Mentally Ill Killer's Execution Blocked
A divided Supreme Court on Thursday blocked the execution of a Texas killer, saying lower courts should have considered psychiatric evidence about his mental illness.
The court ruled 5-4 in the case of Scott Louis Panetti, who shot his in-laws to death 15 years ago in front of his wife and young daughter. Lawyers for the convicted murderer say that he suffers from a severe documented illness that is the source of gross delusions.
"This argument, we hold, should have been considered" when Panetti was scheduled for execution, said Justice Anthony Kennedy, who wrote the majority opinion.
Kennedy said Panetti should have been given the opportunity to submit expert psychiatric evidence in state court because "it is uncontested" that he made a substantial showing of incompetency. Siding with Kennedy in the majority were Justices John Paul Stevens, David Souter, Ruth Bader Ginsburg and Stephen Breyer.
In dissent, Justice Clarence Thomas said that Panetti had petitioned the federal courts twice in his case and the law allows only one petition.
"The court bends over backwards to allow Panetti" to bring his current claim, despite no evidence that his condition has worsened, or even changed, since 1995, Thomas wrote. He was joined by Chief Justice John Roberts and justices Antonin Scalia and Samuel Alito.
Thomas called the majority opinion "a half-baked holding that leaves the details of the insanity standard" for the lower court to work out.
In the Panetti decision, the justices "made clear they are not talking about the broad sweep of mental illness, as some other organizations have urged," said Kent Scheidegger of the Criminal Justice Legal Foundation, which supports capital punishment.
One of Panetti's lawyers, Keith S. Hampton of Austin, Texas, said that "what this decision means is that you can bring in experts to try to determine a person's rationality."
Executing people like Panetti "serves no purpose and offends our sense of decency and common humanity," said Gregory W. Wiercioch, a staff attorney with Texas Defender Service who argued the case before the Supreme Court in April.
Texas had asked the court to reject Panetti's appeal on procedural grounds. Attorneys for the state also argued that the court should set a tougher standard for mental illness exceptions to capital punishment.
A former ranch hand and native of Hayward, Wis., Panetti had a history of mental problems including schizophrenia, recording 14 hospital stays over 11 years before his conviction. The killings took place in September 1992.
Four courts have said he was competent when he fired his trial lawyers. A jury and two courts rejected his defense of not guilty by reason of insanity. Panetti personally argued that only an insane person could prove the insanity defense, dressing in cowboy clothing and submitting an initial witness list that included Jesus Christ and John F. Kennedy.
Then-Justice Lewis Powell said 20 years ago that a person may not be put to death if he cannot perceive "the connection between his crime and his punishment."
The Eighth Amendment of the Constitution bars "the execution of a person who is so lacking in rational understanding that he cannot comprehend that he is being put to death because of the crime he was convicted of committing," they said in court papers.
© 2009 The Associated Press. All Rights Reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed. The court ruled 5-4 in the case of Scott Louis Panetti, who shot his in-laws to death 15 years ago in front of his wife and young daughter. Lawyers for the convicted murderer say that he suffers from a severe documented illness that is the source of gross delusions.
"This argument, we hold, should have been considered" when Panetti was scheduled for execution, said Justice Anthony Kennedy, who wrote the majority opinion.
Kennedy said Panetti should have been given the opportunity to submit expert psychiatric evidence in state court because "it is uncontested" that he made a substantial showing of incompetency. Siding with Kennedy in the majority were Justices John Paul Stevens, David Souter, Ruth Bader Ginsburg and Stephen Breyer.
In dissent, Justice Clarence Thomas said that Panetti had petitioned the federal courts twice in his case and the law allows only one petition.
"The court bends over backwards to allow Panetti" to bring his current claim, despite no evidence that his condition has worsened, or even changed, since 1995, Thomas wrote. He was joined by Chief Justice John Roberts and justices Antonin Scalia and Samuel Alito.
Thomas called the majority opinion "a half-baked holding that leaves the details of the insanity standard" for the lower court to work out.
In the Panetti decision, the justices "made clear they are not talking about the broad sweep of mental illness, as some other organizations have urged," said Kent Scheidegger of the Criminal Justice Legal Foundation, which supports capital punishment.
One of Panetti's lawyers, Keith S. Hampton of Austin, Texas, said that "what this decision means is that you can bring in experts to try to determine a person's rationality."
Executing people like Panetti "serves no purpose and offends our sense of decency and common humanity," said Gregory W. Wiercioch, a staff attorney with Texas Defender Service who argued the case before the Supreme Court in April.
Texas had asked the court to reject Panetti's appeal on procedural grounds. Attorneys for the state also argued that the court should set a tougher standard for mental illness exceptions to capital punishment.
A former ranch hand and native of Hayward, Wis., Panetti had a history of mental problems including schizophrenia, recording 14 hospital stays over 11 years before his conviction. The killings took place in September 1992.
Four courts have said he was competent when he fired his trial lawyers. A jury and two courts rejected his defense of not guilty by reason of insanity. Panetti personally argued that only an insane person could prove the insanity defense, dressing in cowboy clothing and submitting an initial witness list that included Jesus Christ and John F. Kennedy.
Then-Justice Lewis Powell said 20 years ago that a person may not be put to death if he cannot perceive "the connection between his crime and his punishment."
The Eighth Amendment of the Constitution bars "the execution of a person who is so lacking in rational understanding that he cannot comprehend that he is being put to death because of the crime he was convicted of committing," they said in court papers.
Recommended
- Cell Phones: Evolution Or Revolution?
- College Admission: Tough Times For Girls?
- Cannabis Tour Guide On Amsterdam Play Video
- On Tape: Man Sets Wife On Fire Play Video
- The Anti-Drug Campaign Play Video
- @katiecouric: Kathryn Stockett Play Video
- Good Grades, Bought And Paid For
- Perez Moments After The Blast Play Video
*********************************
godofredo29, Isn't that the truth. Americans are really pretty silly. When a person is ready to die, wants to die, is suffering, terminal, and would like to end their life peacfully, the whackos do everything in their power to stop it. Run around beating the Bible and saying that you have no right to your own life.
On the other hand, here is a guy that doesn't know his rear from roast beef, and everyone can't wait to kill him.
If fact American's can't wait to put as many people in jail as possible, and kill as many of those as they can. I always figured if I was homeless and needed a place to stay, I would just smoke a joint on the street, and voila, room and board at all the good tax payers expense. :o)
Posted by gunnerv1 at 12:12 PM : Jun 29, 2007
I'm with gunny on this.
Although I agree with most of your post, sometimes a person is just born a bad seed. No matter how good your parenting skills are, you will find that one of your two kids is a success and an angel, the other sibling is a juvenile delinquent. Both raised the same, by genuine, loving parents. We really need insane asylums to keep the dangerous ones locked up forever. It just isn't fair to the sane citizens to have a killer running around freely.
If he doesn't know he's getting ready to get strapped to old sparky and put out of his misery, so much the better for him.
All this other stuff is totally irrelevant.
The law states that no man shall be executed if he is unable to understand WHY he's being put to death and boy does that fit here. He SHOULD be in a mental institution. As a matter of fact, he's so sure that God cured him that he's refused to take any medication for his illness for the past 10 or so years. It absolutely HAS been documented that his condition has severely deteriorated since his sentence.