> 2. That person has to escape from their final prison.
Tangentially, in some Scandinavian (I believe?) countries, escaping from prison is not a punishable offense. To be clear, you will be looked for, and taken back to prison when found, but their legal system has ruled that the craving for freedom is a natural human urge, and that it's punishing human behavior to punish escapees for escaping.
That's explicitly why I called out crimes committed as part of the escape and evasion as a potential example of "subsequent crimes that don't qualify for the death penalty". There are too many valid mitigating circumstances to just blanket say "he's a convicted murder, and he escaped, now we get to kill him".
I'm not sure I'd go so far as to say that escape shouldn't be treated as a crime (one way to view crime is an explicit rejection of the idea that a government can or should dictate our actions, so in that light, trying to get out of a legal punishment is itself a rejection of that government's right to issue punishments). But certainly, if the only additional crime is the escape itself, then the death penalty is entirely unwarranted.
IIRC the reasoning mainly rests on the right to not have to assist the state in convicting and punishing you. Similar principle as the right to remain silent.
It would also be weird to punish people for a failing of the state.
Tangentially, in some Scandinavian (I believe?) countries, escaping from prison is not a punishable offense. To be clear, you will be looked for, and taken back to prison when found, but their legal system has ruled that the craving for freedom is a natural human urge, and that it's punishing human behavior to punish escapees for escaping.