Diva
02-10-05, 08:18AM
Now that you have answered the first part (http://www.nochicktrix.com/forum/showthread.php?t=8230) of this thread, I want to show you why I asked.
Here's the background on this case. A man (with a friend) abducted an airforce man, forced him to withdraw money from an ATM, then took him to a secluded spot and shot him eight times, killing him. He gets the death penalty. He fights the system, taking his case to the supreme court. They state that the mentally retarded cannot be executed. He has never been listed as mentally retarded. His IQ is higher than when he first was encarcerated... the defense claims that it is due to 'mental stimulation' from the case itself. He dropped out of highschool after failing the 10th grade three times.
"Oddly enough, because of his constant contact with the many lawyers that worked on his case," the psychologist, Evan S. Nelson, wrote in a report in November, "Mr. Atkins received more intellectual stimulation in prison than he did during his late adolescence and early adulthood. That included practicing his reading and writing skills, learning about abstract legal concepts and communicating with professionals."
In helping put an end to the death penalty for the mentally retarded, then, Atkins could have ensured his own execution. Prosecutors say that Atkins has never been retarded and that the recent tests confirm it. "I don't see how a 76 is exculpatory and evidence of mental retardation," Eileen M. Addison, the commonwealth's attorney here, said in court on Thursday. "It needs to be under 70."
I know that a lot of you do not believe in the death penalty, but this is not what I would like to discuss. My question is: Do you think that he should be listed as Mentally Retarded and why... or why not.
I'll give my answer in a bit.
Here's the background on this case. A man (with a friend) abducted an airforce man, forced him to withdraw money from an ATM, then took him to a secluded spot and shot him eight times, killing him. He gets the death penalty. He fights the system, taking his case to the supreme court. They state that the mentally retarded cannot be executed. He has never been listed as mentally retarded. His IQ is higher than when he first was encarcerated... the defense claims that it is due to 'mental stimulation' from the case itself. He dropped out of highschool after failing the 10th grade three times.
"Oddly enough, because of his constant contact with the many lawyers that worked on his case," the psychologist, Evan S. Nelson, wrote in a report in November, "Mr. Atkins received more intellectual stimulation in prison than he did during his late adolescence and early adulthood. That included practicing his reading and writing skills, learning about abstract legal concepts and communicating with professionals."
In helping put an end to the death penalty for the mentally retarded, then, Atkins could have ensured his own execution. Prosecutors say that Atkins has never been retarded and that the recent tests confirm it. "I don't see how a 76 is exculpatory and evidence of mental retardation," Eileen M. Addison, the commonwealth's attorney here, said in court on Thursday. "It needs to be under 70."
I know that a lot of you do not believe in the death penalty, but this is not what I would like to discuss. My question is: Do you think that he should be listed as Mentally Retarded and why... or why not.
I'll give my answer in a bit.