Texas Justice Flawless

Rita Radostitz's article on the death penalty ["Why Is Doil Lane Still on Death Row?," Oct. 17] seemed a bit, well, disingenuous when it claimed that "inmates need to prove they are retarded," or words to that effect. 1) You don't get to be an inmate without first being tried and convicted, and 2) any attorney is going to argue before the trial judge that their client is incapable of contributing to his or her own defense.
   For someone to be on death row, they have to be competent to stand trial, which means two things. Did they understand the consequences of their actions when they committed the crime – i.e, did they realize shooting someone seven times would kill them – and the second criteria is, does the defendant understand the difference between right and wrong? Nada mas, campers. Mentally retarded people are not totally helpless and incapable of understanding the difference between right and wrong, unless you want to denigrate all people who are handicapped. BTW, only a real asshole calls handicapped people "retarded."

   Rita Radostitz responds: Mr. Swanson confuses two distinct legal concepts – competency and mental retardation – which are determined by completely separate legal standards. In the Atkins decision, the Supreme Court acknowledged that many people with mental retardation are indeed competent to stand trial. However, the court determined that the evolving standards of moral decency in the United States prohibit the execution of those with mental retardation. In other words, despite the fact that a person with mental retardation might be competent, the impact of their impairment renders them less morally culpable, and therefore not subject to capital punishment, although they may still be tried and, if convicted, sentenced to prison. The court's reasoning is similar to the treatment of juveniles charged with a capital crime – although a 15-year-old youth may both know the difference between right and wrong and be able to assist his/her attorney (the standard for competency), the citizens of the state of Texas have decided (and the U.S. Constitution requires) that they be exempt from being executed, even if they are competent to be tried and held accountable for their crimes. As for Mr. Benjet being an "asshole," my guess is that the many men and women with mental retardation who have benefited from his expertise and efforts to save their lives would disagree with that assessment.