Search Results

This chapter argues that contrary to popular wisdom (and clear pronouncements by classic retributivists such as Kant), retributivists should oppose capital punishment for murderers. He concedes that murderers may deserve to be executed, and that this can be carried out fairly and humanely. Rather, his argument focuses on epistemic problems with ascertaining guilt, which have been made more prominent and visible by recent advances in forensic science (such as DNA testing). Even after guilt was found beyond a reasonable doubt during a fair trial, and confirmed in all subsequent appeals, these scientific advances have been able to clearly demonstrate the innocence of dozens of convicted murderers on death row. This chapter rejects several other arguments against capital punishment offered as retributivist before outlining and defending his own against actual and potential criticisms.

The year 2016 produced a record number of exoneration cases involving guilty pleas (National Registry of Exonerations, 2017). Nonetheless, guilty pleas account for a minority of overall exonerations in the National Registry. This chapter provides a broad overview of false guilty pleas, including what they are and why they can be so difficult to document. Also reviewed is current research examining factors that have increased the likelihood of false guilty pleas both in the real world and in the lab. The chapter continues by describing the shadow-of-the-trial model, followed by a discussion of its potential limitations, especially its omission of guilt status as a predictor of plea outcomes. Finally, the chapter concludes with proposed reforms for reducing false guilty pleas as well as with areas of need for future research.

This chapter explores the diminishing use of the death penalty in the United States in the modern era. During the early 1800s, executions were practically celebrations, with merchants selling souvenirs and alcohol to thousands of onlookers. Such spectacles, which often included cursing at the widow and tearing down the scaffold and cutting the rope, prompted states to require private hangings. By the middle of the century, a majority had determined that executions were bringing out the worst in its citizenry. Despite excessive costs, bad lawyering, discrimination, procedural mistakes, and horrifyingly botched killings, execution in the United States persists—for now. Although 60% of the states and the federal government continue to maintain the policy, only a small percentage of states are actively pursuing executions.

Chapter 2 examines the critical role DNA analysis has played in exonerating the wrongfully convicted. Since the first DNA exoneration in 1988 of Gary Dotson, falsely convicted of rape in Illinois, hundreds of people have been exonerated through DNA analysis, including many who were on death row; minority groups have been disproportionately represented (approximately 70%). This chapter examines the various reasons that innocent people have been convicted, including coerced confessions and mistaken eyewitness identifications, and discusses several cases in which DNA evidence led to exoneration. It also discusses the establishment of the innocence movement, from the founding in 1983 of Centurion Ministries, an organization devoted to freeing innocent people from prison; to the formation in 1992 of the Innocence Project, which used DNA to free the innocent; to the global movement of today, in which more than 100 innocence organizations around the world work on reform and litigation.

Chapter 4 examines two of the cells in the basic framework: “Enthusiasm” about the benefits of using the science of genetic inheritance, and “Skepticism” about the risks of using the science of genetic inheritance. For each viewpoint, this chapter explores arenas within medical and scientific research (including gene therapy, the search for Covid-19 vaccines, and gene editing), criminal justice (including forensic DNA databases, rapid DNA testing, and exoneration), and biogeographical ancestry (including racial and ethnic ancestry testing, race-based medicine, and deep ancestry). Chapter 4 provides evidence to support both excitement about the benefits of genomic science and concern about its risks and costs.

This chapter analyses central foci of Amat al-Latif’s life trajectory and memory world. Recounting her life from a relational perspective, Amat al-Latif wishes to establish an enduring memory of her relationship with her father and exonerate him from accusations of treason. Asserting that allegations regarding his involvement in Imam Yahya’s assassination were belied by his devoutness and disapproval of violent overthrow, she offers an alternative appraisal of the events of 1948. Exploring women and men’s biographies, this chapter unsettles the notion of gendered memory, and argues that the normative constraints of gender on processes of remembering cannot be analyzed adequately without taking class into account. Selective twentieth-century biographies written by Yemeni men reveal that gender does not foreclose men’s employment of emotive parameters. Nor are they necessarily characterized by a disavowal of the personal and the domestic, often taken to be central features of women’s life writing. The chapter concludes that all (auto-)biographies studied in Mirrored Loss are none the less implicated in the politics of memory in different ways.

This chapter considers the relationship between the American prosecutor and the wrongful conviction phenomenon, as illustrated by contemporary miscarriages of justice. It examines the “Duke Lacrosse Case” and the “Central Park Jogger Case,” both of which involve demonstrated innocence and show the importance of DNA evidence to exonerations. The chapter next moves to a series of other significant but lesser-known examples of injustice and concludes by suggesting that miscarriages of justice can be cured by punishing identified malefactors.