Capital Sentence Research Articles

Suspended Execution beyond China’s Borders

AbstractAlthough China remains the world’s most prolific death-penalty jurisdiction, it has also reportedly reduced executions in the twenty-first century. China achieved this reduction in part through the use of a nominal capital sentence called “suspended execution.” The success of suspended execution as a diversionary tool has produced calls for its introduction elsewhere. However, there has been no empirical research on suspended execution outside China. This article fills this gap by identifying neighbouring countries where suspended-execution proposals have been considered, determining why these countries considered it, and examining how proposals were structured. We identify four Asian jurisdictions—Taiwan, Japan, Vietnam, and Indonesia. We find that all of these countries looked to China for inspiration; each did so independently and for reasons unrelated to China’s death-penalty reforms. Our findings provide insights about capital punishment in Asia, the appeal of suspended execution, and the role of China in regional penal practice.

Eliezer Yehudah Waldenberg, Hilchot Medina, “Incarceration in prison and its definitions, and the punishment of exile”

Eliezer Yehudah Waldenberg, <i>Hilchot Medina</i>, “Incarceration in prison and its definitions, and the punishment of exile”

Dead Wrong: Capital Punishment, Wrongful Convictions, and Serious Mental Illness

Serious mental illness (SMI), wrongful convictions, and capital punishment is explored, as having a SMI may heighten an individual’s risk of being wrongfully convicted and consequently dealt a capital sentence. In Atkins v. Virginia, the Supreme Court banned the use of capital punishment for individuals with intellectual disabilities, ruling it unconstitutional, due to the diminished moral and intellectual capacity held by these individuals. Based on these Supreme Court findings, an argument is made that SMI is a compelling mitigating factor that ought to disqualify the pursuit of capital punishment. Due to the cognitive and volitional impairments associated with SMI, people with SMI are especially vulnerable to being wrongfully convicted of a crime and further wrongfully sentenced to death. Data to build this argument include that those with SMI are more likely to: 1) falsely confess; 2) struggle with assisting in their defense; 3) be perceived as an unreliable witness; 4) appear as though they lack remorse; and 5) face prejudices from judges and jurors; which all contribute to wrongful convictions. An explanation of these vulnerabilities are discussed in detail by examining 26 case vignettes (derived from the National Registry of Exonerations and other sources) where such individuals were wrongfully convicted due to SMI. Data from the National Registry of Exonerations is further analyzed, leading to discussion of the disproportionate co-occurrence of wrongful convictions that are stimulated by SMI. This paper concludes with an analysis of reforms and a discussion of how to enact safeguards to protect individuals with SMI.

An examination of the effects of mental disorders as mitigating factors on capital sentencing outcomes.

Mentally ill and emotionally disturbed offenders comprise a significant component of those whose criminal conduct has swept them into the criminal justice system, including a subset who are tried and convicted of capital murder. The present study employs the population of capital cases advanced to penalty phase in the state of North Carolina (1990-2009) to examine whether presentation to the jury of the statutory mitigators of extreme mental and emotional disturbance and capacity impaired, and specific mental illness diagnoses, often referred to as mental disorders, at the sentencing phase mitigate against a sentence of death. Mental disorders included mood disorders, psychotic disorders, anxiety disorders, brain disorders, multiple mental illness diagnoses, learning disabilities, and personality disorders. Results from these 835 cases indicate that with the exception of one, the diagnosis of a learning disability, the capital jury's acceptance of various mental health conditions does not effectively mitigate against a capital sentence. In addition, jury rejection of a diagnosis of mental illness or the two mental health statutory mitigators, capacity impaired and extreme emotional disturbance, as a mitigating factor has a counter-mitigating effect in that it significantly increases the odds of a death penalty recommendation by about 85-200%.

