Op-Ed: Prohibit the Death Penalty for Offenders with Mental Illness

Here's an op-ed that appeared in the The News-Sentinel (Fort Wayne, Indiana), from Kathleen Bayes. Bayes is the executive director of the National Alliance on Mental Illness-Fort Wayne.

Indiana should pass bill to prevent death penalty for severely mentally
ill

Thank You, Fort Wayne News-Sentinel editorial staff for your continued strong objection to reinstating the death sentence for Joseph Corcoran. Your editorial on Jan. 5 inspired me to continue the fight.

Please, please, Gov. Daniels, choose to commute the death sentence of Corcoran to life in prison without parole. End this pathetic injustice and enormous waste of money.

Order the Indiana attorney general's office to forgo any further appeals. Surely, they have more useful, productive ways to spend their time and money.

In the official study of the death penalty in Indiana, commissioned by Gov. O'Bannon and published in 2002, the costs to the county and state for an average death-penalty trial through all appeals totaled $568,836. That total did not include the cost of the defense in federal court and in clemency proceedings, all of which are paid by the federal courts and are substantial. The death penalty and its enormous cost should be reserved for the worst of the worst, if it continues to exist in Indiana at all.

Words cannot express Fort Wayne National Alliance on Mental Illness members' disappointment that the U.S. Court of Appeals has permitted Indiana to choose to reinstate the death penalty for Corcoran once again.

Corcoran is extremely mentally ill. This truth is no longer in question.

Corcoran is absolutely consumed with the brain illness, paranoid schizophrenia. Absolutely no one denies this truth after his 10 years in prison. Three experts say his mental illness is so severe that he is incompetent to make rational decisions. The state did not contradict this expert testimony. Corcoran's pattern of behavior over the last 10 years verifies this truth. One of the three appeals court judges, Judge Ann Claire Williams, agreed that Corcoran was mentally incompetent to waive
his right to having the trial court review his case.

This man is so ill with schizophrenia that all he wants to do is die. His profound schizophrenia prevented him from cooperating with his defense when he was first tried and convicted. His current defense attorney told me that no one wanted to take his case because he is so uncooperative in
his delusions. He just wants people to help him die, signing waiver after waiver of his appeals rights.

Putting Corcoran to death serves no moral purpose. Killing him will not deter future criminal activity driven by mental illness.

There is no logic, no rationale, no plan, nothing gained when a severely mentally ill person is overcome by the voices in his head and commits a capital crime. It is not an act of conscious will or choice. There is no way to deter total irrationality by punishment. Deterrence comes only from
treatment. Members of NAMI who live with mental illness will often tell us about irrational, regrettable behavior that resulted from their brain malfunction, not their conscious will. They will tell us how sorry they are when they return to sanity by effective treatment. They will tell us how hard they work to fix the damage the illness caused. Indiana chose not to execute children and the severely retarded. Indiana should also exempt the profoundly mentally ill.

No one is clamoring for Corcoran's execution except the attorney general's office. The grieving family has steadfastly remained silent. Let the torment of the resurrection of Corcoran's impending death pass from them. Release them from reliving this grief every two years.

The Indiana Legislature must change the law by passing Senate Bill 22. It will prohibit the death penalty in cases where a defendant is found to be afflicted with severe and persistent mental illness, carefully defined to avoid abuse. Senate Bill 22 will save the state of Indiana a lot of money. The proposed law has been passed out of the Bowser Commission, established by the Senate for thorough examination and review. It is strongly supported by the American Psychiatric Association, American Psychological Association, Mental Health American, NAMI National, the American Bar Association, many other organizations and most law enforcement personnel.

The state of Indiana should save its money and spend it on treatment, instead of punishment. Treatment is the true source of safety for all of us.

--------------------------------------------------
Kathleen A. Bayes is executive director of the National Alliance on Mental
Illness Fort Wayne.

Legislation Re Mental Illness & the Death Penalty Introduced in North Carolina

The News & Observer reports that lawmakers in North Carolina will consider legislation aimed at prohibiting the death penalty for offenders with severe mental illness ("Bill would ban execution of mentally ill killers," January 13, 2009).

Here's the full article:

A coalition of advocates for the mentally ill and a state Superior Court judge spoke in favor today of legislation that would exclude the severely mentally ill from the death penalty.

