I found this a hard read, on different levels. The topic is obviously a chilling one - is it ever right to kill another human, does the punishment fit the crime?
The book starts off with a potted history of the death penalty and some of the problems it has encountered with regards to whether the various methods are humanitarian, they feel bad if the person basically being murdered by them suffers in any way or takes too long to die. Does that make it more right if they are killed peacefully, it is still legalised murder. The authors history as a reporter shows here, there are a lot of facts well told, but it didn't have the soul of a story you want to read a whole book in the style of, it was more like an extended article.
There is no definitive ending of this book though, the death row inmate Richard Glossip wasn't pardoned or executed, just last minute stays and appeals.
The book starts off with a potted history of the death penalty and some of the problems it has encountered with regards to whether the various methods are humanitarian, they feel bad if the person basically being murdered by them suffers in any way or takes too long to die. Does that make it more right if they are killed peacefully, it is still legalised murder. The authors history as a reporter shows here, there are a lot of facts well told, but it didn't have the soul of a story you want to read a whole book in the style of, it was more like an extended article.
There is no definitive ending of this book though, the death row inmate Richard Glossip wasn't pardoned or executed, just last minute stays and appeals.