Court Blocks Execution of Mentally Ill Man

June 25, 2007— -- The Supreme Court ruled Thursday that the State of Texas cannot put to death a mentally ill death row inmate even though he claims he doesn't fully understand why he is being executed.

Scott Panetti, who has battled mental illness for years, brutally murdered his estranged wife's parents, Joe and Amanda Alvarado. A jury found him competent to stand trial for the murders and a judge allowed him to represent himself in court.

At his trial each day, Panetti wore a cowboy hat, bandana and boots. He rambled incoherently and contended that it was one of his own alternate personalities who had committed the crime. He attempted to subpoena Jesus Christ.

The jury found him guilty and he was sentenced to death in 1995. After years of appeals, Panetti's case reached the Supreme Court in April, when the justices heard arguments about whether Panetti can be executed if he doesn't fully understand that representatives of the State of Texas will put him to death for his crime.

Keith Hampton, a lawyer for Panetti said, "We believe he has to have a rational understanding as to why he is being executed -- otherwise society is denied a sense of retribution for his crime."

Panetti's lawyers wanted the justices to settle on a definition of mental illness for the purpose of competency for execution.

In 1986 the Supreme Court found in Ford v. Wainwright that the Eighth Amendment's prohibition on cruel and unusual punishment forbids the execution of individuals suffering from insanity and identified several reasons why the court found execution of the insane to be unconstitutional.

The court questioned the value of executing a person who does not comprehend why he is being put to death. Panetti's lawyers wanted the court to clarify that ruling and define a test for establishing insanity in this context.

Attorneys from the State of Texas representing the state's Department of Criminal Justice argued against Panetti. In briefs, the lawyers supported Panetti's death sentence writing, "No judge or jury has ever found him incompetent" and citing testimony by a psychiatrist who observed that Panetti understood why he was facing capital-murder charges, and the significance of the punishment he was going to receive.