Texas executes the mentally retarded

[Soundbear]

Quick to judgement??

Accused in 1992.

Convicted in 1994.

18 years to complete all appeals processes.

No, not quick at all.

I think that there is always more that we cannot see from this distance. The media will report whatever gets the most attention for their reporting, and therefore advertisers, and we can never trust them to give the whole truth.

The courts, on the other hand, consider everything.

Having said all that, I still am against capital punishment.

[stupefied]

The US Supreme Court ruled that mentally disabled people cannot be executed. Texas changed the definition of mentally disabled, and the Supreme Court refused to intervene. The ruling still stands, that mentally disabled prisoners are not supposed to be executed in the US.

Whether you agree with their methods or not they concluded the man did not fit the definition of mentally retarded. The Supreme Court agreed.

The mentally disabled are extremely easy to take advantage of. They can be talked into, and talked out of, all kinds of things. Didn't you know a disabled person, while you were growing up? They get their lunch money lifted all the time, and are talked into doing all kinds of dumb things, by predatory people eager to prey upon them. Most of the time, they are exploited just to amuse neanderthals, but occasionally, they are roped into doing dangerous, or illegal things. The internet is rife with stories like this - I can't believe I find myself having to explain it.

Sorry you feel that you had to explain, it really wasn't necessary. It doesn't address the question either. Do you have any proof of manipulation in this case?

[The Left Sock]

The Supreme Court did not 'agree' to anything. They simply decided not to contest the decision. Their official position remains the same, that mentally disabled people are not supposed to be executed.

Proof of manipulation? Well, while I was on the defence team, we were working on a few theories... are you serious? The fact that the man was mentally disabled casts reasonable doubt on whether he understood the full context of his rights, and makes him vulnerable to manipulation by not only the other criminals he was involved with, but the police and courts as well.

Nobody's suggesting he should have been released from prison. The question is whether or not he should have been executed. Texas has a history of executing the mentally disabled, and they seem bent on continuing this practice, with complete disregard for the wishes of the Supreme Court. That is why this thread was started in the politics section. It's politics, and they are executing mentally disabled people for political reasons. Governor Perry vetoed the Supreme Court ruling, in order to execute Wilson.

[stupefied]

So in other words you have nothing to back up your claim of manipulation.

It would seem the generally accepted standard for determining if a person is mentally retarded (yes the word used is retarded, not disabled) is an IQ below 70. This guy scored higher than this level many times but there was one anomaly where he scored lower. Seems to me that it would be a whole lot more feasible to make yourself look stupider than you really are on an IQ test once than to do the opposite a number of times.

[The Left Sock]

That's a slippery slope you're teetering on. You claim there is no proof that Wilson was manipulated into comitting the crime, or getting himself convicted, but you are quick to suggest that he deliberately 'dumbed himself down', to avoid execution. You can't have it both ways.

In Canada, the legal distinction for mental retardation is an IQ of 84 or less. This number correlates with standard deviations on the Bell Curve for intelligence. An IQ of under 70 wouldn't even be mild retardation in Canada, it would be moderate retardation, with much more serious implications.

Wilson never scored above an 84 IQ. Once again, Texas is making up their own rules, and deciding what type of 'testing' to perform.

[stupefied]

That's a slippery slope you're teetering on. You claim there is no proof that Wilson was manipulated into comitting the crime, or getting himself convicted, but you are quick to suggest that he deliberately 'dumbed himself down', to avoid execution. You can't have it both ways.

That's a good point. It's more likely there was an error by the one administering the test. I think it's pretty safe to assume that one can't pretend to be smarter than they are while taking one of these tests. Since he was tested many times and only scored that low one time I would think that the one lower score was the one that isn't accurate.

I'm not taking a position on whether the dude should have been put to death or not. I'm just looking at the relevant facts that are available and wondering how you can make some of the assertions you're making. He met the standard that is used and one anomaly on an IQ evaluation doesn't change that.