| About this site |
| About us |
| Our beliefs |
| Your first visit? |
| Contact us |
| External links |
| Good books |
| Visitor essays |
| Our forum |
| New essays |
| Other site features |
| Buy a CD |
| Vital notes |
| Spiritual/ethics |
| Spirituality |
| Morality/ethics |
| Absolute truth |
| Peace/conflict |
| Attaining peace |
| Religious tolerance |
| Religious hatred |
| Religious conflict |
| Religious violence |
| Laws and news |
| Religious laws |
| Religious news |
|
|
 | “When a society starts killing its children, something is wrong, something is deadly wrong.” Joseph Green Brown, death row survivor, 1998-MAY. |
| "Evidence of innocence is irrelevant" Mary Sue Terry, former Attorney General of Virginia, replying to an appeal to introduce new evidence from a prisoner sentenced to death. |
Overview:
By the end of 1987, the execution of murderers who were children at the time of the offense -- i.e. under the age of 18 -- had been abandoned in all developed countries, except for the United States. Many western democracies severely criticized the United States for this practice.
In 1988, the U.S. Supreme Court banned the execution of murderers who were under the age of 17.
In 2005-MAR, the court reduced the cutoff age so that 16 and 17 year-old offenders could not be sentenced to be executed. As in most rulings related to ethics and morality, the vote was close: 5 to 4.
Countries that still execute child criminals:
Quoting author Rollin Perkins, Judge Michael A. Wolff of the Supreme Court of MIssouri, wrote: "In the 13th century, a seven-year-old boy was tried for murder; his execution was 'pardoned for the king's sake."....English records also show that a 13-year-old girl was executed for killing her mistress, a 10-year-old boy was executed for killing a companion, and an eight-year-old boy was similarly punished for 'maliciously' burning some barns. Perkins also notes that American records show the execution of two 12-year-old boys for murder. The standards of decency...seem certainly to have evolved." But they have evolved faster in some countries than in others.
The International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, the American Convention on Human Rights, and the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child prohibit the execution of a person who has committed a crime while a child (under the age of 18). The United States Senate ratified the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights in 1992, conditional on the continued right of individual states to impose the death penalty on juvenile murderers - those aged 16 or 17 at the time that the crime was committed. The U.S. is the only federal government in the world to have not ratified the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child.
According to Amnesty International USA:
| "...The United Nations Human Rights Committee, the expert body which oversees countries compliance with the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR), as well as many other international experts, have stated that this US reservation to the ICCPR should be withdrawn as it is incompatible with the treaty and therefore invalid." |
| "...11 countries have expressly voiced their objections to the US reservation on the same grounds." |
| "...the ban on the death penalty against child offenders is so widely agreed and adhered to that it is considered a principle of customary international law, binding on all countries regardless of which international treaties they have or have not ratified." 6 |
As of 2004-MAR, only six countries had laws on the books that allow the execution of juvenile offenders: Democratic Republic of Congo, Iran, Nigeria, Pakistan, Saudi Arabia, and the United States . Yemen had enabling laws in the 1990's, but has since abolished them.
In its Simmons v. Roper ruling in 2003-AUG, the Supreme Court of Missouri reported that officially sanctioned executions of juvenile murderers have occurred during the previous few years only in Iran, The Republic of the Congo, and the United States. Of all the countries of the world, the U.S. was the main killer of juvenile offenders. Of the last seven such executions worldwide, five occurred in the United States -- (mainly in Oklahoma, Texas, and Virginia). 16,17
Capital crimes in biblical times:
Some of the 613 laws in the Mosaic Code of the Bible call for the death penalty for those guilty of a variety of behaviors: working on Saturday, committing adultery, being a sorcerer, following a different religion, religious proselytizing, performing a séance, engaging in incest. Also:
| Men engaging in homosexual activity in a Pagan temple, 19 |
| Women having engaged in sexual intercourse before marriage, |
| Female prostitutes, and |
| Engaged women who were raped in a town and who did not cry out |
were to be executed. Most were to be killed by stoning; prostitutes who were daughters of a priest were to be burned alive. None of the above laws mentioned the perpetrator's age. So a person under 18 might be executed for engaging in one of these behaviors.