Draft legislation introduced at a joint legislative committee today would allow a judge to determine that a defendant suffered from severe mental illness at the time of the killing. The defendant would
still face a murder trial, but the worst punishment would be life without parole.

Advocates of the legislation say it would only apply to those with severe mental illnesses such as schizophrenia or bipolar disorder, or those with severe brain injuries. People whose criminal acts were the result of drug or alcohol abuse would not be eligible.

"We're talking about individuals whose distortion of thinking is so severe that it's difficult for us to imagine," said James Ellis, a University of New Mexico law professor who successfully argued to the U.S. Supreme Court several years ago that the mentally retarded should not be executed.

Superior Court Judge Carl Fox said the proposed law could save the state money by avoiding capital murder trials for the severely mentally ill. Capital trials are much more expensive because they require an additional defense attorney and defense experts, and typically take longer to try.

Today, North Carolina juries decide during the sentencing phase of a capital trial whether mental illness is a mitigating factor.

Connecticut is the only state to prohibit executing the mentally ill. Nearly 20 other states incorporate similar language in their statutes that set up the standards for being found not guilty by reason of insanity. Advocates say North Carolina's insanity standard is much stricter.

The joint committee will hear more information regarding the proposal at another meeting at 2 p.m. Thursday.

Peg Dorer, director of the N.C. Conference of District Attorneys, said the group has not taken a position on the legislation, but she said the proposal is a bad idea.

She said it gives defendants too many opportunities to argue severe mental illness. If they do not get a favorable pretrial ruling, they still have the opportunity to persuade jurors during the sentencing phase and could continue to argue it on appeal.

"It's just dragging the whole system down," she said.
***

Editorial: Unjust death penalty

The following editorial appeared today in the Fort Wayne Journal Gazette regarding the case of death row inmate Joseph Corcoran. This year, the Indiana Legislature will consider a bill that would prohibit the death penalty for offenders determined to suffer from severe mental illness.

Unjust Death Penalty

"Reinstatement of the death penalty against Joseph Corcoran marks another sad twist in a cruel and misplaced effort to extract justice from a mentally ill man. The sentence should again be thrown out on appeal, and Indiana lawmakers, in the meantime, should finally pass a law banning the execution of the mentally ill.

Corcoran is a prime example of why such a law is needed. He demonstrated classic signs of paranoid schizophrenia when he shot to death his brother, his sister’s fiancé and two other men in 1997 because he thought they were talking about him. Five years earlier, he had been charged but acquitted in the shotgun slaying of his parents.

His horrific story would have ended with a life sentence if Corcoran had agreed to bench trial – with a judge instead of a jury reaching the verdict – but the terms of the deal from then-Allen County Prosecutor Robert Gevers placed the death penalty back on the table with a jury trial. After he was
convicted, Corcoran changed his mind and decided to pursue an appeal, but the Indiana Supreme Court ruled that his decision came too late.

That ruling was overturned in 2007, but last week the U.S. Court of Appeal issued a 2-1 decision reinstating the death penalty. At issue is the question of whether Corcoran is capable of making a rational choice. In her dissent, Judge Ann Claire Williams pointed to the fact that no testimony was presented to suggest that he was.

'The majority reasons that the Indiana Supreme Court was entitled to believe Corcoran’s contention that he wished to waive further proceedings because of his guilt, and I agree that ordinarily, the Indiana court’s decision to rely on one person’s testimony over other people’s testimony would be one to which we would defer,' Williams wrote.

'But this is not a case where the court picked the opinion of one expert who believed Corcoran could make a rational decision over an expert who disagreed,' she wrote. 'Indeed, the state presented no expert who contradicted the conclusions of these three experts. Rather, the person whom the court
credited was a person diagnosed with a severe mental illness that causes delusions, who told a doctor and his sister he wanted to die to escape those delusions.'

Corcoran’s attorneys said they will seek another hearing before the full federal appellate court. If it is denied, they will appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court.

Gov. Mitch Daniels could also commute the death sentence, which he did in the case of Arthur Paul Baird, who killed his parents and pregnant wife in 1985.

Such cases could be avoided in the future if a bill pending in the Indiana General Assembly is approved. Sen. Karen Tallian, D-Portage, has again filed legislation based on the recommendations of the Bowser Commission. Senate Bill 22 would prohibit use of the death penalty in cases where a defendant is found to suffer from a severe mental illness.

