Legal Dilemmas in Mental Health and Criminal Justice
Delve into the intricate legal landscape surrounding mental illness and criminal justice, exploring cases like Sell v. US and the paradoxes of competency in different stages of the legal process. Uncover the complexities of forced medication, competency evaluations, and the evolving methods of execution in cases like Brad Sigmon's imminent firing squad sentence. Gain insights into the nuanced considerations of state of mind at the time of crime, trial, and execution. Navigate through the legal intricacies with Baumgartner in POLI 203, Spring 2025.
Download Presentation
Please find below an Image/Link to download the presentation.
The content on the website is provided AS IS for your information and personal use only. It may not be sold, licensed, or shared on other websites without obtaining consent from the author. If you encounter any issues during the download, it is possible that the publisher has removed the file from their server.
You are allowed to download the files provided on this website for personal or commercial use, subject to the condition that they are used lawfully. All files are the property of their respective owners.
The content on the website is provided AS IS for your information and personal use only. It may not be sold, licensed, or shared on other websites without obtaining consent from the author.
E N D
Presentation Transcript
Deadly Justice, Ch 13 Public Opinion With some updates: Mental illness, Brad Sigmon March 5, 2025 Baumgartner, POLI 203, Spring 2025 1
One correction from last time Sell v. United States (2003): States may NOT forcibly medicate an individual solely for the purpose of making them competent for execution. I said the opposite several times in lecture last week, and that confused many of you (those who did the readings!) A confusing trajectory by the Court: Perry v. Louisiana (1990): states may not execute those rendered competent solely by medical treatment, BUT: Washington v. Harper (1990): states MAY forcibly medicate, even against the person s will. Riggins v. Nevada (1992): Defendants at trial may be forcibly medicated while on trial. Baumgartner, POLI 203, Spring 2025 2
Current status, and the general paradox Sell v. US (2003): States may NOT forcibly medicate SOLELY for the purpose of rendering someone competent. This is kind of like Batson v. Kentucky: States may not exclude people from jury service SOLELY on the basis of their race. (But you have to catch the DA putting that racist logic in print, or saying it in court.) I m pretty sure it does happen. States just can say that is what they are doing, or they must come up with a second reason why they are doing it. Baumgartner, POLI 203, Spring 2025 3
Another distinction from last time The Court is interested in your state of mind at 3 different moments: Time of crime: Did you know what you were doing, at the time of the crime? Influence of others, intoxication, mental status at the time of the crime, and other similar factors can be a mitigator, or even an element in reducing the crime from 1st degree to a lower degree, or the plea down to NGRI (Not Guilty by Reason of Insanity) Time of trial: Are you competent to stand trial and assist in your own defense? Trials may be delayed for this reason. You await in jail. Time of execution: Are you competent to understand that the state is putting you to death, and why (as a punishment for a crime) Baumgartner, POLI 203, Spring 2025 4
Brad Sigmon, South Carolina Scheduled for execution this Friday, by firing squad Kaneesha and I wrote a report about the capriciousness of his death sentence. (We wrote a similar one for Freddie Owens a few months ago, unsuccessfully.) I asked the attorneys: I thought there was litigation about how you could not force a person to choose their own method of death. Yes, we won that. They changed it. Now, the default is the electric chair, and if you don t want that you can choose lethal injection or firing squad. All the recent lethal injection cases have required a second dose of midazolam, though the state s protocol calls for only one. So, something is wrong with the drugs, or the protocol is faulty. So, people are concerned about being tortured, and he chose the firing squad. Baumgartner, POLI 203, Spring 2025 5
Most recent firing squad executions 6/18/2010, Ronnie Lee Gardner (Utah) 1/26/1996, John Albert Taylor (Utah) 1/17/1977, Gary Gilmore (Utah) That s it in the modern period Five states allow this as a possible method: MS, OK, UT, SC, ID Baumgartner, POLI 203, Spring 2025 6
Public Opinion Simple question: What SHOULD BE the relation between public opinion and use of the death penalty? While public opinion is moving away from the death penalty, it s easy for opponents of the death penalty to say the state should do so as well. However, it could work the other way as well. In fact, it did work the other way during the period of 1972 to about the mid-1990s. Similarly, what if voters / citizens in Robeson County support the death penalty more than those in Guilford or Orange County? How does that square with equal protection of the law ? Baumgartner, POLI 203, Spring 2025 7