There are some offences aimed specifically at juvenile offenders in which the Bible required them to be be executed: cursing parents, hitting a parent, or being stubborn or rebellious. Sometimes, a death penalty implemented on an adult guilty of a crime would also require his or her children to be executed, even though they were innocent of any crime. The sins of the fathers would be translated to the children. Fortunately, with the exception of Christian Reconstructionism, no significant religious group in North America advocates implementation of biblical standards for execution.
Opposition by religious groups to the death penalty for juvenile offenders:
Roman Catholic and Protestant churches have come a long way from their policies during the late Middle Ages and Renaissance when they executed tens of thousands of "witches" and other heretics. There are still some extreme Fundamentalist Christian individuals and groups in North America who advocate that sexually active homosexuals and followers of the Wiccan religion be executed by the state. However, almost all other faith groups have now abandoned all, or almost all, of the the biblical death penalties.
Generally speaking, most conservative faith groups support the death penalty for those found guilty of murder; some support the execution of juvenile murderers. Most liberal religious groups oppose the death penalty for all crimes. Mainline denominations and their membership take various positions.
Religion Link reported that: "Religious leaders and organizations have been powerful lobbies on both sides of the death penalty debate. Those against the death penalty say it is their moral obligation to bring the issue of capital punishment to the forefront of the religious community's agenda. They also argue that it is becoming increasingly difficult for the U.S. to maintain its position as the global leader on human rights when it not only still executes people, but juveniles as well. On the other side of the debate, some religious leaders firmly believe the Sixth Commandment is a prohibition against murder and not a prohibition against the death penalty." 18
In 1989, a number of mainline and liberal faith groups filed briefs with the U.S. Supreme Court in the case of Stanford v. Kentucky. They supported two juvenile murderers: Kevin Stanford who was about 17 years, 4 months of age at the time he committed murder, and Heath Wilkins who was about 16 years, 6 months of age. Both had been sentenced to be executed.
| Some were pacifist Christian groups with a long history of promoting civil rights and opposing killing: American Friends Service Committee, Mennonite Central Committee, and the General Conference Mennonite Church; |
| The United States Catholic Conference of the Roman Catholic Church also filed a brief. The Catholic Church has long promoted an end to the death penalty. |
| Many liberal or mainline religious groups filed briefs: American Baptist Churches; American Jewish Committee; American Jewish Congress; Christian Church (Disciples of Christ), National Council of Churches; General Assembly of the Presbyterian Church; Southern Christian Leadership Conference; Union of American Hebrew Congregations; United Church of Christ Commission for Racial Justice; United Methodist Church General Board of Church and Society; and West Virginia Council of Churches. |
| No conservative Protestant faith groups appear to have supported Stanford and Wilkins in opposition to the death penalty for juvenile murderers. 16 |
Opposition by secular groups to the death penalty for juvenile offenders:
Also in 1989, the following groups filed briefs during Stanford v. Kentucky indicating their opposition to the death penalty for juvenile offenders: The American Psychiatric Association, Child Welfare League of America; National Parents and Teachers Association; National Council on Crime and Delinquency; Children's Defense Fund; National Association of Social Workers; National Black Child Development Institute; National Network of Runaway and Youth Services; National Youth Advocate Program; and American Youth Work Center; American Society for Adolescent Psychiatry and American Orthopsychiatric Association; Defense for Children International -- USA; National Legal Aid and Defender Association; and National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers; Office of Capital Collateral Representative for the State of Florida; and International Human Rights Law Group. 16
Since 1989, the following groups have issued statements in opposition to the death penalty: Child Welfare League of America; National Parents and Teachers Association; National Council on Crime and Delinquency; Children's Defense Fund; National Association of Social Workers; National Black Child Development Institute; National Network of Runaway and Youth Services; National Youth Advocate Program; and American Youth Work Center; American Society for Adolescent Psychiatry and American Orthopsychiatric Association; Defense for Children International -- USA; National Legal Aid and Defender Association; and National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers; Office of Capital Collateral Representative for the State of Florida; International Human Rights Law Group. 16
Status in the North America by the end of 2002:
According to the Death Penalty Information Center, in the United States at the end of 2002:
| Sixteen states set 18 as the minimum age at the time of a commission of a crime for a person to be eligible for the death penalty. |
| Five states have 17 years as the minimum age (FL, GA, NH, NC, TX). |
| Seventeen set 16 as the minimum age (AL, AZ, AR, DE, ID, KY, LA, MS, MO, NV, OK, PA, SC, SD, UT, VA, WY). 2,10 |
There have only been 22 juvenile executions carried out between 1973 to 2003. Of these, 18 (81%) were in Texas, Virginia, or Oklahoma. Texas alone is responsible for 13 executions. 20 The trend appears to be towards an gradual elimination of juvenile executions in the U.S., except in Texas. 16
Canada abandoned the death penalty, for ordinary crimes, in 1976. However, in 1959, Steven Truscott, then 14 years of age, was charged with the murder of a 12 year old girl, Lynne Harper. He was tried and convicted. At the age of 16, he was sentenced to hang. Fortunately, the sentence was never carried out. He served ten years before being paroled. Recent evidence has emerged that proves beyond reasonable doubt that he is innocent of the crime. His case is being reviewed by the courts.
