home

Decision Time on Juvenile Offender Death Penalty

By Jeralyn, Section Death Penalty
Posted on Tue Jan 04, 2005 at 05:08:43 AM EST
Tags: (all tags)
Share This: Digg! StumbleUpon del.icio.us reddit reddit

There are 71 juvenile offenders on death row in the U.S. - 71 persons who were under 18 at the time of their crimes. The Supreme Court is expected to issue an opinion on the validity of the death penalty for these youthful offenders shortly. It will be the first time since 1989 that the Court addresses the issue. The case is Rogers v. Simmons. You can read about Christopher Simmons here . The amicus briefs are here, and a resource page is available here.

The U.S. stands in impressive (not) company on the issue. Since 1990, the only other countries that have executed juvenile offenders are China, Democratic Republic of Congo, Iran, Pakistan, Yemen, Nigeria and Saudi Arabia.

The New York Times today outlines the issues and the case. South Carolina's The State has more. Yesterday, the Roanoke Times published this editorial calling upon Virginia to put an end to the execution of juvenile offenders.

Conscience, supported by science, should compel state lawmakers to embrace principle over politics on this grave moral issue. ...DNA has refuted the notion that innocent people never end up on death row. Science offers compelling evidence, as well, that even the guilty acted with diminished capacity if they committed their crimes as juveniles. Recent studies of the brain show its impulse control center does not develop fully till age 20 or 21.

Lawmakers should eliminate the death penalty at least against the young, because that is the right thing to do. And isn't moral leadership what voters say they expect of their politicians these days?

Also of interest is a report by Columbia University scholars establishing empirical evidence that there is a growing national consensus against the juvenile death penalty and finding that this consensus will have an impact on the Court's decision in Rogers v. Simmons.

In 2003, the Missouri Supreme Court set aside the death sentence of Christopher Simmons, who was 17 when he was arrested for the murder of Shirley Crook. The court held that the "evolving standards of decency" embodied in the constitutional prohibition of cruel and unusual punishments barred execution of persons who committed capital crimes before their 18th birthday. This decision was based in part on an emerging national consensus opposing execution of juvenile offenders: Legislatures have increasingly disallowed death sentences for persons under 18, and even where such sentences are permitted by statute, they are increasingly rarely imposed in practice.

For a good article on the difference between the adult and juvenile mind, go here.

< 225 Religious Groups Call on Gonzales to Oppose Torture | Possible Arrest of al-Zarqawi? >

  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft


    • Display: Sort:
    Decision Time on Juvenile Offender Death Penalty | 13 comments (13 topical)
    Re: Decision Time on Juvenile Offender Death Penal (none / 0) (#1)
    by Ernesto Del Mundo on Mon Jan 03, 2005 at 10:45:10 PM EST
    China, Democratic Republic of Congo, Iran, Pakistan, Yemen, Nigeria and Saudi Arabia Wow, North Korea didn't even make that list. I don't care if they are in the Axis of Evil...they're wussies!

    Re: Decision Time on Juvenile Offender Death Penal (none / 0) (#2)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Tue Jan 04, 2005 at 01:35:56 AM EST
    I personally oppose the death penalty. But I think it is a mistake to have courts endlessly rummaging for constitional reasons to ban it. Our constitution is a fine document but it does not address everything we think should be done in a "good" world. And when it does not it should be amended. Instead we argue that the constitution "intends" what we want. And we are infuriated when judges say "no it intends what the other side wants". The way to get rid of the death penalty is to convince people to amend statutes and clarify constitutions. It can be done. Otherwise judges can say anything - good today, bad tomorrow.

    Re: Decision Time on Juvenile Offender Death Penal (none / 0) (#3)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Tue Jan 04, 2005 at 03:46:41 AM EST
    Thankyou Jeralyn, for posting this and please keep up the great work you do on this site.

    Re: Decision Time on Juvenile Offender Death Penal (none / 0) (#4)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Tue Jan 04, 2005 at 05:47:02 AM EST
    I am afraid I agree with Ken. Just because executing juveniles is not a good thing does not mean the Constitution bans it. The Constitution says nothing whatever about executing juveniles. I believe more states are raising the age at which murderers become death-eligible. That is the way to go.

    Re: Decision Time on Juvenile Offender Death Penal (none / 0) (#5)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Tue Jan 04, 2005 at 06:18:18 AM EST
    Death eligible Another euphemism to make it sound less horrible than it really is...kind of like academically eligible to be on the football team, or eligible for a promotion at work

    Re: Decision Time on Juvenile Offender Death Penal (none / 0) (#6)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Tue Jan 04, 2005 at 06:59:52 AM EST
    It would be hard to put it better, and more succintly, than the Supreme Court did in Atkins v. Virginia (executing the mentally retarded violates the 8th Amendment): A claim that punishment is excessive is judged not by the standards that prevailed in 1685 when Lord Jeffreys presided over the "Bloody Assizes" or when the Bill of Rights was adopted, but rather by those that currently prevail. As Chief Justice Warren explained in his opinion in Trop v. Dulles, 356 U.S. 86, 78 S.Ct. 590, 2 L.Ed.2d 630 (1958): "The basic concept underlying the Eighth Amendment is nothing less than the dignity of man.... The Amendment must draw its meaning from the evolving standards of decency that mark the progress of a maturing society." I'd worry about any society that didn't have evolving standards of decency -- presuming that those standards are improving. I wonder about us now in the Bush/Ashcroft/Gonzales era defined by their devolving standards of decency.

