The court handles all cases with extreme seriousness; however, different cases are handled differently. For instance, murder cases have different pre-trial procedures to be followed as compared to violation of traffic rules. This paper outlines philosophers’ view of punishment and how the Cumberland County District Court Division handles capital punishment.
To begin with, punishment is an act that involves intentional infliction of agony or misery to a person for wrong doing, with the aim of correction. Capital punishment involves penalty by death or life imprisonment of the person who has been found guilty. In an attempt to justify punishment, philosophers have come up with various theories, which explain the core objective of punishment, including Utilitarianism and Retributivism (Fieser, 2001).
Utilitarianism is a theory that seeks to identify the consequence of administering punishment; it explains that punishment should serve to dissuade a potential offender from committing a crime. This could be done by setting clear laws, which outline the punishment for the specific crime committed. The theory also proposes punishment as a way of rehabilitating the offender. For instance, sentencing an offender to do community work should be done with the aim of improving his/her character (Fieser, 2001). On the other hand, Retributivism is a theory that advocates proportionate punishment to every wrongdoer. The theory invokes the retaliation principle, which stipulates that a person, who kills another, should also face the same. The proponent of this theory, Immanuel Kant, seems to be in agreement with the existence of capital punishment in some states. However, to rule out chances of an innocent person being punished, the theory advocates for justice; before punishment is administered, the court should proof beyond reasonable doubt that the accused is guilty. In this respect, Retributivism is superior to Utilitarianism Theory (Fieser, 2001).
Cumberland County District Court Division handles all the cases with utmost care to ensure fairness; consequently, no innocent person is punished. To achieve this, the court has well laid down procedures that must be followed prior to trial. First, selection of jury is done to ensure that the counsel and the people represented are satisfied with the qualifications of the chosen members. During the process, jurors undergo vetting as set out by the law to ensure that they execute their duties reasonably and unprejudiced. The next step is to determine whether the prosecutor has a potential of discriminating against race. Once all possible doubts have been cleared, jurors undergo oath taking, after which the trial is set to start. First, the accused is expected to enter a plea, either guilty or not guilty, after which the jury analyses all the evidence presented (US Department of Justice, 2008).
The accused is accorded basic human rights; for instance, the accused is not compelled to stand trial while handcuffed unless there is necessity for the same. If any restraint is to be done, then the judge must give reasons as to why that should happen. Also, jurors must be advised not to consider one as guilty on the grounds of being tried while restrained. Once the accused is found guilty of first degree murder, the jury examines the mitigation plea; that is, whether the penalty ought to be reduced from punishment by death to a less severe punishment like life imprisonment. Finally, it is the prerogative of the judge to give a verdict based on the jury’s recommendations (US Department of Justice, 2008). However, sometimes judges overrule the jury’s recommendations and impose death penalty rather than life imprisonment (Death Penalty Information Center, n.d).
In conclusion, even though some flaws have been identified, the court system is very diligent when it comes to the undertaking of trials involving capital punishment. The accused is treated fairly all through the trial and is perceived guiltless until proven blameworthy beyond reasonable doubt.
References
Death Penalty Information Centre. (n.d). Death Penalty. Web.
Fieser, J. (2001). Capital Punishment. The Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy. Web.
U.S Department of Justice. (2008). Capital Punishment Statistics. Web.