should be exempt from being sentenced to death?

First of all I am for the death penalty and am pro-choice. If you are not, that is a whole other topic for discussion.

I feel if a person , ANY person, criminally insane, mentally retarded, having a bad day, whatever, kills one of my babies (or anyone for that matter) should receive or give the jury the option to request the death penalty.

What do you think?

By Kaye on Wednesday, June 26, 2002 - 05:27 am:

Hmm interesting question. I guess I see both sides of this. The obvious is you do the crime, you pay the price, whatever that may be. However, I guess that if you take into account a Mental Retarded person did the crime, his IQ by definition is lower that 70. With this means he normally does not live alone because he is unable to make good choices such as remembering to turn off the stove, to grab pots and pans without pot holders etc. Overall their understanding of the world around them is very small. I think what fears me is that people will now use this as one more crutch. It would be interesting to see really the percentage of people on death row that are MR. Also then if they are that low function can we then hold their family more responsible? I think this really should have been decided on a more case to case basis!

By Jewlz on Wednesday, June 26, 2002 - 02:35 pm:

im going to stand on the side of no they shouldnt be put to death ... but should be put in a home where their environment is controled based on thier abilities to cope with the world... many in the big world would hurt ... encourage ... make fun of ... or just plain do harm to these people and they dont no the difference ... example they want freinds in school so this particular child said hed hold this bag for his new so called friend .... later he was found with a ziploc baggie full of marijuanna ..and was expelled from school till my hubby his special ed teacher stood up for him with a lawyer tellin them this was very illegal for the school board to do ...the child didnt look to see what he had just knew he was doing someting good for his new friend that was going to let him play basketball with him after school when they met to return the baggie ...the states have done away with state homes am im sorry for this ... instead of doing away with them i think they should have upgraded and updated them to society standards and have as many mainstreamed into a communitay as possible but on the other hand those that cannot ... make it so they are comfortable in the community ( like apart complex communtiy style ) they are in as possible. most dont remember from week to week or can comprehend higher than a 5 -10 year old child ... i cant hold a child like that resposible for a adult decision ...but we can control it ... as for hodling the parents resposible .... to a certain extent if they are not watchin and takin care to make sure certain things dont happen then i think yeah ...i mean if they allow a gun to be out in the open then of course but this is the same as with a child that isnt MR .this is a hard topic to discuss for me as my heart goes out to the parents and children that live and deal with these problems

By Pamt on Wednesday, June 26, 2002 - 06:54 pm:

Hmmm...well, let's see. In total opposition to Annie2, I am opposed to capital punishment for anyone and pro-life so my answer would obviously be no. First of all, a mentally retarded person who murdered someone would be essentially like a 4-5 year old child (or perhaps younger) who murdered someone, depending on their actual IQ. They are not capable of inferencing, understanding cause-effect, making sound judgments, or drawing reasonable conclusions. If a mentally retarded person actually did do something "worthy" of our court's determination of capital punishment then it was either (1) accidental (i.e, manslaughter instead of murder) or (2) they were used by someone of fairly "normal" intelligence as the pawn or scapegoat. As a speech pathologist, I have worked alot with children and adults of varying levels of MR and I highly doubt they could ever be capable of committing crimes that meet the criteria for the death penalty.

By Jennings111 on Wednesday, February 8, 2006 - 04:37 pm:

i agree with pamt 100%!!!

By Reds9298 on Wednesday, February 8, 2006 - 04:42 pm:

I am for capital punishment, but am pro-life. Other than that, I agree with Pamt 100% as well. Even if a mentally retarded person did commit murder, I DO NOT think he/she should receieve the death penalty.

By Luvn29 on Wednesday, February 8, 2006 - 04:59 pm:

Mentally retarded, as in IQ and mentality of a four or five year old child, probably not. But a person claiming insanity when they have otherwise lived life as a typical adult person, Yes. I guess these are two different things, but the way I feel is that if a person commits a crime such as those punishable by death, then they obviously have something missing in the head, or they wouldn't commit such crimes. I don't think they should be able to get out of punishment by claiming insanity.

By Groovepickle on Wednesday, February 8, 2006 - 05:15 pm:

It depends on the circumstance. The mentally retarded person no, and possibly no for the criminally insane, but it depends on the situation.

By Ginny~moderator on Wednesday, February 8, 2006 - 06:14 pm:

Well, since this almost 4 year old thread has been revived, I remain opposed, completely, to capital punishment, under any circumstances. One of my reasons for being opposed is the knowledge that judges and juries make mistakes. And prosecutors often (not always, maybe not frequently, but often) try to twist testimony and facts in order to get a conviction when the evidence is stretched, or evidence is kept out or not given to the defendant's attorney. And, sadly, sometimes police officers don't testify fully truthfully.

Then Governor Ryan of Illinois put a moratorium on the death penalty in Illinois in 2000 because, since the death penalty had been reinstated in 1977, 12 people had been executed but 13 had been cleared - often by outside, non-profit organizations opposed to the death penalty who had discovered (or uncovered) evidence that proved that the convicted person was not guilty. There is a well-known case in Illinois where both prosecutors and police chose to conceal evidence from the defendant's attorneys that would have exonerated him, even in the face of another person both admitting to the crime of murdering a child and clear, unrefutable evidence supporting that admission. To this day, the prosecutors and police are saying, well, maybe he didn't rape her, maybe his DNA isn't there, maybe this other guy did confess to the crime and say no one else was involved, but he could have been an onlooker. The case is the Jeanine Nicarico case.

