When a person is found wrongly convicted and jailed or fined, the State may make some recompense, but if a person is wrongly convicted of a capital crime and executed, the State could offer nothing. If we admit that there is error in Justice, how does the State argue for capital punishment? I suppose the amount of error the State is willing to accept is somewhat analogous to whatever is left over after "beyond a reasonable doubt." Try to explain these concepts of error or doubt, especially in its most crucial scenario of the death penalty. Please note that I am not asking you whether you agree or disagree with the death penalty. Superior essays will try to explain the arguments offered for the legitimacy of capital punishment despite apparent, perhaps significant, space for error. Also likely are essays that focus on the concept of "reasonable" in reasonable doubt.
'wrongly convicted, jailed or fined' - Capital Punishment research paper topic.
Cristian, we aren't an essay writing service. Posting the prompt for your essay here will not get the essay written for you. Write your essay so that we can offer a review and advice you about how to improve it. You already have the professors instructions, you just needed to complete the legwork (research, essay writing) so that you can post the essay here. We can then jump in and help you perfect it before submission on your part.