Determining Intellectual Disability for Capital Defendants

In Hill v. Anderson , 881 F.3d 483 (2018), the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals considered whether Ohio correctly reviewed the defendant's writ of habeas corpus that sought relief from capital sentencing. Mr. Danny Hill challenged his capital sentence, claiming he is intellectually disabled as

Psychopathic Personality Disorder

The diagnosis of psychopathic personality disorder has salience for forensic clinical practice. It influences decisions regarding risk, treatability and sentencing, indeed, in certain jurisdictions it serves as an aggravating factor that increases the likelihood of a capital sentence. The concatenation of symptom that is associated with modern conceptions of the disorder can be discerned in early writings, including the book of Psalms. Despite its forensic clinical importance and historical pedigree the concept remains elusive and controverted. In this paper I describe an attempt to map the concept of psychopathic personality disorder—the Comprehensive Assessment of Psychopathic Personality (CAPP). I outline the processes used to create the concept map; I summarise evidence in support of the content validity of the map and describe different operations designed to operationalise the construct. It is only when conceptual clarity is achieved that valid operations and measures can be created. I end with a plea for more carefully considered application of statistical methods; applications that better fit the theoretical questions being posed.

Mst Asia Bibi v The State: Capital Sentence Reference no 614/2010 / Criminal Appeal no 2509/2010: Lahore High Court: Muhammad Anwaarul Haq, Syed Shabaz Ali Rizvi JJ: 5 November 2014

Mst Asia Bibi v The State: Capital Sentence Reference no 614/2010 / Criminal Appeal no 2509/2010: Lahore High Court: Muhammad Anwaarul Haq, Syed Shabaz Ali Rizvi JJ: 5 November 2014

La pena di morte per ľ"assassinio" del bue aratore (a proposito di Varrò rust. 2,5,3-4 e Colum. 6, praef. 7)

Abstract This essay is focused on a difficult passage in Varrò, rust. 2,5,3-4, which is quoted, explained and partially corrected by Columella (6 praef. 7). Both passages are for us a valuable source of information about the capital sentence inflicted, in a very early age, on the person who caused the death of the ploughing ox. However, a contradiction or apory can be observed in the attitude of the two authors. On the one hand - as admirers of the mos maiorum - they seem to praise the innocence and the restraint of the ancients, who showed so much respect for so beneficent an animal. On the other hand, in their roles as instructors of the most efficient farming techniques, they are keen on the profits assured by the raising of farm animals, and discuss without embarrassment the slaughter of oxen (either sacrificial or simply commercial) and the eating of beef. In Greece, the Attic Bouphonia, with all their functional ambiguities, marked the transition from the age of the bloodless sacrifice - praised and placed forever in the archives of history - to the "modern" age of slaughter; on the contrary, Roman culture lacked a similar rite that could somehow reconcile the two antithetical ideas, the ancient taboo about the slaying of domestic animals and the actual killing as performed in historical times.

THE EXECUTION OF SADDAM HUSSEIN – A LEGAL ANALYSIS

On December 30, 2006, Saddam Hussein was led into a dank execution chamber in Baghdad, Iraq. A heavy noose was slipped around his neck while several guards in the room began hurling sectarian taunts at him. Saddam Hussein stared ahead, mocking his guards before reciting the most sacred of Islamic prayers-"There is no God but God, and Muhammed is his prophet." The trap door beneath Saddam Hussein swung open at 6:10 a.m. Saddam Hussein never finished his prayer. This article analyzes the legal rules governing Mr. Hussein's last moments of life. In particular, this article sets forth the legal requirements that govern implementation of the death penalty in Iraq and opines that the Iraqi government did not follow these rules when carrying out Saddam Hussein's capital sentence. To accomplish this goal, the article (1) analyzes whether the Iraqi government had legal authority to execute Saddam Hussein and (2) sets forth abstractly the procedural steps that apply to implementation of a capital sentence in Iraq; and (3) applies these abstract procedural steps to the specific facts of Saddam Hussein's execution. The purpose of this exercise is to understand more broadly what went wrong in the days leading to Saddam Hussein's execution so that legal scholars and policy makers can draw broader conclusions about what this event might mean about the rule of law in Iraq.

