home

AI Questions Executions of Mentally Ill

By TChris, Section Death Penalty
Posted on Tue Jan 31, 2006 at 12:13:17 PM EST
Tags: (all tags)
Share This: Digg! StumbleUpon del.icio.us reddit reddit

by TChris

A report released today by Amnesty International asks whether current constitutional caselaw is adequate to safeguard the mentally ill from execution. If it is categorically wrong to execute children or the severely retarded, is the execution of a mentally ill convict consistent with contemporary standards of decency?

If the diminished culpability associated with youth and mental retardation render the death penalty an excessive punishment when used against offenders from those categories, what about people suffering from serious mental illness or impairment other than retardation, such as serious brain damage, at the time of the crime? Should they not also be ineligible for execution?

The question is made timely by the large percentage of mentally ill offenders on death row and by the criminal justice system's emphasis on punishment, rather than treatment, of the mentally ill. Yet judges too frequently discern no constitutional barrier to killing the mentally ill.

For example, in upholding the death sentence against mentally ill inmate John Edward Weik on 3 September 2002, all five Justices on the South Carolina Supreme Court wrote: "while it violates the Eighth Amendment to impose a death sentence on a mentally retarded defendant, the imposition of such a sentence upon a mentally ill person is not disproportionate." In November 2004, two federal judges upheld the death sentence of Indiana death row inmate Arthur Baird, noting that while the US Supreme Court had prohibited the execution of offenders with mental retardation in Atkins, "it has not yet ruled out the execution of persons who kill under an irresistible impulse" brought about by mental illness.

The report makes a convincing argument against the death penalty for any offender, but its conclusion regarding the execution of the mentally ill is particularly compelling:

For the USA to be pursuing this premeditated ritualistic killing in the 21st century against offenders suffering from serious mental illness is particularly offensive to widely held standards of decency.

Go here to read a lengthy summary of the report, or here for the full 190 page report.

< 9th Circuit Tosses Partial Birth Abortion Bill | Unanswered Questions in Dedge Case >

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

  • Contribute To TalkLeft


    • AI Questions Executions of Mentally Ill | 10 comments (10 topical)
    Re: AI Questions Executions of Mentally Ill (none / 0) (#2)
    by Sailor on Tue Jan 31, 2006 at 02:04:48 PM EST
    There is a difference between legal competency and mentally ill, and the law is way behind the medical community on this definition.
    not that they are not finding all the excuses under the sun right now.
    Please provide links to presentages of defendents who 'get off' while claiming some excuse you mention. Also, while many states heeded the meme of 'not guilty by reason of insanity' was being abused and changed their laws, actual stats show that defense was rarely successful anyway. I love how vicious armchair quarterbacks and keyboard commandos always are quick with an opinion ... minus the facts.

    Re: AI Questions Executions of Mentally Ill (none / 0) (#3)
    by Quaker in a Basement on Tue Jan 31, 2006 at 02:23:33 PM EST
    How are we to defend the sanctity of life if we aren't willing to kill a few people in the process?

    Re: AI Questions Executions of Mentally Ill (none / 0) (#4)
    by phat on Tue Jan 31, 2006 at 03:37:41 PM EST
    "Anthony Larette was assigned a trial lawyer with no capital experience. The jury was left entirely unaware of his history of mental illness, the symptoms of which included blackouts and hallucinations, and after a sentencing phase which lasted less than an hour, they voted for a death sentence. He was executed in Missouri in 1995." phat

    Re: AI Questions Executions of Mentally Ill (none / 0) (#5)
    by jimcee on Tue Jan 31, 2006 at 07:27:07 PM EST
    Of couse if we could know in advance who these defective murderers are we could have them aborted before they murdered anyone and there would be no argument from from the Left. Or they could be executed after they committed thier crimes. So what is it; kill them before they are born or kill them after they have killed? So which came first the killer or his birth? Yeah it is an absurd argument but not any different from the anti-death penalty pro-abortion folks. These arguments are best left in the classroom before it becomes an Orwellian reality.

    Re: AI Questions Executions of Mentally Ill (none / 0) (#6)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Tue Jan 31, 2006 at 08:15:03 PM EST
    So what is it; kill them before they are born or kill them after they have killed? So which came first the killer or his birth?
    Bigot. We could learn to diagnose and treat mental illnesses before the rare case of mental illness related violence occurs. We can also treat, rather than punish, those who aren't diagnosed until too late. Punishing people for actions they can't control is simple sadism. Failing to treat people who can be helped is equally cruel. When it's about an illness the solution should be treatment.

    Re: AI Questions Executions of Mentally Ill (none / 0) (#7)
    by phat on Tue Jan 31, 2006 at 09:19:40 PM EST
    Of couse if we could know in advance who these defective murderers are we could have them aborted before they murdered anyone and there would be no argument from from the Left. Or they could be executed after they committed thier crimes. So what is it; kill them before they are born or kill them after they have killed? So which came first the killer or his birth? Yeah it is an absurd argument but not any different from the anti-death penalty pro-abortion folks. These arguments are best left in the classroom before it becomes an Orwellian reality.
    You're right. That is an absurd argument. And your bringing it up tells me more about the obscene attachment some have with the death penalty. It tells me that reasoned argument is not something you are willing to engage in. You may claim it, sure, but you don't do it. I'll tell you this, there are plenty of people who are pro-life who are opposed to the death penalty, (the Pope comes to mind). Are you willing to discount them, too? I would assume you are, since you are too willing to attack people who are pro-choice and not willing to discuss the death penalty on its own merits. It's an obscene and irrational attachment to a brutal practice. When you are you willing to discuss the death penalty, please, say something. Barring that, well... phat

    Re: AI Questions Executions of Mentally Ill (none / 0) (#8)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Wed Feb 01, 2006 at 12:48:15 AM EST
    come on this mentally country been killing nuts for 230 years.

    Re: AI Questions Executions of Mentally Ill (none / 0) (#9)
    by Sailor on Wed Feb 01, 2006 at 09:00:20 AM EST
    "Of couse if we could know in advance who these defective murderers are we could have them aborted before they murdered anyone and there would be no argument from from the Left." Of course, the left has always been for forced abortion, that's why we call it 'A woman's right to choose.' * And either kill them now or kill them later are certainly the only choices; after all, education, treatment and meds have never worked for anyone. (* Tho, I'm starting think it might be appropriate at time;-)

    Re: AI Questions Executions of Mentally Ill (none / 0) (#11)
    by Al on Wed Feb 01, 2006 at 02:49:59 PM EST
    Jimcee, do you have an argument that is based on a situation that is possible in this universe? You say your argument is absurd; but it isn't even that.

    Re: AI Questions Executions of Mentally Ill (none / 0) (#12)
    by phat on Wed Feb 01, 2006 at 08:32:36 PM EST
    Great! This nutcase won't harm anyone else.
    I rest my case. Obscene. phat

    AI Questions Executions of Mentally Ill | 10 comments (10 topical)