Advancing the Story: The deadly question

A few weeks ago, The Atlantic published a lengthy article that explored the death penalty in Texas and how state jurors “must first decide if the person will be a future danger” before someone could be sentenced to death. Texas jurors must answer the question “whether there is a probability that the defendant would commit criminal acts of violence that would constitute a continuing threat to society.” In other words, the law is asking its citizen to predict behavior.

I’d be remissed if I didn’t state I have strong opinions against capital punishment and feel that the question asked of jurors is problematic in a multitude of ways. However that is not the point of this post. The point is the advance the story in which I have done in two ways, highlighted in the e-mail below.

  1. There was a missing preposition in the first sentence below.


  2. I pitched a follow-up article idea. The article concluded that the question at hand is a deadly one and it explained why experts don’t believe humans can accurately predict if someone will present future danger. I thought it could be interesting if the writer or The Atlantic attempted to determine how that would affect the amount of executions in Texas. Or even in a broader sense, explore how the death penalty would look like without the question. In my e-mail, I also asked a question for my own curiosity and I guess that is also a good candidate for a new article on the topic.






One thought on “Advancing the Story: The deadly question

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s