The Virginia state
senate approved a similar bill three months ago. Other bills are gaining
traction in Texas, Ohio, Tennessee and Missouri. Some include
post-traumatic stress disorder, while others are limited to schizophrenia,
schizoaffective disorder and bipolar disorder. Many require active psychosis at
the time of the crime. Some would let a judge decide who should be exempted,
before the trial begins. The Texas bill would let a jury decide during the
trial. The Tennessee bill requires a documented medical history before the
crime, which might exclude someone like Otto.
Supporters of these bills, with the backing of the American
Bar Association, argue that the “insanity defense” tends to be very
narrowly defined, and juries are skeptical of it. The Supreme Court has
already banned the death penalty for people with intellectual disabilities and
those who committed their crimes before the age of 18. Both bans were based on
the idea that society views these murderers as “categorically less culpable
than the average criminal.” The high court has ruled that death row prisoners
must be “competent” to be executed, though lower
courts are still debating exactly what that means.
“Defendants who have a mental illness are particularly
vulnerable in our criminal justice system,” Amanda Marzullo, director of the
Texas Defender Service, told a panel of legislators in her state last month.
“They are very likely to fire their defense lawyers, or not cooperate with
them, or even try to represent themselves.”
Prosecutors have been wary. “The version of this legislation
that is pending in Ohio would effectively end the death penalty,” said Louis
Tobin, executive director of the Ohio Prosecuting Attorneys Association. He
predicted that everyone facing the punishment would be able to obtain a
diagnosis. A defendant can already mount an insanity defense, he pointed out,
and then tell the jury about mental illness as a way of persuading them to vote
for life without parole instead of death. Ohio’s bill, as of now, would apply
retroactively, potentially setting up lengthy legal fights over old cases.
To read more CLICK HERE
No comments:
Post a Comment