HUNTSVILLE, Texas (AP) — No one
disputes that Scott Panetti — heavily armed, head shaved and wearing
camouflage — shot and killed his in-laws at their Texas Hill Country
home, showering his estranged wife and 3-year-old daughter in blood.
Panetti
himself acknowledged during his 1995 capital murder trial that he had
killed Joe and Amanda Alvarado. Dressed as a cowboy, he acted as his own
attorney, believing only an insane person could prove an insanity
defense.
Jurors convicted him and sentenced him to death, and he is scheduled to die on Wednesday.
Panetti's
attorneys are seeking to get him off death row or, in the very least,
to get his execution date postponed so that he can undergo further
psychological testing to determine if he's competent to be put to death.
They believe his case raises questions about the legality of executing
the mentally ill — an issue the U.S. Supreme Court has previously
considered.
"From our perspective, this has been like a slow-moving train wreck since 1995," said Kathryn Kase, one of his lawyers.
A
diagnosed paranoid schizophrenic, Panetti had been hospitalized for
mental illness more than a dozen times in the decade leading up to the
September 1992 killings of the Alvarados.
A
2007 Supreme Court review of Panetti's case tweaked the criteria for
executing those with severe mental disorders by requiring inmates to not
only know that they are being punished, but to also have a "rational
understanding" of their punishment. Providing little guidance other than
requiring a "fair hearing" for presentation of psychiatric evidence to
consider insanity claims, the justices returned Panetti's case to lower
federal courts, which ultimately found him competent.
Seven
years since his last mental evaluation, Panetti is showing increasingly
aberrant delusional behavior on death row, said Kase, who visited him a
few weeks ago. He believes his punishment is part of a satanic
conspiracy to prevent him from preaching the Gospel.
"He
cannot appreciate why Texas seeks to execute him," Kase said. "You have
to have a rational as well as factual understanding of why you're being
executed.
"In Mr. Panetti's
case, his understanding is the state wants to prevent him from preaching
the Gospel on death row and saving their souls. And clearly that's not
factual or rational."
Prosecutors argue that Panetti's claims are without merit and that defense attorneys have had years to arrange new evaluations.
Lucy
Wilke, an assistant district attorney in Gillespie County, where
Panetti was tried, said that as recently as Nov. 4, Panetti discussed
Election Day politics during a prison visit with relatives.
"At
the very least, it is clear that Panetti is oriented to time and place,
a fact which his lawyers have disputed," she said in a filing last week
to the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals, which refused to stop the
execution.
Panetti's case now is back before a federal appeals court.
Court-appointed medical experts for the state have long said they suspect some of Panetti's bizarre behavior was contrived.
Panetti
responded to a recent interview request from The Associated Press with
the message: "I respectfully decline, Acts 28." The Biblical chapter in
the Acts of the Apostles includes a reference to St. Paul as a prisoner
of the Romans and of Paul successfully teaching the Gospel.
0 comments :
Post a Comment