This page has long believed that justice is not achieved by killing people. But even those who support the death penalty should agree that putting to death criminals who are mentally ill serves no purpose."
- - - - -

Senate Bill 22
Proposed bill establishes a procedure to determine whether a defendant charged with murder is an individual with a severe mental illness. Prohibits the imposition of the death penalty on a defendant found to be an individual with a severe mental illness. Provides that a jury serves as the fact finder in a sentencing hearing in a capital case, even if the defendant pleads guilty or is tried. … Permits a defendant to waive the right to impanel a jury during the sentencing hearing.
***
An earlier post on Joseph Corcoran is available here.

Effort to ban the death penalty for offenders with mental illness gains momentum in Kentucky

Here's an excerpt from a lengthy article that appeared on September 3 in LEO, the alternative weekly paper in Louisville, Kentucky. The article ("Crazy and Condemned - Kentucky Could Be the First State to Ban Executions of the Severely Mentally Ill") chronicles an emerging effort in Kentucky to secure a legislative prohibition on the death penalty for offenders with severe mental illness. Other states may also introduce legislation during their 2009 sessions.

"It was clear from the beginning Eugene Gall was guilty. It also was clear he was insane.

Driving through a Cincinnati suburb on the morning of April 5, 1978, Gall — a paranoid schizophrenic with a criminal past — spotted a young girl walking alone through the tranquil neighborhood. The 12-year-old girl was on her way to school.

Two hours later, a motorist driving down a stretch of rural highway in northern Kentucky noticed a red windbreaker on the side of the road and stopped to retrieve it. About a mile later, she noticed a textbook in the road and pulled over once again.

Assuming the lost items belonged to a student at the local elementary school, the woman called the principal to report finding the jacket and a book bearing the name Lisa Jansen, written neatly inside the front cover. The principal told her no student by that name attended the school.

Later that afternoon, television newscasts began reporting that Lisa Jansen was missing. By the time the woman called police to report what she had found, they already had a suspect: Eugene Gall.
Just hours after Jansen vanished, police responded to a report of robbery at a small grocery store in Gardnersville, Ky., a tiny town about 20 miles east of Interstate 71. Officers raced into the parking lot as Gall tried to exit, armed with a .357 magnum revolver and $112 from the register. Gunfire erupted, and Gall shot and injured two cops and a bystander before he was captured.

After reviewing Gall’s rap sheet, police questioned him about the missing girl.

In 1970, Gall had been charged with several counts of rape, but a judge found him mentally incompetent to stand trial. He spent 19 months in a mental institution where doctors treated him with anti-psychotic drugs. Eventually, Gall was deemed competent and he pleaded guilty to the charges — although he claimed not to remember the rapes — and spent five years in a state penitentiary.
When police asked Gall if he had any information about Lisa Jansen’s disappearance, he did not deny involvement. Instead, he insisted he could not recall his whereabouts that morning.

The next day, after police found the girl’s body alongside a remote creek in northern Kentucky, 30 miles from her home, Gall was charged with kidnapping, rape and murder. Ultimately, a jury in Boone County, Ky., convicted Gall and sentenced him to death.

'He was severely mentally ill and there was an insanity defense raised, but the jury did not go that way,' says Edward Monahan, a longtime defense lawyer who represented Gall on appeal years later. 'The problem is that juries are very rarely able to bring themselves to make that finding, probably because they fear the person’s release into society and their safety being in danger.'

The jurors undoubtedly saw a monster who — regardless of mental illness — committed a gruesome crime, and they were unwilling to risk sending Gall to a psychiatric facility because he might one day be released. It’s a pervasive fear that compels juries to send inarguably insane defendants not only to prison, but also to death row.

But a growing consensus of legal experts and mental health professionals are pushing for an end to executing the severely mentally ill, claiming the punishment is inappropriate and unconstitutional in cases where a person’s insanity likely led to a crime.

The movement is gaining momentum nationwide and in Kentucky, where state lawmakers are expected to consider a bill next session that would prohibit the execution of the severely mentally ill. If approved, Kentucky would become the first state to enact such a ban.

The law would apply only to a narrow pool of defendants, and would ensure that those convicted still are severely punished, as opposed to institutionalized. They could face life in prison without parole — just not execution.

'When someone behaves in a way that hurts other people substantially, there should be accountability, but the accountability should be based on the culpability of the individual,' says Monahan, who took over as the state’s chief public defender Sept. 1. 'Someone who is severely mentally ill has less ability to be accountable for their conduct. … The ultimate penalty ought not be applied to people who cannot fully control their behavior.'... ”
***
Read the article in full.

