Part of the issue is that we divide the trial into (guilty or not) and (determine punishment if guilty). There's no 95% chance of guilty, go to jail and 100% chance of guilty, death penalty.
But, ultimately, some people are going to go away forever. People like Manson are never going to get released. What's the big difference between the death penalty and life imprisonment with no parole that attenuates the error in the conviction process.
>What's the big difference between the death penalty and life imprisonment with no parole that attenuates the error in the conviction process.
You can't reverse the damage done by either sentence. However a sentence of life without parole is correctible as soon as a mistake is identified. Releasing an innocent person after taking 40 years of their life is awful, but it is better than realizing we killed an innocent person 25 years ago.
I question how often people are really released after 40 years in prison. It happens, but it certainly doesn't happen frequently. In fact, it's so infrequent it seems any false release after a decade or more seems to pop up in national news.
I feel like fictional accounts of long-delayed justice are more common than real ones.
Either way a tragedy occurs, but I'm not sure how much our system should be informed by ultra-rare edge cases.
But, ultimately, some people are going to go away forever. People like Manson are never going to get released. What's the big difference between the death penalty and life imprisonment with no parole that attenuates the error in the conviction process.