Now that they've decided the Boston Marathon bomber is guilty, which wasn't much in question, they somehow have to decide whether to kill him or not.
A friend of mine suggested that they would decide not to kill him, because it was cheaper to keep him alive.
I think it's true that it's cheaper to keep him alive - mostly because of all the mandatory appeals that have been built into the death penalty system.
But I told my friend that they may see execution as worth the extra cost. I mean, how much money have we spent on this guy already? Tons.
It's clear that the criminal justice system does not operate on a simple cost/benefit ratio. And, even if it did, what is the psychological/social value of giving this guy a lethal injection? It's manifestly clear that a lot of people feel it's a good idea.
When facing a monstrous deed,
many will feel the need
to bury the beast
at the very least.