title: Apparent skepticism: capital punishment and medical evidence.
abstract: In recent cases on the constitutionality of sentencing to death criminals who were younger than 18 years of age at the time of their crimes or who are mentally retarded, the US Supreme Court has rejected medical evidence that such persons categorically possess diminished culpability. Rather, the Court has accepted the public's "apparent skepticism" of such a scientific consensus in upholding the execution of capital offenders who are 16 years of age or older. The 1952 English case of Craig and Bentley sparked discussion of similar issues in the United Kingdom and contributed to the abolition of capital punishment for murder in that country. US courts should have more deference for such medical evidence, despite perceived widespread resistance to the conclusions of researchers that adolescents and mentally retarded persons categorically lack sufficient maturity, judgment, and deliberation to receive capital punishment and that they are not deterred from murder by the threat of execution.
authors.affiliation: Legal Department, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN 55905.
authors.forename: F
authors.initials: F
authors.lastname: Helminski
mesh_terms: D000293:Adolescent; D000328:Adult; D000367:Age Factors; D002203:Capital Punishment / Q000331:legislation & jurisprudence*; D002648:Child; D005555:Forensic Psychiatry; D006803:Human Development; D006801:Humans; D008607:Intellectual Disability; D008297:Male; D011639:Public Opinion; D012106:Research; D006113:United Kingdom; D014481:United States