I don't understand how they have drawn a Lakshman Rekha on 70 IQ
level? And can intellectual disability be measured? very complex for
me!
Mar 4th 2014 15:22 by The Economist | WASHINGTON, DC

http://www.economist.com/blogs/democracyinamerica/2014/03/capital-punishment
WHEN Bill Clinton was governor of Arkansas, he oversaw the execution
of Ricky Ray Rector, a man so feebleminded that he said he would save
the pecan pie from his last meal "for later". In 2002 the Supreme
Court ruled that putting mentally retarded people to death was a
"cruel and unusual" punishment, and therefore unconstitutional. But
the justices left it up to the states to define retardation, and this
has proven so difficult that on March 3rd the issue came before the
Supreme Court again.

A Florida man named Freddie Lee Hall (pictured) was convicted in 1978,
along with an accomplice, for the rape and murder of a pregnant woman
and the murder of a police officer. He was sentenced to death. His
lawyers are appealing that he is too mentally incapacitated to be
executed.


For the bulk of the hour-long hearing, the justices quizzed Seth
Waxman, representing Mr Hall, and Allen Winsor, Florida's
solicitor-general, about the role of statistics in defining
intellectual disability. Florida's test requires defendants to
demonstrate both "significantly subaverage intellectual functioning"
and impairments in "adaptive behaviour" like communicating and looking
after oneself. Psychiatrists use a similar approach and, like Florida,
consider an IQ score of 70 or below as indicative of mental
disability. But unlike many states and against the medical consensus,
Florida uses that score as a rigid cutoff point. Mr Hall's IQ in 2002
was 71, so Florida considers him eligible for execution. It refuses to
consider other evidence of his disability.

That is a very slim line between prison and death, but, as Justice
Sonia Sotomayor said, "a line has to be drawn somewhere." The main
question she and several justices pressed is whether Florida may
ignore the "standard error of measurement" implicit in all
intelligence tests. "It is universally accepted," Mr Waxman argued,
"that persons with obtained scores of 71 to 75 can and often do have
mental retardation" due to a five-point margin of error. The four
liberal justices, along with the swing voter, Anthony Kennedy, were
inclined to agree. "Your rule prevents us from getting a better
understanding of whether that IQ score is accurate or not," Mr Kennedy
admonished Mr Winsor.

Not until the closing minutes of the hearing did anyone acknowledge
the man's life hanging in the balance. Justice Stephen Breyer noted
that Mr Hall "has been on death row for over 35 years". Justice
Kennedy asked Mr Winsor if he considered Florida's brand of delayed
justice to be "consistent with the purposes of the death penalty".
This inquiry from Mr Kennedy had nothing to do with the narrow legal
question of the day, but it betrayed his more general doubts about the
way the Sunshine State puts people to death.

Antonin Scalia, a conservative justice, was more hostile to Mr Hall's
defence. He noted that it took ten years after his initial conviction
for Mr Hall's lawyers to raise the issue of retardation. He added that
the complexity of the crime--which involved hiding one victim's body in
a wood--belies Mr Hall's purported disability. The state might well
argue, Justice Scalia said, that Mr Hall "could not have pulled all of
this off" if he was really so intellectually impaired. This is an old
theme for Mr Scalia, who argued back in 2002 that the court's bar on
executing the mentally disabled would turn "the process of capital
trial into a game" where murderers "feign mental retardation" to avoid
the death penalty.

Justice Elena Kagan cut to the chase late in the proceedings: "Can I
just ask," she said to Mr Winsor, "why you have this policy?"
Initially flummoxed, Mr Winsor replied: "Florida has an interest in
ensuring that the people who evade execution because of mental
retardation are people who are, in fact, mentally retarded." Raising
the IQ cutoff to 75 to take account of the margin of error, he said,
"would double the number of people who are eligible for
the...exemption." In other words, Florida wants to execute more
people, and therefore uses the most rigid definition of retardation
that it can get away with. It probably won't get away with it for much
longer.

-- 
Avinash Shahi
M.Phil Research Scholar
Centre for The Study of Law and Governance
Jawaharlal Nehru University
New Delhi India



Register at the dedicated AccessIndia list for discussing accessibility of 
mobile phones / Tabs on:
http://mail.accessindia.org.in/mailman/listinfo/mobile.accessindia_accessindia.org.in


Search for old postings at:
http://www.mail-archive.com/accessindia@accessindia.org.in/

To unsubscribe send a message to
accessindia-requ...@accessindia.org.in
with the subject unsubscribe.

To change your subscription to digest mode or make any other changes, please 
visit the list home page at
http://accessindia.org.in/mailman/listinfo/accessindia_accessindia.org.in


Disclaimer:
1. Contents of the mails, factual, or otherwise, reflect the thinking of the 
person sending the mail and AI in no way relates itself to its veracity;

2. AI cannot be held liable for any commission/omission based on the mails sent 
through this mailing list..

Reply via email to