Sponsored link:
Rulings on the execution of child criminals by U.S. courts:
The U.S. Supreme Court, the Supreme Court of Missouri, and the high courts of other states have made several rulings on this topic in recent decades:
| 1988: Execution banned where criminal was 15 years of age or
younger: In the U.S. Supreme Court case Thompson v. Oklahoma, a boy had been
convicted of having actively participating in a brutal murder when he
was 15 years of age. The court ruled that capital punishment in the U.S.
was unconstitutional if applied to a child who was 15 years of age or younger at the
time of the offense. 7 Justice
Stevens "concluded that the 'cruel and unusual punishments'
prohibition of the Eighth Amendment, made applicable to the States by
the Fourteenth Amendment, prohibits the execution of a person who was
under 16 years of age at the time of his or her offense....In
determining whether the categorical Eighth Amendment prohibition
applies, this Court must be guided by the 'evolving standards of decency
that mark the progress of a maturing society,' [Trop v. Dulles, 356 U.S.
86, 101], 13 and, in so doing, must review
relevant legislative enactments and jury determinations and consider the
reasons why a civilized society may accept or reject the death penalty
for a person less than 16 years old at the time of the crime." 12 Justice Stevens noted that, at the time:
| ||||||||
| 1989: Execution OK if
criminal was 16 or 17 years of age:
In the case of Stanford v. Kentucky,
the U.S. Supreme Court, allowed the executions of two
males who were children at the time they committed murder. Kevin
Stanford was about 17 years, 4 months of age. Heath Wilkins was about 16
years, 6 months of age. The vote was 5 to 4 -- a common result on rulings
involving morality and ethics. As noted above, an unusually large number of religious and secular organizations filed amicus curiae (friend of the court) briefs in support of Stanford Justice Scalia wrote the majority report for the court. He noted that. at the time:
| ||||||||
| 2002: Court refuses to revisit Stanford case: The U.S. Supreme Court was bitterly divided -- as is its usual states on matters related to ethics and morality -- when presented with the option of considering whether to review a lower court conviction. They voted 5 to 4 to not accept the case. It involved Kevin Nigel Stanford, a Kentucky youth who was 17 when he abducted, raped, shot, and killed a 20 year old woman. This was the same individual that they reviewed 13 years earlier in Stanford v. Kentucky. Justice John Paul Stevens wrote for the minority and was joined by Justices David Souter, Ruth Bader Ginsburg and Stephen Breyer. He called teen execution a "shameful practice.....The practice of executing such offenders is a relic of the past and is inconsistent with evolving standards of decency in a civilized society." | ||||||||
| 2003-AUG: Missouri court rules on case of 17 year old
murderer: "Christopher Simmons murdered Shirley Cook in 1993,
when he was 17 years [and five months] old." After a robbery attempt, he
bound and gagged the woman, and pushed her off a railroad trestle, causing here
death. Prior to the robbery, he told his accomplice that they could get get away
with murder because they were juveniles. He was convicted of first-degree murder and
sentenced to death." He argued that execution for a murder that he
committed at the age of 17 would be cruel and unusual punishment, and thus
prohibited by the 8th and 14th
amendment to the U.S. Constitution. He
asked the Supreme Court of Missouri to set aside his execution
and commute his sentence to life imprisonment without eligibility for
probation, parole or release. Judge Laura Stith of the Missouri court
ruled that: "In the 14 years since Stanford was decided, a national
consensus has developed against the execution of juvenile offenders. No
state has lowered the age for execution from 18 to 17 or 16, five more
states have banned the practice of executing juvenile offenders through
legislative action and a sixth state has banned such a practice through
a judicial decision. Only six states have executed a juvenile offender
in the past 14 years. Opposition to the juvenile death penalty by
professional, social and religious organizations, both nationally and
internationally, has grown since Stanford. Similar to the
reasons set out in Atkins in regard to
offenders who are mentally retarded, neither retribution nor deterrence
provides an effective rationale for imposing the juvenile death penalty,
and the risk of wrongful execution of juveniles is enhanced....This
Court concludes that the United States Supreme Court would hold that the
execution of persons for crimes committed when they were under 18 years
of age violates the evolving standards of decency and is prohibited by
the Eighth Amendment to the United States constitution. This decision
applies retroactively to persons whose cases are on collateral review."
