Since I discovered that he was a professor at Hofstra University I decided to do a slight background check on that particular school because I had personally never heard of Hofstra. Come to find out Hofstra University, according to US NEWS, is ranked number two in the country when it comes to law. Hofstra is currently

In conclusion I would like to say that at first sight this seemed to be a very well written and factual article. But after a slight bit of digging I found this to not be true at all. Even though Mr. Freedman may be quite qualified in the ways of our judicial system he used many so called "facts" to try and persuade his audience.

I saw the title that this person was writing as an opponent of the death penalty. I further assumed to prove his point that he was going to have a lot of statistics to help back his point. Which for me meant that I was going to have to do more research to help break this essay a part.

The next point that Freedman attempts to make is that the death penalty does not reduce crime. What he does not tell you is that the death penalty is not designed to reduce crime. The death penalty is a form of punishment designed to dispose of extremely violent criminals.

First what studies exactly addressed these issues? And if it were true that one of the major contributing factors on whether someone received a verdict of the death was their race, I do not believe the justice system would continue to use capital punishment.

Then Freedman tries to compare the quality of capital murder trials to that of felony cases. Well, a felony case does not cost close to as much as a capital murder case. Also, most defense lawyers are prepared to defend felonies a tad bit more than capital cases.

The next so-called "fact" Freedman presents to us is that the death penalty reduces public safety. That statement is not a fact. If that were true we would probably not have the death penalty. Does the judicial system really want to put people to death bad enough that they would risk other peoples' lives?

argument. And he used the Criminal Justice Section of the New York State Bar Association. He made sure to let me know that it was full of people who are well versed in the judicial system. Now what he did not let you know was that this particular section of the NYSBA just happens to be the one that deals specifically with the death penalty and Constitutional rights. Every member of this section are all opponents of the death penalty.

Next I discovered his main purpose for writing this article in the first sentence of the third paragraph. And he supports this argument with the reasons of the death penalty's enormous cost, a detriment to public safety, it does not reduce crime, is racially Crumley 3

Some common words found in the essay are:
Texas Freedman, Report York, Ted Bundy, Death Penalty, Crime Report, Hofstra University, Bar Association, death penalty, Yale University, Eric Freedman, Chicago Detroit, fbi uniform crime, crime report, found guilty, uniform crime, reduce crime, judicial system, fbi uniform, hofstra university, police officers, uniform crime report, agree death penalty, pg 48, tell death penalty, opponents death penalty,
Approximate Word count = 2065
Approximate Pages = 8 (250 words per page double spaced)