Until we have a 100%, foolproof, mistake free method of adjudicating guilt, I am opposed to the death penalty. A number of states have an option for a sentence of life without parole which truly means life without parole - dying in jail. That option gives the opportunity to release the convicted person if 5, 10 or 20 years later it is found that the conviction was in error. You can always release and apologize to someone who was wrongfully convicted, as long as s/he is still alive.

Yes, I know there was a recent DNA test about the case of a man who had been executed, and the test showed that he was, indeed, at least guilty of rape (and almost certainly guilty of murder). But there are still the numbers of people every year who had been sentenced to death but are later released because DNA or other evidence proved their innocence.

By Luvn29 on Wednesday, February 8, 2006 - 06:35 pm:

Wow, didn't realize this post was that old! LOL!

By Reds9298 on Wednesday, February 8, 2006 - 07:12 pm:

I didn't either Adena! Didn't even pay attention!

By Ginny~moderator on Wednesday, February 8, 2006 - 08:04 pm:

I was incorrect above. Governor Ryan didn't put a moratorium on the death penalty, he put a moratorium on executions. To my knowledge, a death penalty sentence can still be imposed in Illinois.

By Cocoabutter on Thursday, February 9, 2006 - 12:10 am:

As a conservative, I truly don't understand being in favor of the death penalty. I don't know if I am for it or against, since I haven't explored that topic much. Has it been shown to have an impact on crime? I don't think so.

But, in the case of a severely mentally incompetent person, I do not believe that the death penalty should apply. They need to be out of public life, for sure, but they also need more help than they would get in prison.

Some criminals can't be rehabilitated, but I have heard good things about Christian rehabilitation in prisons. As far as mental therapy, I also think that prisons absolutely need it, but how to get it and pay for it is another question.

By Kim on Thursday, February 9, 2006 - 07:44 am:

Annie, I am assuming this sprouts from what is happening locally. I cannot remember the crime.....

By Ginny~moderator on Thursday, February 9, 2006 - 10:17 am:

Kim, whatever was happening locally, it was happening in June 2002, when Annie first posted.

By Missbookworm on Friday, February 17, 2006 - 10:26 pm:

What does being pro life or not have to do with capital punishment? A definition of pro life please

I'm with Pam on this one I am against capital punishment and therefore my answer would be no.

By Pamt on Saturday, February 18, 2006 - 01:23 pm:

For most people, "pro-life" equals "anti-abortion." To my way of thinking, pro-life means quite literally "for life." To that end, I am against things that end life (abortion, capital punishment, euthanasia) and for things that improve life (putting an end to the child sex trade, taking care of the homeless and abandoned, etc.). I recently blogged on the subject and explained my personal views in a lot more detail. You can read that http://pamela-august.blogspot.com/2006/01/pro-life-or-anti-abortion.html

By Missbookworm on Tuesday, February 21, 2006 - 02:02 pm:

Thanks Pam for explaining! It sounds like we have a lot in common in the way we "view" things.

*heads off to read pam's blog

By Bobbie~moderatr on Monday, February 27, 2006 - 09:45 am:

I am with Jewlz. I think they should rethink the closure of all the state run homes. There are too many people "on the streets" that would be best suited in a structured home setting. Not as in a jail type setting but a setting similar to a nursing home but set up to accommodate the needs of the MR/emotionally unstable. We have a "home", that is like a half way house. The people that end up there are released from the Psychiatric hospital here in town. They are being moved do to the insurance but are not ready to go home. They are released from there (the halfway house), per the insurance by being shown the door. Basically, they aren't concerned whether they have some where to go or not. Once they reach the stage of "sane" enough to be released they are told they will be leaving. Some of these people are homeless. They are taken to the homeless shelter and wished luck. They in turn leave the shelter because they are taken there and not under a "control" system and because they are not capable of looking out for their best interest they leave..

The times I have had DH put in the hospital he was released way before he was ready.. Insurance, limitations. I saw this woman hallucinating (very bad thing to see, ugly site) Her insurance told them to release her two days later.. There was NO way she was ready to return home but the insurance wasn't concerned, they had a day limit that had to be kept.. Family members have no options to help them.

I think it has to be handled on a case by case situation. And insanity and mentally retardation are two different things.. My understanding.. to be sentenced to the death penalty it has to be shown/prove that you were capable of understanding your crime and that your state of mind was one that shows you knew what you were doing and that you acted on these impulses knowing these actions were wrong and would cause death. Meaning, someone in the throws of insanity shoves someone out of a window thinking that the only escape was to fly from the situation and the person falls to their death is different then someone being mad and shoving someone out of a window. Just as a MR person, let say, throwing something off of an over pass.. They may not have the ability to understand that throwing that thing off the over pass will most likely lead to the death of a passer by. Many of them can't process past the action and see the out come. Thus the four to five year old mentality.. If a four year old is mad and whacks someone over the head, they are acting on impulse not understanding the total effect of their actions. Where as a emotionally sound person would know, If I whack him in the head he will be hurt..