Judge Price dissented. He believed that the state Supreme Court lacks
the authority to overrule Stanford v. Kentucky. Simmons' defense stressed the belief that juvenile executions are no longer a moral option. They based their argument, in part, on the diminishing number of states with laws that permit juvenile executions, and the rarity of such sentences by juries. At the time of the Missouri court decision in 2004-AUG, "...a total of sixteen states -- to which should be added federal civilian and military courts -- require a minimum age of 18 for imposition of the death penalty....If the twelve states and the District of Columbia that bar the death penalty entirely are added, the combined total is twenty-eight states that prohibit juvenile executions." The State of Missouri appealed the case to the U.S. Supreme Court. | ||||||||
| 2004: U.S. Supreme Court decided to hear Roper v. Simmons: On
2004-JAN-26, the Supreme Court agreed to review the Missouri case described
above. The case is Roper v. Simmons, case no. 03-0633. The case
was heard in the fall of 2004. One additional piece of evidence has emerged in recent years. Researchers have determined that the human brain continues to develop during a person's teenage years, and only matures at about the age of 20. | ||||||||
| 2005: U.S. Supreme Court declares execution of
juvenile murders unconstitutional: By the usual 5 to 4 vote, the U.S.
Supreme Court ruled that it is unconstitutional to execute a juvenile killer
-- i.e. a person convicted of murder who was under 18 years of age at the
time of the offense. At the time of the ruling: "30 States prohibit the juvenile death penalty, including 12 that have rejected it altogether and 18 that maintain it but, by express provision or judicial interpretation, exclude juveniles from its reach. Moreover, even in the 20 States without a formal prohibition, the execution of juveniles is infrequent." 21 The latter states are: AL, AZ, AR, DE, FL. GA, ID, KY, LA, MS, MO, NV, NH, NC, OK, PA, SC, TX, UT, and VA. This cancels the sentences of 72 convicted murderers on death rows around the country. The court also bars states from sentencing minors for future crimes. The ruling stated that the "Court established the propriety and affirmed the necessity of referring to 'the evolving standards of decency that mark the progress of a maturing society' to determine which punishments are so disproportionate as to be 'cruel and unusual'." The main basis for their ruling is that the executions of juvenile criminals violate the U.S. Constitution's Eighth Amendment which bans such punishment. They also cited the 14th amendment. This decision should raise the opinion that many Western democracies have had of the U.S. Some had severely criticized the U.S. for this practice. 22 The Family Research Council reacted negatively to the decision. They cite "grave concerns such as states rights' and judges being moral arbitrators. One disturbing part of the majority opinion is that once again foreign courts and sentiment are cited to justify their decision. Justice Anthony Kennedy, writing for the majority, states, 'It is proper that we acknowledge the overwhelming weight of international opinion against the juvenile death penalty...The opinion of the world community, while not controlling our outcome, does provide respected and significant confirmation for our own conclusions." The Family Research Council continued: "Justice Antonin Scalia, in his brilliant dissent, highlights the hypocrisy of the Supreme Court by pointing out that it tends '(t)o invoke alien law when it agrees with one's own thinking, and ignore it otherwise, (and that) is not reasoned decision making, but sophistry.' Justice Scalia cites examples of foreign decisions that the majority ignores, including decisions that involve outlawing abortion and funding of religious schools. There is a dangerous trend in American courts with federal and state judges citing foreign precedent to justify radical decisions, e.g., of sodomy (Lawrence v. Texas) and gay 'marriage' (Goodridge v. Department of Health [in Massachusetts]). The U.S. judicial system should not rely on selective citations of foreign laws." 23 | ||||||||
| 2005-MAR-18: Condemnation of Court decision: The Fundamentalist Baptist Information Service condemned the "foolish judges" of the Supreme Court for ruling that it is unconstitutional for the state to execute murderers who are under 18 years of age at the time that they commit their crime. By tying their decision to the views of society, Justice Anthony Kennedy revealed "that his authority is not the U.S. Constitution but the shifting sand of public opinion. God established the death penalty for murder immediately after the flood and it has never been rescinded....(Genesis 9:6)...No exceptions were made for youth. In fact, the Bible specifically says that young rebels are subject to death. 'For every one that curseth his father or his mother shall be surely put to death...(Leviticus 20:9)'." 24 |
Public opinion polls:
| The Gallup Poll conducted a poll on 2002-MAY concerning the execution
of juvenile murderers starting. Results were:
N = 1,012. Margin of error is within 3 percentage points. | ||||||
| Vote.com conducted a similar public opinion poll on their website on 2002-AUG-31.