    Re: Decision Time on Juvenile Offender Death Penal (none / 0) (#7)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Tue Jan 04, 2005 at 07:05:08 AM EST
    ... 71 juveniles... thanks for the info. I oppose the death of anyone incarcerated in their youth (under 21).

    Re: Decision Time on Juvenile Offender Death Penal (none / 0) (#8)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Tue Jan 04, 2005 at 08:28:02 AM EST
    Yes Ken is right on the money, and that is what the constitution is all about, it allows people to argue over all ideals and keeps us from becoming a slave to the big guys, and it is everything to everyone and that is good. And to our government i say don't be like Bin Laden remove the Juvenile death penalty.

    Re: Decision Time on Juvenile Offender Death Penal (none / 0) (#9)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Wed Jan 05, 2005 at 01:21:00 AM EST
    the constitutin clearly says you can only be executed if you commit your brutal murders after 18, if you are 17 you are just a nice little baby and have no self-control

    Re: Decision Time on Juvenile Offender Death Penal (none / 0) (#10)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Wed Jan 05, 2005 at 01:39:19 PM EST
    all human societies have ages beyond which one is supposed to be an adult, many such societies have rituals to mark passing and such like, but the rituals tend to come at the same age, sometimes the age is very young in our eyes, and sometimes it is quite old according to most of human history, as is the case with our age of 18. since there is no legal differentiation that i am aware of between the term juvenile and child i will consider them to be the same things. i believe that it would be very rare to find a society in which children of the society were killed for an offense committed by the child, this is in reference to punishment as opposed to euthanized at birth because there isn't enough food, killed in a war party by a neighboring tribe or clan, or something different than punishment. rare is i believe a synonym for unusual. as to whether it is cruel to kill a child i suppose that we could look over the history of humanity and see in how many histories and poems the act of killing someone considered a child is applauded, i believe that not many have applauded the kiiling of children, and that those who have have generally been abhorred by later generations and other cultures. perhaps though i am in error, and martha and her ilk(it's not often i get to use the word ilk, but then again it's not often i find someone to whom the word actually applies) will be upheld as the saviors of humanity in times to come, and there will be many beautiful pictures done in the style of american pastoral, staunchly bashing in the skulls of juveniles and bombing abortion clinics.

    Re: Decision Time on Juvenile Offender Death Penal (none / 0) (#11)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Wed Jan 05, 2005 at 02:24:50 PM EST
    I'm of two (well, maybe three) minds on this issue. On the one hand I oppose the death penalty execpt in the most extreme cases (mass murder/serial killers) and wouldn't cry if it were abolished totally. So any movement in that direction, including banning execution of juvenile offenders, seems like progress. But OTOH I believe that, for most purposes, our society's dividing line of 18 years is too high by at least a year (in some cases, two). I'd regret it if the Court's decision carved that number even more deeply into stone than it presently is. On the third hand, the U.S. has used this issue, along with a largely bogus concern over our right to recruit 17-year-olds into the military (they still can't fight until they're 18), as an excuse to avoid ratifying the International Covenant on the Rights of the Child. So maybe a decision to outlaw these executions by the Court would get the ball rolling on this treaty again.

    Re: Decision Time on Juvenile Offender Death Penal (none / 0) (#12)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Fri Jan 07, 2005 at 06:59:21 PM EST
    how wonderful it was to see my son today. we laughed and talked for a couple of hours. we enjoyed a drink and some junk-food out of the vending machines. we took a couple of photos with a instant camera, photos that i will cherish for ever. we gazed into each others eyes and enjoyed each others company. the time passed so fast, as if it were only minutes. time's up said the guard, so i gathered my trash and photos. we say our good bye's and i love you's. i walk away, leaving the youngest boy on texas death row waiting for the guards to take him back to his cell. this is what we do, once a week, until the state of texas kills him or until our standards of decency evolve.

    Re: Decision Time on Juvenile Offender Death Penal (none / 0) (#13)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Thu Jan 20, 2005 at 09:30:56 AM EST
    I believe that the death penalty should be used in only the most extreme cases. Every juvenile on death row has committed a murder (or multiple murders). being a "juvenile" myself, I believe that most teens are capable of making decisions, especially involving another's life. The state of mind of the offender should be taken into account, and if found incapable of making mature decisions, the death penalty should not be used. But if, as I suspect, most juveniles are able to refrain from intentionally murdering someone, the same penalty for "children"as for adults should be used. Final thought: If you were awoken in the middle of the night by an intruder, and then a loved one, say your spouse, was murdered in the process, would you consider this person a "child"? Or would you want them punished as an adult for the intentional murder of a loved one?

    Decision Time on Juvenile Offender Death Penalty | 13 comments (13 topical)