Opposition to the Death Penalty for Individuals with Severe Mental Illness - PowerPoint Presentation

Slide1

Opposition to the Death Penalty for Individuals with Severe Mental Illness

Turning Public Opinion Consensus Into State Legislative Action

Aurélie

Tabuteau Mangels

, Mental Illness Initiative Fellow

American Bar Association’s Death Penalty Due Process Review ProjectSlide2

Serious Mental Illness

Refers to disorders that carry certain diagnoses such as schizophrenia, bipolar disorder, and major depression; that are relatively persistent (at least 1 year) and that result in comparatively severe impairment in major areas of functioning.

Different from intellectual disability.

Exemption from the death penaltyIndividuals found to have a serious mental illness could not be sentenced to death or executed,But could still be found guilty and sentenced to LWOP.Legislative actionIntroducing and passing bills in state legislatures (death penalty states)

What are we talking about?Slide3

From the public

November 2014: 58% of Americans in favor of a SMI exemption

(Public

Policy Polling)December 2015: 66% of Americans in favor of a SMI exemption (David Binder Research) From relevant professional organizations2006: American Bar Association (ABA), American Psychiatric Association (APA), American Psychological Association (APA), National Alliance on Mental Illness (NAMI)2011:

Mental Health America (MHA)

Occasionally, from conservative voices in individual casesScott Panetti

Today: There is a strong support for a severe mental illness exemption… Slide4

Connecticut (2009) only state to ever pass a SMI exemption

lawDeath penalty abolished for future offenses in 2012.The Courts haven’t recognized a constitutional bar on the execution of individuals with severe mental

illness

Some state Supreme Court judges have expressed their opinion that execution of those with severe mental illness violates the 8th Amendment: Justice Rucker, Corcoran v. State (Ind. 2002)Justice Pfeifer, State v. Scott (Ohio 2001)

Justice

Zazzali, State v. Nelson (N.J. 2002)Justice Stratton, State v. Ketterer

(

Ohio 2006) .

… but no State legislative action or constitutional banSlide5

So what happens currently for defendants with severe mental illness claims in capital cases?

Their mental illness can be taken into account in capital

proceedings,

but they also continue to be sentenced to death and executed. Most recently: Adam Ward in Texas, executed on March 22nd 2016 Fifth Circuit opinion: “Petitioner

has been afflicted with mental illness his entire life

. He was diagnosed with bipolar disorder and placed on lithium as early as age 4”.Slide6

2015 Public Opinion Research Results

Research conducted by David Binder Research/8th Amendment ProjectSlide7

Strong support for the exemption across six states

Polling conducted of

1200

individuals (200 in 6 death penalty states).Two focus groups held in Indianapolis in Nov. 2015:One group of men, one group of women,Both groups white, independent and Republicans with college education.

1

st

Ask

States polled: Idaho, South Dakota, Indiana, Ohio, Tennessee, VirginiaSlide8

Many more respondents “very” conservative than “very” liberal

Ideology

8% Very

24% VerySlide9

The proposal changes the current death penalty law so that persons with:

documented evidence of a qualifying severe mental illness, at the time of the

crime,

cannot be executed, and instead would receive a sentence of life in prison without parole if found guilty.Proposal presented to the voters polledSlide10

2/3 of voters initially support the proposal to add an exemption to the death penalty for those with severe mental illness

Support — 66%

Oppose — 24%

1

st

AskSlide11

The case by case decision making process is considered the most convincing reason to support the proposal by voters

(Adapted version)

This

proposal would require a

case by case decision making process

by

a judge or jury who

will consider all of the

relevant evidence.

62% more likely to support

This

proposal would add an exemption

only for persons who can prove they had a qualifying medical diagnosis or documented symptoms of a

SMI.55% more likely to support

Examples of qualifying severe mental illness under this proposal include schizophrenia, bipolar disorder, and

PTSD.

52% more likely to support

More likely to

oppose

No difference/unsure

More

likely to

supportSlide12

Movement After Details: 6% increase in support after voters hear details about the proposal.

2

nd

Ask: After Details

Support — 72%

Oppose — 22%

+6

- 2

- 4Slide13

Strongest argument in support of the proposal is that a severe mental illness significantly compromises an individual’s decision making process.

(Simplified version)

Very / SW convincing

Unsure/False

Not at all/not very convincing

Severe

mental illness

can

significantly impair an

individual

, such as a veteran suffering

PTSD. Judgment

, impulse control, and decision-making skills

can be

significantly compromised.

74% found it convincing

The

law currently forbids the death penalty for persons with intellectual disabilities and

juveniles. People with severe mental illnesses should be treated the same way.

59% found it convincing

The process to diagnose SMI is

conducted by medical experts and is lengthy and detailed

. It is extremely difficult for someone to fake an illness this severe.

62% found it convincingSlide14

Focus Group findings

13 of the 16 participants said the Legislature should vote Yes on a SMI exemption, 3 said No.

Participants agreed that

serious cases of disorders like PTSD, schizophrenia and bipolar disorder should qualify as SMI.Participants also want a rigorous case by case determination.

You need the right experts, and you need to ask them if they have seen people who have faked it, and how do you get around that.

As a society I think it would be a bad decision to execute someone with a mental illness or limited capabilities. Just from a moral standpoint, they don’t have the ability to make proper decisions, even if the crime they committed was serious enough to be in that situation.

(Female voter)

(Male

voter) Slide15

Turning the consensus into actionSlide16

Dispelling

the mythsEducating the public

Gathering

behind the mental health communityCreating strong processes to address the public’s concernsHow we’re turning the consensus into legislative actionSlide17

Thank you!

Questions?

Aurélie Tabuteau MangelsMental Illness Initiative FellowDeath Penalty Due Process Review Project Section of Civil Rights and Social Justice American Bar AssociationTel.: (202)

442-3451 @:

Aurelie.TabuteauMangels@americanbar.org