Document Type
Argument Essay
Publication Date
1996
Excerpt
Nineteen-year-old Sara Weir met Douglas Kelly at the health club, where thirty-seven-year-old Douglas was a janitor. When she met him, she thought that he was a really nice guy, and when Douglas invited Sara to his home one night, she accepted. Unbeknownst to Sara, Douglas had been convicted five times of sexually assaulting women. That night, Douglas raped Sara and stabbed her with a pair of scissors and stuffed her body under a bed. He then drove off in Sara's car. When he was apprehended by the police, Douglas admitted to killing Sara, but denied raping her and stealing her car. He knew these factors would automatically require the death penalty. When the jury was allowed to hear testimony from four of the other women that Douglas had raped, they came back with a death sentence. In this incident, the jury was able to return with a unanimous decision that Douglas Kelly should be put to death for his crimes. This is not always the case, however. More often than not, judges and juries have a hard time sentencing convicts to death, and this indecisiveness is becoming more and more common in capital cases. The wavering attitude surrounding the use of capital punishment is also evident in the case of minors. One of the biggest problems relating to the use of capital punishment, especially concerning the sentencing of minors, is the ambiguity that surrounds it.
Recommended Citation
Wilhelm, Melissa M., "Rage and Confusion: The Debate Over Capital Punishment (1996)" (1996). The Valpo Core Reader. 223.
http://scholar.valpo.edu/core_reader/223