|
|
Panel eyes court ruling on
retarded Definition key to execution
issue The U.S. Supreme Court's recent landmark decision banning the execution of the retarded will be the focus of a Virginia State Crime Commission study this fall. The justices issued the 6-3 ruling in June, in the Virginia case of Daryl Renard Atkins, whose IQ was once tested at 59. Atkins shot to death Eric Michael Nesbitt, a 21-year-old airman, during a robbery in York County on Aug. 16, 1996. A 10-member commission subcommittee of six legislators, Attorney General Jerry W. Kilgore, a representative of the governor's office, a defense lawyer and a prosecutor has been created to consider definitions for retardation and to recommend who will make the determination on whether someone facing a death sentence is retarded. Kim Hamilton, director of the State Crime Commission, said the subcommittee also will look at a bill that was tabled last session - in anticipation of the Supreme Court decision - that would have banned the execution of retarded people. The bill, which was passed unanimously by the state Senate last session, had a two-part definition of mentally retarded. Under the bill, in order to be considered mentally retarded, inmates must have "substantial subaverage general intellectual function, existing concurrently with significant limitations in adaptive functioning both of which were [exhibited] before the age of eighteen." The bill defined "significantly subaverage general intellectual functioning" as an IQ of 70 or below as measured by scientifically recognized and standardized intelligence-quotient testing. "Significant limitations in adaptive intellectual functioning" means significant limitations in two or more skill areas such as communication, self-care, home living, social and interpersonal skills, and health and safety, according to the bill. The subcommittee will be chaired by state Sen. Kenneth W. Stolle, R-Virginia Beach. Its first meeting is set for Sept. 23, said Hamilton. A determination, by means as yet unknown, still must be made on whether Atkins is retarded or not. In an earlier proceeding, a psychologist testifying for the defense has said he was, while a psychologist testifying for the prosecution has said he was not.
|
|
VOR * 836 S. Arlington Heights Rd., #351 * Elk Grove Village, Illinois * 60007 877-399-4VOR ph. * 847-258-5273 fax * tamie327@hotmail.com |