INDIANAPOLIS, Indiana (AP) -- With just three days left in his term, Indiana Gov. Joe Kernan removed a convicted murderer from death row Friday and called for a review of how fairly the state administers the death penalty.

Kernan granted clemency to Michael Daniels, an Indianapolis man convicted of killing an Army chaplain in 1978 in a $1 robbery as the minister shoveled snow from his driveway with his 15-year-old son.

The son now also is a minister who opposes the death penalty. He said he has forgiven Daniels, and was happy with the governor's decision.

Daniels -- incarcerated on Indiana's death row longer than anyone else -- will now stay in prison for the rest of his life without the possibility of parole, the governor's office said.

Kernan said that evidence casting doubt on Daniels was never presented in court, and that Daniels' IQ has been measured at 77, just above the level to be considered mentally retarded. He also said Daniels was psychotic for some time and unable to assist in his defense, and that he was the only one of three co-defendants to get the death penalty.

More...

What do you guys think about putting mentally retarded people to death?

__________________
lambaste me not

All of them? Seems a bit harsh to me.

(No. Person must know right from wrong to be eligible.)

Hehe..you got me! Good one.

I agree. It is pretty common for people to agree that we should not but I have heard people say that it shouldn't matter. It's sort of a Social Darwinism thing.

__________________
lambaste me not

Not all of our mentally retarded are so dumb as to not know right from wrong… Sure his IQ was measured at 77 but that doesn’t mean he can’t comprehend the fact it’s not ok to kill someone.

Yeah but if an expert determines that he did not know what he was doing, should we still put them to death?

__________________
lambaste me not

Well if an expert determines he didn’t know what he was doing, I’d feel better about having him sit in jail than giving him the death penalty. Hopefully that expert tests him on things other than math, English, writing, and history. I’m assuming that’s the kind of testing they did to rate his IQ.

An IQ test determines comprehension. A 77 is a bit above a 70 which is what is considered mentally retarded. In any case, I definitely agree with you that an IQ test should not be the only mitigating factor. A defendant should be extensively tested by trained psychologists to determine whether or not he/she can coprehend morality, murder, society etc.

__________________
lambaste me not

Mentally ill and mentally retarded are two completely different things.

Someone I knew very well committed a murder during his very first schizophrenic psychotic break. He began acting strange just one week before the crime. He was a gentle, loving, intelligent, fun person. Because there was no history of mental illness, he was found guilty and sentenced to 40 years in prison. His appeal was turned down even though by then (3 years later), his schizophrenia was well documented. Although he was "treated" in prison, he was quite often tormented by his disease. After 17 years, he was moved to a minimum security facility in order to ease him back into society. He needed a group home and was unable to afford one so he stayed there. Less than 4 months after his "release," the voices in his head were tormenting him again. He attempted suicide for probably the hundredth time and succeeded. A swift execution would have been much more humane.

__________________
Do you know what it's like to fall in the mud and get kicked... in the head... with an iron boot? Of course you don't, no one does. It never happens. It's a dumb question... skip it.

Hmm. I really do admire your compassion, and I am not being sarcastic when I say that. However, I do not feel that we should use the death penalty as a way to put people out of their misery because it might be easier for them (or for us). I believe that if we are to have a death penalty, the philosophy behind it should be to remove threats to society. The mentally ill should not be released to the world and thrown to the dogs without help in the first place.

__________________
lambaste me not

My story is not meant to cover all mental illness. We agree that in ANY case in which violent murder occurs, the murderer should NEVER be released into society. In this case, life in prison would have also been more humane.

Schizophrenia is exacerbated under stress. Lucid moments are filled with guilt. Add paranoid schizophrenia and pseudo-freedom and you get torture. You were 100% right when you said, "The mentally ill should not be released to the world and thrown to the dogs without help in the first place." But, I doubt if most people would want to spend the tax dollars it would take to help a murderer. In the end, he's a murderer first and schizophrenic second. With hindsight, I know execution would have been better for him and society. Don't get me wrong. I don't think we should offer euthanasia to mentally ill people. I guess that I believe violent criminals should always be eligible for the death penalty even if they are proved to be mentally ill.

__________________
Do you know what it's like to fall in the mud and get kicked... in the head... with an iron boot? Of course you don't, no one does. It never happens. It's a dumb question... skip it.