Capital Crimes

[David / Amicus]

I take the expression "capital crimes" to mean a crime worthy of the
death penalty.

Some think that "cruel and unusual" in Amendment VIII includes capital
punishment regardless of the form of execution.


But Amendment V mentions capital crime though it does not specify what
is a capital crime. But simply using the term does that not imply that
our Founding Fathers believed that there were some crimes worthy of the
death penalty i.e. capital punishment?

[theget]

It's usually taken to mean that they can, in some circumstances,
execute you, but not torture you or humiliate you.

I tend to think that this would put paid for your plans for the
surviving Tsarneav brother that involved cutting off body parts. Not
only the parts you mentioned, but noses and ears as well. I think.

It would probably mean that hanging, shooting, and electrocution are
acceptable, but pressing, gibbeting or crucifixion would not be.

I also once heard that this referred to a specific kind of punishment
that may have included amputation, but no cite and I haven't found
that anywhere else.

[David Johnston]

Obviously. And as the American Supreme Court ruled capital punishment
may be cruel, but it's usual.

[Martin Edwards]

Though not now in Europe (except Belarus), Australia, New Zealand,
Canada or the more civilized American states. That could start an
argument on whether it meant at that time or in perpetuity.

--
Myth, after all, is what we believe naturally. History is what we must
painfully learn and struggle to remember. -Albert Goldman