I read this years ago and have been citing it ever since. Reading it again today makes me realize how well constructed his examination is. I doubt that any book on capital punishment will ever overtake Executed on a Technicality: Lethal Injustice on America's Death Row but this is a great one for a clear and concise explanation of the issues.

excellent balanced discussion

Thought provoking.

good subway read? i guess?

Interesting research on the death penalty. I'm ultimately on the same wavelength as Turow. Sometimes it is necessary but....

I listened to the audio version of this read by the author. His nasally voice was the only thing I can criticize about what otherwise is a fantastic book. It is well researched, informative, superbly written, and compelling. Everyone who has an opinion on this issue ought to read it, regardless of where that opinion lies.

I’m tempted to get the physical book for my library at home.

Readers know Scott Turow as the writer of mystery novels with a legal setting. Ultimate Punishment is a non-fiction exploration of the questions he and 13 others considered as members of a “blue-ribbon” Commission appointed to tell the Governor how to reform capital punishment in Illinois. Its report concludes by explaining why the Commission could not come up with the ultimate solution to the problems inherent in the ultimate punishment: “All members of the Commission have emerged from our deliberations with a renewed sense of the extraordinary complexities presented by the question of capital punishment.” It notes both that “The horror of a cool, contemplated end to the life of another human being, especially in the name of the law, is profound.” and that “it is essential to recognize that our adherence to the death penalty arises not because it provides proven tangible benefits like deterrence but rather from our belief that capital punishment makes an unequivocal moral statement.” Without stating its writer’s own view Turow’s book quotes from the official report, saying “Because capital punishment is presently lawful in Illinois and because it appears to have the support of a majority of Illinois citizens, our deliberations have concentrated primarily on these reforms and other proposals, rather than on the merits of capital punishment. Only at the close of our work did we consider that question. A narrow majority of the Commission would favor that the death penalty be abolished in Illinois. Those favoring abolition did so either because of moral concerns, because of a conclusion that no system can or will be constructed which sufficiently guarantees that the death penalty will be applied without arbitrariness or error, or because of a determination that the social resources expended on capital punishment outrun its benefits."
Scott Turow’s Ultimate Punishment is Highly Recommended. It doesn’t provide answers, but it examines the questions more clearly and rationally than most readers have done on their own.

This book should be required reading for all University law students. The writer Scott Tudor admits that early in this law career he was wishy washy about capital punishment, one day he would be for capital punishment and the next he would be against capital punishment. Than the writer worked on a commission to study capital punishment in the state of Illinois and his eyes were forced opened to how persecutors ( The Crown in Canada. ) will do anything or say anything in a lot of cases to get a conviction and the whether the person actually did the crime or not often comes second to getting a conviction. I would give you examples however I think it's better if you read it yourself. This books goes a long way in proving my opinion that the reason they call it capital punishment is because if you don't have the capital you get the punishment.

Very thought-provoking. As someone who also doesn't have a firm stance on capital punishment, it was very enlightening to see these arguments presented so concisely and succinctly.

Whatever reasons one might have for supporting the death penalty in the US, Turow ably explains why it has to go.

This is a thoughtful, even-handed examination of the merits and demerits of the death penalty. The author concludes that because the justice system in our democracy is essentially incapable of adopting all of the specific reforms necessary to make the death penalty fair, equitable, appropriate, and less prone to error, it should be abolished. In other words, if you can't get it right, then you shouldn't get it. He gave little attention to the prospect that the death penalty sends a message that taking a life (in the absence of self defense) is justifiable when you’ve been wronged, or that opposition to capital punishment might come, not from compassion for the guilty, but from belief in an immutable code of civil behavior that will not accept a violent solution when one is not required. I’ve always thought this was the best argument against capital punishment (along with the prospect of wrongful executions, which are surprisingly frequent). But I came away from this reading with a weakened objection to capital punishment. He made some pretty strong arguments that a civilized and compassionate society can and should, by collective decision, have the right to deny life to certain abhorrent individuals whose behavior is so repulsive that they should not be tolerated to live. If I haven’t changed my mind, I have a greater appreciation for those who reluctantly support capital punishment.

I read all I can get my hands on when it comes to the death penalty, I don't know why, but I do. Many of these books are harrowing, but this one is rather technical. The author was part of a commission created in Illinois to analyze the situation of death penalty due to many irregularities. They proposed some measures, some were applied, lessons were learned and at the end, we still don't have all the answers.
Most books on the topic either support the abolish or the maintain cause. The author does neither. He sure as hell would pull the switch on Gacy. And yet he has rescued people sentenced to die when they weren't supposed to. I like the structured arguments for and against the death penalty - there are gruesome descriptions of murder and there are terrifying descriptions of people saved days away from execution for something they did not commit. Plenty to think about, as well as an analysis of how such decisions are made politically. A rather technical, but very good examination of the topic.