Marzili observes that Criminologists, Lawyers and other practitioners have over the years tried to analyze and study the rate at which murder declined after murderers are executed but there have been no authoritative conclusive results. In 1973 however, Isaac Ehrilch research carried in the United Sates showed that for every one inmate executed, seven lives were spared as potential murderers were prevented from committing such crimes. The results were similarly observed by his disciples. For those who support capital punishment, the likelihood of tangible results not being felt, they argue, is as a result of lack of swiftness in executing the convicted culprits. For this MSU authoritatively asserts that:
‘’The fact that some states or countries which do not use the death penalty have lower murder rates than jurisdictions which do is not evidence of the failure of deterrence. States with high murder rates would have even higher rates if they did use the death penalty’.
Indeed, others have supported the argument citing that it is preventive in the sense that people in general fear death more so death that is planned and decided by the courts. Even more interestingly is the fact that death penalty against a murderer would prevent him from committing any other offence ever and thus seen as a permanent deterrent measure. Further, these executions take approximately forty days before they are conducted. But one issue that begs the question why should the convicted be made to wait on death row?
Why long wait in death row While the death penalty is seen by many as just, some people have argued that often times those convicted of murder and sentenced to death are put on wait for too long. This is more compounded by the cost incurred as any investigation relating to death penalty usually costs three times more than a non-death case (Marzili 50). When one is convicted and sentenced to death, they are usually put on death row during which time the state expends housing, health-care and food costs on them. However, some of the reasons which have been cited for long death row are many and how that affects the cases have some moral standing (Marzili, 58). First, if the convict becomes sick or ill, then he has to be treated before the execution takes place. Olando (2009) provides a case where in 2003 about $121,025 was spent on a life saving dialysis for a condemned killer who had been subjected to death row for six years. This was the case involving Horacio Alberto Reyes who was convicted of murdering Maria Zetina. He wanted a kidney transplant and argued that this would save tax payers in the long run (Olarndo 8). Secondly, it allows for arbitrary search of any pending justice. Reverend Jesse Jackson had once argued that death sentence is basically an arbitrary punishment. According to him, it does not entail objective templates or guidelines when it should be sought or executed. Therefore, the lack of the objectivity leading to discriminatory practices puts it that whoever is sentenced is allowed humble time to seek redress through an appeal. He further argues that many Americans support of death penalty is anchored on individual propensity to violence, an individual’s criminal history among other factors; parameters