THE CASE OF TAHA YASEEN RAMADAN BEFORE THE IRAQI HIGH TRIBUNAL: AN INSIDER'S PERSPECTIVE

AbstractTaha Yaseen Ramadan was a long-time ally of Saddam Hussein and Vice-President of Iraq at the time of the United States-led invasion in 2003; he was captured by American forces in 2004 and, in 2005-2006, tried before the Iraqi High Tribunal (IHT), alongside Saddam Hussein. The Trial Chamber hearing the case found Taha Yaseen guilty of,inter alia, the crime against humanity of wilful killing; he was handed a sentence of life imprisonment in November 2006. This sentence was appealed by the IHT Prosecutor; the IHT Appellate Chamber responded several days later with an order that the Trial Chamber award Taha Yaseen a capital sentence. The process of re-sentencing, which ultimately led to the execution of Taha Yaseen in March 2007, was, like many other key phases of the trial of Saddam Hussein and Taha Yaseen, undermined by Iraqi political interference emanating, in the main, from the office of Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki. The fairness of the proceedings against Taha Yaseen and his co-accused was further undermined throughout by the near total ignorance of the those involved in the case (i.e., the Iraqi Judges, Prosecutors and Defence counsel) of the substantive law that they were meant to be applying, in particular, International Criminal Law, which had been received into Iraqi law almostverbatimin 2004 from the Statute of the International Criminal Court. This combination of professional ignorance and political interference gave rise to a travesty of justice that cannot be reversed, that is, the execution of a man who was manifestly not guilty of the crime for which he was hanged.

Catholic Bishops and Appeals to the Imperial Court: A Legal Study of the Calama Riots in 408

Riots at Calama and Utica in 408 prompted several Catholic bishops to travel to the imperial court. Episcopal embassies applied pressure both to religious opponents and to African administrators by soliciting law from the consistory. The success the bishops enjoyed, however, introduced the problem of severe penalties attendant to imperial law. Extreme punishments were of little interest to the bishops, and they usually appealed to local officials to mitigate the sentences. In 409 the emperor issued what we know as Sirmondian Constitution 14, which passed a capital sentence against anyone who committed acts of violence against bishops. Augustine's appeal to authorities following the promulgation of Sirmondian Constitution 14, as well as a letter he wrote to Paulinus of Nola, reveal Augustine's unease regarding the methods bishops used to assert themselves, especially when some of his colleagues were willing to utilize coercion to a degree greater than Augustine thought appropriate.

Criminal Procedure. Habeas Corpus. Ninth Circuit Holds That the Supreme Court's Decision in Ring v. Arizona Applies Retroactively to Cases on Habeas Corpus Review. Summerlin v. Stewart, 341 F.3d 1082 (9th Cir. 2003) (En banc)

In Ring v. Arizona, the Supreme Court held that the Sixth Amendment requires a jury, not a judge, to find the aggravating factors necessary to impose a capital sentence. Recently, in Summerlin v. Stewart, an en banc panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit held that Ring announced a substantive rule that applies retroactively to cases on federal habeas review -- a judgment that directly conflicts with the Eleventh Circuit's decision in Turner v. Crosby. Although the Summerlin court reached the right result, it relied on tenuous distinctions between procedural and substantive law, as well as ambiguous studies about the differences between jury and judge fact-finding. Instead, the court should have based its decision solely on the Supreme Court's continuous emphasis on the jury's important role in expressing the moral judgment of the community in capital cases.

Following in the Footsteps of Ford: Mental Retardation and Capital Punishment Post-Atkins

Since the United States Supreme Court held the capital sentence of mentally retarded John Paul Penry to be constitutional in Penry v. Lynaugh, the relationship between capital punishment, mental retardation and the Eighth Amendment has been widely debated. In a long awaited opinion, the Court finally held that the Eighth Amendment categorically prohibits the execution of the mentally retarded. In Atkins v. Virginia, the Court overruled its holding in Penry, and recognized that capital sentences imposed on the mentally retarded constitute cruel and unusual punishment in violation of the Eighth Amendment. Although this appears to be a victory for the mentally retarded and their advocates, the real effect of the decision will depend largely on how the states apply the Atkins holding.

The King's Buttons: The Language of Law inBilly Budd

Revolution and law are joined inBilly Budd— and were from its inception. According to the Genetic Text editors, Herman Melville's last work began as a headnote to a ballad about a condemned naval mutineer. Gradually, this kernel evolved into a prose narrative set in 1797, the year of seemingly contagious British naval mutinies — notably Spithead and “The Great Mutiny” at the Nore — that threatened the prosecution of England's naval war against the regicidal French revolutionary forces. By the time Melville had fixed upon these emblematic, modern political events for his scene, the mutineer of the ballad, an older and probably guilty man, had become a very different figure (Hayford and Sealts, 2). Billy Budd's extraordinary qualities now speak to the injustice of his capital sentence, whereas Captain Vere's judgment speaks to the imperative of necessity. This conflict is reflected not only in the doubts of the drumhead court that sentences Billy, but in the arguments of generations of critics and the midrash of commentary the novel has engendered.

