What is wrong with people in the world these days? When we are called crazy, it’s natural that we react and we all react in different ways. Depending on which definition and/or our definition of crazy are we actually considered crazy?
cra•zy (ˈkreɪ zi)
adj. -zi•er, -zi•est, adj.
1. mentally deranged; insane.
2. impractical; totally unsound: a crazy scheme.
3. intensely eager.
4. infatuated (usu. fol. by about).
5. unusual; bizarre.
6. Slang. wonderful.
n.
7. Slang. an unpredictable person; oddball: one nice sister and two crazies.
In Mr. Young’s editorial, he asks whether to execute or not execute a person. His question pertains to a man by the name of Scott Louis Panetti, who was convicted in 1992 for the killings of his two in-laws and in 1995 was sentenced to death, which he then managed to avoid by claiming insanity. With a previous history of schizophrenia and multiple hospitalizations for mental illnesses, Panetti was scheduled to be executed on December 3, 2014, and in an article published in the Texas Tribune, federal appeals court issues stay for Panetti, in which the court halted Panetti’s execution just hours before his scheduled departure.
Mr. Young states that the insanity plea is often used to get out of extreme sentences and that those who are mentally ill has to provide sufficient paperwork proving insanity or be held fully responsible and suffer major consequences which I most definitely have to agree. That being said, we go back to Mr. Young’s question, to execute or not to execute?
According to the Code of Criminal Procedure, chapter 46 Insanity as Defense, under article 46.05 Competency to be Executed:
(a) A person who is incompetent to be executed may not be executed
(c) A motion filed under this article must identify the proceeding in which the defendant was convicted, give the date of the final judgment, set forth the fact that an execution date has been set if the date has been set, and clearly set forth alleged facts in support of the assertion that the defendant is presently incompetent to be executed. The defendant shall attach affidavits, records, or other evidence supporting the defendant's allegations or shall state why those items are not attached. The defendant shall identify any previous proceedings in which the defendant challenged the defendant's competency in relation to the conviction and sentence in question, including any challenge to the defendant's competency to be executed, competency to stand trial, or sanity at the time of the offense. The motion must be verified by the oath of some person on the defendant's behalf.
(h) A defendant is incompetent to be executed if the defendant does not understand:
(1) that he or she is to be executed and that the execution is imminent;
and
(2) the reason he or she is to be executed.
In an article from the Dallas new, Abby Johnson: If Texas values life, it shouldn’t execute mentally ill man, Ms. Johnson states that Panetti did not even understand why he was being executed. If a prior diagnosis of schizophrenia, multiple mental hospitalizations and the fact that Mr. Panetti does not understand the reasoning for his execution not enough proof or evidence, the state of Texas not only violated his 8th amendment, but also violated the Code of Criminal Procedure, chapter 46 Insanity as Defense, article 46.05 Competency to be Executed.
In all, I agree with Mr. Young. An inmate who is found guilty and convicted for murder (not by self defense), why not save the state and us tax payers the additional amount if it cost more than my annual income just to house a single inmate in a Texas prison. The law is the law and the law is put in place for a reason. We have to abide by them, which punishment has to also be followed accordingly to the law.
