July 26
Old enough to die The U.S. Supreme Court should not succumb to the wispy arguments of those who would have it impose a blanket ban on the execution of killers who were under 18 when they committed their crime.First, not all juveniles who kill are sent to the adult justice system for trial. It takes an especially horrendous crime and special circumstances to get them there. Such crimes are due individual consideration, and today's system offers it. If a young person, because of the nature and circumstances of his or her crime, is adjudicated eligible to stand trial in an adult court in a standardized and fair process, that is protection enough. A jury will decide such a defendant's fate as it does any other's. State laws already require proof of "special circumstances" to impose a death sentence on someone who committed a capital crime before he or she turned 18. A blanket ban is not acceptable because not all murders are alike. Multiple briefs have been filed by those who would change the system, and, in the process, treat all crimes committed by juveniles in one way. They must not succeed, and so far it seems the court majority isn't inclined to change the status quo. A 2002 decision abolished capital punishment for mentally retarded offenders, but that is no reason to push the envelope further to exclude everyone whose crime was committed under 18 from the ultimate punishment. The case before the court is especially heinous and exactly on point, despite the contention by diplomats, the American Medical Association, and former President Jimmy Carter that such executions should be declared unconstitutional. In 1993, then 17-year-old Christopher Simmons and a 15-year-old buddy broke into a mobile home to rob it. Thinking the woman who lived there might recognize them, they bound her up with wire and duct tape and kicked her off a bridge into a Missouri river. The state is rightly appealing its own Supreme Court's decision to reverse Simmons' death sentence. The highest court in the land should let Simmons' execution proceed. If mental competence is not an issue, why should he be spared the death penalty? (source: Editorial, Toledo Blade, July 25)
