines confidence in justice itself.

The UK abolished the death penalty for murder in 1965, with full abolition for all crimes in 1998. This decision reflected a moral shift: that justice must serve truth, not vengeance.

The death penalty remains a powerful symbol of justice in some nations, but the risk of error renders it incompatible with modern human rights standards. A system capable of killing the innocent cannot call itself just.