Mental Health-Related Actions of the 80th Texas Legislature

The Hogg Foundation for Mental Health recently released its "Legislative Update: A Guide to the Mental Health-Related Actions of the 80th Texas Legislature." This summary of mental health-related actions by the 80th Texas Legislature is now available online: http://www.hogg.utexas.edu/session80.html.

It includes information about mental-health related legislation in such areas as criminal justice, appropriations for public mental health services, juvenile justice, health insurance, and civil commitment proceedings.

Of most relevance to this blog is the summary of attempts to reform Texas' insanity defense statute (pp. 44-45), which were not successful. House Bill 2795, authored by Rep. Garnet Coleman (D-Houston), sought to change the language of the current insanity defense to allow for a more thorough inquiry into how mental illness impacts a defendant's capacity to appreciate the wrongfulness of his or her conduct. The bill also sought to provide information to a jury about the consequences of declaring a defendant "Not Guilty by Reason of Insanity." Under the current statute, juries are not told that most defendants found NGRI "are committed to a state hospital and remain under the jurisdiction of the court for a duration not to exceed the sentence limits allowed for the crime."

According to the report, "some argue that the lack of jury instructions regarding the insanity defense prevents jurors from adequately contemplating the consequences of their decision on the life of the defendant and the safety of the community." House Bill 2795 passed out of committee but was not considered by the full House.

New Report on Mental Illness and the Death Penalty in North Carolina

July 9, 2007
North Carolina Report Examines Mental Illness and the Death Penalty

A new report from the Charlotte School of Law on mental illness and the death penalty reveals that obstacles entrenched within the criminal justice system impede efforts to identify those with severe mental illness and treat them fairly. The report, "Mental Illness and the Death Penalty in North Carolina: A Diagnostic Approach," is based on a 2006 symposium hosted by the law school. It examines scientific studies of mental illness and provides an overview of laws established to protect those with mental illness from unjustly facing the death penalty. The report concludes that current legal protections are inadequate, in large part because mentally ill offenders are often allowed to undermine their own defense. Additionally, the legal definitions of mental incompetence which might spare a person from the death penalty do not align with clinical judgments that medical practitioners have to make. Moreover, jurors in death penalty cases often perceive mental illness as an aggravating - rather than a mitigating - factor.

The report concludes that a series of reforms are necessary to build a consensus between the science of mental illness and the law. In addition to its reform recommendations, the report highlights cases of mentally ill North Carolina defendants who have been sentenced to death. The report provides resolutions on this subject from the American Bar Association, the American Psychological Association, the National Alliance on Mental Illness, and the American Psychiatric Association. ("Mental Illness and the Death Penalty in North Carolina: A Diagnostic Approach," Charlotte School of Law, 2007).

The 78 page report, "Mental Illness and the Death Penalty in North Carolina: A Diagnostic Approach," is available in pdf format at: http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/CharlotteMI.pdf

(Source: Death Penalty Information Center)
***
More on North Carolina

On April 9, 2007, North Carolina Policy Watch released the results of its first “Carolina Issues Poll”, in which voters disapproved by a wide margin (52% to 30%) of the practice of sentencing offenders with severe mental illness to death. The press release can be found at http://ncpolicywatch.com/docs/pdfs/Carolina_Issues_Poll_Media_Release.pdf. Poll results can be found at http://ncpolicywatch.com/docs/pdfs/Carolina_Issues_Poll.pdf.

During the 2007 legislative session in North Carolina, State Senator Eleanor Kinnaird proposed allowing defendants with severe mental illness to avoid the death penalty if they were too mentally ill to understand their actions at the time of their crimes (Senate Bill 1075/House Bill 553). Under the bill, a mentally ill defendant either could ask a judge to rule on the issue before trial or ask a jury to consider it during the trial's sentencing phasee. Those already on death row could file an appeal. The bill did not specify which diagnoses qualify someone as being severely mentally ill. Rather, it defined severe mental illness as being unable to appreciate the wrongfulness of one's conduct, to use rational judgment or to conform their conduct to the law.

Neither the House nor Senate bills on mental illness and the death penalty passed out of committee during this session. North Carolina is one of at least three states, including Indiana and Washington, that considered such legislation in 2007.

(Source: http://www.newsobserver.com/102/story/573736.html)