Illegal Convictions and Sentences to Capital Punishment

The paper examines the prevalence of illegal capital convictions and sentences to death in the United States, from 1976 to 1992. Data are analyzed from all capital convictions and sentences to death row during this period, using information from the death row imprisonment file in the National Archive of Criminal Justice Data, collected by the U.S. Bureau of Prisons and used by the Bureau of Justice Statistics in their annual capital punishment research notes. Data are available on over 6,000 offenders sentenced to death row during this period. The findings show that more than 40 percent of all original capital convictions or sentences are overturned as illegal—either in the conviction for the crime, the capital sentence, or for illegal elements in the capital statutes. Considerable variation exists between states in the proportion of illegal convictions and sentences. In some states, all of the capital cases were overturned during this period as illegal convictions or sentences. In 18 states more than half of all capital cases are legally defective. The discussion raises questions regarding the problematic results of capital convictions and sentences.

Social Work Expert Testimony Regarding Mitigation in Capital Sentencing Proceedings

SINCE 1978, the U.S. Supreme ourt has required that in d ath penalty trials the defense be permitted to present any aspect of a defendant's character that might warrant a punish ment less than death (Lockett v. Ohio, 1978). In a long series of decisions, the Court ruled that the death penalty can be imposed only after the sentencer, whether judge or jury, has had an oppor tunity to consider the unique, individual attributes of the defendant (.Furman v. Georgia, 1972; Gregg v. Georgia, 1976; Lockett v. Ohio, 1978; Penry v. Lynaugh, 1989; Profitt v. Florida, 1976). Any of the diverse frailties of humankind con stitute mitigating factors as a matter of law in deciding whether death or life im prisonment is the appropriate punish ment {Woodson v. North Carolina, 1976). Although the critical significance of the social evaluation in sentence mitiga tion has been recognized for more than a decade by courts, the social work literature has been relatively silent about this emerging practice area. So cial workers have increasingly been recognized by courts as expert wit nesses in a variety of proceedings (Gothard, 1989); this article examines the unique aspects of capital sentence proceedings and describes the role of the social worker as expert witness and the influence of the social evaluation on sentence mitigation.

La peine de mort aux États-Unis

This research examines the place of the death penalty within the American society. Initially, based on the general statistics and on the important facts, the various practices of capital punishment are analyzed. The study of the historical evolution of the death penalty, the presentation of some famous cases, the analysis of the particular legislations existing from one State to another, as well as the perception of the death penalty by the American population make it possible to give a good overall picture of the current state of the capital sentence in the United States. Thereafter, the “checks and balances” principles that rules death penalty are analysed; clemency granted by the governors and the president, the power of the lobby, the limitation of competences of the different court and, finally, the individual and the collective rights appearing in the Constitution.

Insanity and the capital sentence.

Insanity and the capital sentence.

Far Eastern Commission

On September 21, 1950 the Far Eastern Commission approved a policy decision relaxing certain previous prohibitions against the exercise of criminal jurisdiction of Japanese courts over nationals of Members of the United Nations. By this decision, Japanese courts, at the discretion of the Supreme Commander, and subject to progressive relaxation of control of criminal jurisdiction by him, might exercise such jurisdiction over all United Nations nationals with the exception of a) members of the armed forces of any Member of the United Nations, b) officials attached to, or accompanying, and in service of occupation forces, c) United Nations nationals on official business in Japan, and d) members of the immediate family and dependents accompanying these exempt groups. Protection of rights of United Nations nationals was safeguarded by provisions in the new policy by requiring the immediate notification to the head of the mission of the country of the national upon his arrest together with provision for access to the national for purposes of arranging for legal representation. All sentences by Japanese courts were to be reviewable by SCAP and such review was mandatory in the case of capital or life sentence.

Execution of the Capital Sentence

Execution of the Capital Sentence