I've just finished watching the excellent BBC documentary Life and Death Row.
The series shadows inmates, their families, the families of their victims and those working on their appeals during the process leading up to the death penalty.
The series was an emotional roller coaster and I found myself experiencing a whole range of feelings and thoughts during each episode.
Firstly, I know that the crimes that these criminals are alleged to commit are atrocious and as well as taking a life, they have also destroyed many others around it.
But does taking the life of the criminal mean that two wrongs make a right?
Before I watched this programme I was of the view that the world is a better place without these murderers in it.
This programme has opened my eyes to the damage that capital punishment can do to the family of the accused and in one instance, a young male whose brother was on death row, confessed that if his brother was put to death, then he to would go off the rails and more than likely descend into a life of crime himself.
This series followed men accused of single violent acts that resulted in death.
Should the law be different for these people as opposed to the likes of serial killers, the epitome of all evil?
Drawing the line and differentiating between the people on death row is a difficult task and one that's ultimately a matter of personal opinion.
Another issue that jumped out at me throughout this three point series, was how do the men and women on death row became embroiled in such a lifestyle in the first place?
Are these people born evil or is it a result of other factors that have influenced them during their lives, particularly the early years?
There's no definitive answer to this and perhaps the truth ranges from case to case.
The third and final installment of the programme focused on the case of Robert Pruett.
Pruett was born into a family where he was sexually assaulted by random men and beaten by his father when he refused to take drugs.
His father was a violent man who was in and out of jail and Robert was convicted alongside his father and brother aged just 16 for the murder of a neighbour.
He then allegedly killed a guard and was sentenced to death.
Although the evidence convicting him of the guard's murder was sketchy, I'm not going to share my thoughts of whether or not he was guilty.
Instead I'm wondering if this guy had any chance whatsoever in life.
He was born into a home in a crime-ridden area of Houston and from an early age all he knew was a life of violence, desperation and drug abuse.
I have no doubt that some people who were 'brought up on the wrong side of the tracks' do defy the odds and make a life for themselves, but the odds of doing so are stacked against them.
Earlier this week I was in McDonald's where a young boy and his friend were causing trouble.
The kid was about 12-years-old and undoubtedly a menace, but he wore tatty clothes and was out wandering around at 10pm.
His tatty clothes and lack of supervision suggested that his parents weren't enforcing the usual methods and rules used to bring up a child.
I'm only in a position to speculate, but I highly doubt that his parents monitor his grades at school and he is offered any encouragement to progress with an education.
This kid was a little shit, but I believe that if he was born into a better family who strived to bring him up properly, then it could have been a different story.
Instead he's unlikely to access the training necessary to secure a reasonably paid job and if he is skint then how is he most likely to be able to make a quick buck and achieve status? Crime.
I don't hold many positive hopes for the future of this young man, but I'd love to be proved wrong.