Results were:
N = 13,525. Although the margin of error was less than one percentage point, the people who voted were self-motivated and are not necessarily a representative sample of American adults. Comparing this poll's data with those of the Gallup Poll would indicate that the Vote.com subjects do not represent a typical sample of the American public. This is a good indicator of the unreliability of Internet polls. |
References used:
All of the following hyperlinks were active at the time this essay was written or updated. Some may be broken today.
- Naftali Bendavid, "U.S. study rebuts death penalty bias: Critics: Report on race issue flawed," Chicago Tribune, 2001-JUN-7.
- Diane Jennings, "Execution gets little notice despite youth of defendant," Dallas Morning News, at: http://www.dallasnews.com/
- Jamie Fellner, "Should we execute killers with the mind of a child?," Chicago Tribune, at: http://www.hrw.org/
- "U.S. execution of mentally retarded condemned. State legislatures urged to act," Human Rights Watch, 2001-MAR-20.
- "Beyond Reason: The Death Penalty and Offenders with Mental Retardation," Human Rights Watch report, is at: http://www.hrw.org/
- "The Death Penalty and Offenders with Mental Retardation" (Human Rights Watch essay at: http://www.hrw.org/campaigns/
- Thompson v. Oklahoma, 487 US 815 (1988)
- "Question of the death penalty," U.N. Commission on Human Rights, at: http://www.unhchr.ch/Huridocda/
- Anne Gearan, "Executing retarded is barred," Associated Press, 2002-JUN-21.
- "The Death Penalty in 2002: Year End Report," The Death Penalty
Information Center, at:
http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/ You need software to read these files. It can be obtained free from:
- Ramsey Clark, "The tragedy of war as an end in itself," The Toronto Star, 2003-MAR-8, Page A9.
- "Thompson v. Oklahoma," U.S. Supreme Court, (1988), at FindLaw: http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/
- "Trop v. Dulles," U.S. Supreme Court, (1958), at: http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/
- "Stanford v. Kentucky," U.S. Supreme Court, (1989), at: http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/
- "Court refuses teen execution case," Associated Press, 2002-OCT-21, at: http://www.beliefnet.com/
- "Simmons v. Roper," Supreme Court of Missouri, (2003), at: http://www.osca.state.mo.us/
- "Juveniles: The Death Penalty Gives up on Juvenile Offenders," Amnesty International, 2003-JUL-28, at http://www.amnestyusa.org/
- "The Death Penalty," PollingReport.com, at: http://www.pollingreport.com/
- Some theologians interpret Leviticus 20:13 as applying to all sexual activity between two males.
- Bill Mears, "Supreme Court will revisit execution of teenage killers," CNN.com, 2004-JAN-26, at: http://edition.cnn.com/
- "Roper, Superintendent, Potosi Correctional Center v. Simmons, 03-633." U.S. Supreme Court, at: http://a257.g.akamaitech.net
- "U.S. bans executions of minors," Associated Press, 2005-MAR-01. Published in the Toronto Star, 2005-MAR-02, Page A13.
- "Supreme Court Once Again Cites Foreign Precedent," Washington Update, Family Research Council, 2005-MAR-02.
- "Foolish Judges," Friday News Notes, Fundamentalist Baptist Information Service, 2005-MAR-18.
|
Navigation: Home page > "Hot" religious topics > Death Penalty > this essay |
Copyright © 1995 to 2005, by Ontario Consultants on
Religious Tolerance
Originally published: 1995-JUN-8
Last updated 2005-MAR-02
Author: Bruce A Robinson
|
|
