Think of those moments when jury has to decide whether the defendant should live or die.  There is evidence.  There is law.  There is logic.  Yet, it is one of the most difficult moments for jury.

A large percent of Americans support the idea of death penalty.  However, giving an opinion for a public survey is different from sending a person to death.  Shouldn’t we know what judges think about it?  It could be a fruitless exercise to infer their view from their articles, or from listening to their lectures.  It is better to review judgments.  That could suggest the definite trend.

A recent case at the Cook County Criminal Courthouse in Chicago is interesting to note.  Twelve jurors considered the fate of one Juan Luna Jr.

“I’m pleading with you to consider mercy.  Sometimes we can temper justice with mercy,” shouted Luna’s lawyer stamping his feet.  He pleaded to consider Luna’s 33 years of unblemished life before punishing him for those 40 minutes in which he committed mass murder.

Eleven jurors voted in favor of death penalty, one did not.  As a jury must be unanimous in case of death penalty, Luna’s life was spared.  He received life in prison.

Are juries moving from logic and evidence to moral intuition?

The records say in the mid 1990’s every year juries awarded death penalty to 315 persons.  With the passage of time, this number has decreased.  Last year, only 100 were sentenced to death.

Surprisingly, even victim’s families sometimes often do not favor death penalty. 

I believe death penalty punishes dependants and dear ones more than the wrongdoer.  Life with no chance of parole could be more severe.