Executing the Mentally Ill

By Alison Hughes

March 26, 2003

The voices and hallucinations began to plague James Colburn when he was a teenager. Diagnosed as a paranoid schizophrenic, he received only sporadic treatment (his family depleted their savings in an effort to help him), spent time in and out of mental hospitals, and attempted suicide over a dozen times. One night in 1994, while racked with hallucinations that told him to harm himself and others, James Colburn strangled and stabbed Peggy Murphy to death. On March 26, the state of Texas is scheduled to execute him by lethal injection.

In Texas as throughout the country, the mentally ill can be prosecuted, convicted and punished for criminal conduct unless deemed "mentally incompetent." The standard for mental incompetence has become so high, however, that as a practical matter a person with mental illness will face trial (and execution, if convicted of a capital crime) unless he thinks he is Napoleon or God. An estimated five to ten percent of death row is comprised of prisoners with a serious mental illness.

All murders are horrific. None should be committed with impunity. The families of victims and society at large rightfully seek justice by securing the conviction and punishment of those who murder. But if all murders are equal in the sense that a life has been taken wrongly, all murderers are not equal. They differ, most crucially, in their blameworthiness. James Colburn did not kill out of hatred for the victim. He did not kill for pay. He killed out of illness, not evil. As blameworthiness varies, so should punishment.

Capital punishment Ð which almost all democratic governments regard as unacceptable in any circumstances Ð is ostensibly reserved for the most heinous crimes, committed by the most culpable offenders. It is difficult to understand how a person whose mind has been plagued by delusions, hallucinations, and uncontrollable, unchaotic emotions can ever be considered among the worst offenders.

Last year, the Supreme Court said that it was unconstitutional to execute offenders with mental retardation, in part because their mental impairment precluded the level of culpability associated with capital punishment. Mental illnesses are very different disorders than mental retardation, but they still may cause lapses in judgment, inappropriate or dangerous behavior, and interfere with a personÕs ability to think clearly and make sound decisions. It is as cruel and senseless to execute those who are mentally ill as it is to execute those with mental retardation.

What will executing James Colburn accomplish? Life imprisonment would be sufficient to express outrage at his crime, to hold him accountable, and to protect society from further violence. The grief over Peggy MurphyÕs death should not be used to justify blind vengeance.

Most of the worldÕs democracies (and some dictatorships) recognize that capital punishment is an anachronistic cruelty that should be abolished. They also maintain, however, that above all, even if a country retains capital punishment, at the very least it should not be imposed on anyone who suffers from any "mental disease or defect." Yet here in America people like James Colburn carry their demons with them to the death chamber.

Home | About Us | News Releases | Publications | Info by Country | Global Issues | Campaigns | Community | Store | Film Festival | Search | Site Map | Contact Us | Press Contacts | Privacy Policy