'Furiosus Solo Furore Punitur': Should Mentally Ill Capital Offenders Be Categorically Exempt from the Death Penalty?

2014 ◽  
Author(s):  
Emily E. Randolph
Keyword(s):  
Death Penalty ◽  
Mentally Ill ◽  
Capital Offenders

Save the Death Penalty for the Most Culpable Offenders

1993 ◽  
Vol 21 (3) ◽  
pp. 363-372
Author(s):  
Michael B. Ross
Keyword(s):  
Death Penalty ◽  
Capital Punishment ◽  
Mentally Ill ◽  
State Legislatures ◽  
Mentally Retarded ◽  
The State ◽  
Heated Debate ◽  
Speed Up ◽  
Controversial Topic

The death penalty is a controversial topic that continues to generate heated debate in our country. Polls show that the vast majority of Americans favor the use of capital punishment. In response, politicians both in Congress and in the state legislatures have proposed measures to expand our use of the death penalty and to speed up the rate of executions. However, while this “tough on crime” rhetoric is popular, we as Americans must be careful to see that those whom we do execute are in fact the most culpable of offenders. This article explores our past use of the death penalty and proposes that we implement certain protections for the least culpable of offenders: the mentally ill, the mentally retarded, and the juvenile.

Emerging Trends from the Resentencing of Capital Offenders in Malawi

2019 ◽  
Vol 22 (2) ◽  
pp. 164-199
Author(s):  
Mwiza Jo Nkhata
Keyword(s):  
Death Penalty ◽  
Criminal Procedure ◽  
Constitutional Court ◽  
Evidence Code ◽  
Life Imprisonment ◽  
High Court ◽  
Emerging Trends ◽  
Capital Offenders ◽  
The Republic ◽  
Mandatory Sentence

In 2007, the High Court of Malawi, sitting as a constitutional court, declared that the mandatory sentence of death for murder was unconstitutional. At the time of the High Court’s invalidation of the mandatory death penalty, Malawi’s prisons had over 190 prisoners serving their sentences as a result of the imposition of the mandatory death penalty. Some of these prisoners were on death row, while others had their sentences commuted to life imprisonment. When the mandatory death penalty was declared unconstitutional, the High Court also directed that all prisoners serving their sentences for murder should be brought before the High Court so that they could receive individual sentences taking into account the circumstances of the offense, the offender, as well as the interests of the victim(s). This paper interrogates the application of the sentencing discretion that was introduced with the outlawing of the mandatory death penalty in Malawi. Specifically, the paper analyzes decisions that have emerged from the resentencing of capital offenders in so far as judges have either considered or refused to consider the relevance of post-conviction factors during the resentencing. It is this paper’s central finding that a refusal to consider post-conviction factors, as some judges held, was not only unjustified but was also contrary to Malawi’s Criminal Procedure and Evidence Code and the Constitution of the Republic of Malawi. This refusal, the paper argues, resulted in sentencing discrepancies as well as a failure to properly utilize the discretion vested in the courts for purposes of sentencing.

scholarly journals An Analysis of the Death Penalty in Indonesia Criminal Law

2017 ◽  
Vol 1 (2) ◽  
pp. 191 ◽  
Author(s):  
Eddy Rifai
Keyword(s):  
Mental Illness ◽  
Death Penalty ◽  
Criminal Law ◽  
Judicial Review ◽  
Mentally Ill ◽  
Criminal Code ◽  
Constitutional Court ◽  
Legal Policy ◽  
The Public ◽  
Public Reaction

This research uses normative juridical approach to study on the analysis of the death penalty executions and the legal policy of death executions in Indonesia. There are delays on death executions for the convicted person since they entitled to using rights namely filing a judicial review (PK/Peninjauan Kembali). Furthermore, the legal loophole in the execution of the death penalty by the publication of the Constitutional Court Number 107 / PUU-XIII / 2015 which assert that the Attorney as the executor can ask the convicted person or his family whether to use their rights or not if the convict clearly does not want to use his rights, the executions will be carried out. Legal policy on threats and the implementation of the death penalty in the draft of criminal code was agreed by draftsman of the bill with the solutions. The draftsman of the bill agrees that the death penalty will be an alternative punishment sentenced as a last resort to protect the society. The bill also regulates that the execution among others include that the execution can be delayed by ten years probations. If the public reaction on the convict is not too large or convict has regret and could fix it or the role in the crime is not very important and there is a reason to reduce punishment, the death penalty may be changed. For pregnant women and the mentally ill convicts the execution can only be carried after the birth and the person has recovered from mental illness. The existence of this solutions is still kept putting the death penalty in criminal law, whereas the effectiveness of the death penalty is scientifically still in doubt to solve crimes and to prevent crimes by the death penalty punishment.

Mentally ill prisoners continue to face death penalty in Japan, says Amnesty

BMJ ◽  
2009 ◽  
Vol 339 (sep11 2) ◽  
pp. b3729-b3729 ◽  
Author(s):  
Z. Kmietowicz
Keyword(s):  
Death Penalty ◽  
Mentally Ill

“Good Ol' Boys” and the Chair: Death Penalty Attitudes of Policy Makers in Tennessee

1998 ◽  
Vol 44 (2) ◽  
pp. 245-256 ◽  
Author(s):  
John T. Whitehead
Keyword(s):  
Death Penalty ◽  
Capital Punishment ◽  
Mentally Ill ◽  
State Legislators ◽  
Research Support ◽  
Policy Makers ◽  
Public Defenders ◽  
Life Without Parole ◽  
District Attorneys ◽  
Attorneys General

This report is a summary of a survey of Tennessee chief prosecutors (district attorneys general), chief public defenders, and state legislators concerning their attitudes toward capital punishment. Global approval was compared with (1) approval when offered the options of life without parole and (2) life without parole and restitution to the victim's family. Additional items probed approval of capital punishment for specific subpopulations: juvenile, mentally ill, and mentally retarded offenders. Consistent with previous research, support for the death penalty declined when respondents were given the option of life without parole. A concluding note is offered calling for more complete research on the issue.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document