Political science / representation studies Our entire profession is focused, to a large part, on assessing the degree to which democratic governments respond to public opinion. But there is another side to representative government: protecting the actions of the government from being taken over by prejudice, anger, passion Protection of minorities, of foreigners, of the marginalized is often unpopular. This might be nowhere as common as in criminal justice: Every effort to enforce constitutional protections of due process and the rights of the accused has been unpopular. So, we have to struggle in this class with what SHOULD be the role of public opinion in an area where people are accused of very serious crimes Baumgartner, POLI 203, Spring 2025 8
See the Gallup web site https://news.gallup.com/poll/1606/death-penalty.aspx BTW, on the first day of class I asked you all these questions. Your results compare to the Gallup results are on the class web site, Week 1. Big news from Gallup, when choosing from Death or LWOP, 2019 showed a 60-36 preference for LWOP, first time so strong. Baumgartner, POLI 203, Spring 2025 9
Who supports, who opposes? Surveys consistently show these people more likely to support: Men Whites Republicans Older people People with less education People in the South People living in rural areas People who believe in the bible as the literal truth Conservatives Other attitudes that go along with this: Punitiveness Racial resentment Authoritarian personality Spending too much on welfare Spending too much on cities, etc. Dispositional (not situational) understanding of crime Baumgartner, POLI 203, Spring 2025 10
Question wording matters Higher support: Generic question Specific individuals such as Saddam Hussein, Timothy McVeigh, Unabomber Lower support: DP v. LWOP v. possibility of parole Young defendant Felony murder cases / accomplice to the crime (very low support) Also note: death penalty is very rare. And people not supporting the death penalty can t be on the jury. So, there is something different from answering the generic Gallup Poll question and voting for death. Baumgartner, POLI 203, Spring 2025 11
A summary of public opinion 595 public opinion surveys with national samples, 1936 to present 147 questions were asked only once; we throw those out. 448 questions: Same wording, same company / survey organization 65 different questions Gallup murder is the most common question: 43 times NORC murder 30 times; Gallup morally acceptable 21 times, etc. Dyad-ratios algorithm, compares movement over time across two or more observations with the same question, generates a weighted moving average of the results. (UNC Prof. Jim Stimson gets credit!) Good: Uses all the possible information. Bad: You can t interpret the number other than to see if it s going up or down. Baumgartner, POLI 203, Spring 2025 15
Lets look at that index again, 1953 to present Three periods: 1. Before 1965 2. To 1996 3. After 1996 Baumgartner, POLI 203, Spring 2025 16
Public opinion almost perfectly predicts the annual number of death sentences Baumgartner, POLI 203, Spring 2025 17
Death Penalty and general punitiveness Peter Enns, Incarceration Nation, used the same method to measure public support for harsher v. less harsh criminal justice policies. It correlates very closely with death penalty opinion. So there is something general about the 1980s and 1990s and crime. It has changed since then. Baumgartner, POLI 203, Spring 2025 18
State by state variation: no impact, huh?! Regions of Texas. Houston not the highest. State by state Baumgartner, POLI 203, Spring 2025 19
An opinion paradox Generally, pretty high levels of support, in the abstract But very low levels of actual use Political leaders have felt the power of public opinion on this Since the mid-1990s, significant declines in support LWOP is available Crime rates have dropped Concerns about innocence / exonerations Several states have abolished, through LEGISLATIVE action, and the politicians did not get booted out. So, some big shifts in the last 20 years, as compared to the earlier period Baumgartner, POLI 203, Spring 2025 20
Some data for North Carolina, mirroring national trends. Is this a problem? What if your crime was in 1993? You d have about a 3-4 percent chance of death. Death sentences per 100 homicides If the crime was after 2000, you d have less than a 1 percent chance of death. Baumgartner, POLI 203, Spring 2025 21
Evolving standards of decency We do expect that the justice system will evolve over time. Various improvements / safeguards have been added to the system over time Does that mean that those sentenced to death in earlier periods should have their sentences reversed? Should reforms be retroactive? If they were retroactive, they might not make it through the legislature So many contradictions and puzzles here Baumgartner, POLI 203, Spring 2025 22
