Lifestyle

TOPICS:

2/8/05

Previous

PAGE: 

1 ... 

401 | 402 | 403

 ... 944

Next

Previous

PAGE: 

1 | 2 | 3

Next

Christopher

Christopher

Portland, OR
November 2002

FEB 07, 2005 11:25 PM

The U.S. Supreme Court found in the case of Daryl R. Atkins that it is unconstitutional to execute someone with an IQ lower than 70. In 1998, Atkins scored a 59.

As a result of the rigors of studying and the time invested reading of law books has now put Atikin's life in jeopardy because his IQ has increased.

A defense expert who retested Mr. Atkins last year found that his I.Q. was 74. In court here on Thursday, prosecutors said their expert's latest test yielded 76.

Mr. Atkins, a slight, balding 27-year-old in an orange jumpsuit, sat slumped with his chin on his hand as lawyers argued about whether his intelligence was low enough to spare him from execution. In 1996, he and another man abducted Eric Nesbitt, 21, an airman from Langley Air Force Base, forced him to withdraw money from an A.T.M. and then shot him eight times, killing him.

He will be one of the first death row inmates to have a jury trial on the question of whether he is retarded. The jury's decision will determine whether his life will be spared.

Mr. Atkins's more recent scores should be discounted, a clinical psychologist who tested him in 1998 and 2004 said, because they are the result of "a forced march towards increased mental stimulation" provided by the case itself.

"Oddly enough, because of his constant contact with the many lawyers that worked on his case," the psychologist, Dr. Evan S. Nelson, wrote in a report in November, "Mr. Atkins received more intellectual stimulation in prison than he did during his late adolescence and early adulthood. That included practicing his reading and writing skills, learning about abstract legal concepts and communicating with professionals."[…]
Prosecutors say that Mr. Atkins has never been retarded and that the recent tests confirm it. "I don't see how a 76 is exculpatory and evidence of mental retardation," Eileen M. Addison, the commonwealth's attorney here, said in court on Thursday. "It needs to be under 70."


I wonder if Ms. Addison can see the sweet irony in calling someone retarded.

delusion

delusion

Santa Barbara, CA
March 2004

FEB 08, 2005 05:07 PM

From an educational standpoint, IQ alone cannot and does not serve as diagnostic evidence of mental retardation. An IQ lower than 80 and the inability to perform two or more adaptive skills is generally considered evidence of retardation. It seems strange to me that the court system wouldn't use the same guidelines as the DSM.

MisterSatan

MisterSatan

Portland, OR
August 2002

FEB 08, 2005 05:08 PM

On a totally unrelated note, I really wish you guys could find articles that weren't subscription-only.

delusion

delusion

Santa Barbara, CA
March 2004

FEB 08, 2005 05:09 PM

I just read that as "on a totally unretarded note". tongue

MisterSatan

MisterSatan

Portland, OR
August 2002

FEB 08, 2005 05:10 PM

delusion said:
I just read that as "on a totally unretarded note". tongue


Is it bad that I laughed at that? blush

delusion

delusion

Santa Barbara, CA
March 2004

FEB 08, 2005 05:12 PM

MisterSatan said:

delusion said:
I just read that as "on a totally unretarded note". tongue


Is it bad that I laughed at that? blush


No, because I did too.

adjunct

adjunct

Philadelphia, PA
July 2002

FEB 08, 2005 05:13 PM

I thought that people who studied such things generally agreed that IQ scores after late adolescence were nearly meaningless, especially since a positive attitude towards 'being smart' can be conditioned through education.

adjunct

adjunct

Philadelphia, PA
July 2002

FEB 08, 2005 05:15 PM

delusion said:
It seems strange to me that the court system wouldn't use the same guidelines as the DSM.


The DSM is a moving target that doesn't follow precedent in the same way as the legal system. It wouldn't really work.

_El_Zilcho_

_El_Zilcho_

Framingham, MA
April 2003

FEB 08, 2005 05:16 PM

delusion said:
It seems strange to me that the court system wouldn't use the same guidelines as the DSM.



I just served on a jury to decided whether a pedophile was still sexually dangerous, and the court definately stressed the DSM.

Plue, I could take an IQ test now and score say, a 130. Then I could take another IQ test and score lower or higher. IQ tests really don't prove much.

Kosomot

kosomot

Pompano Beach, FL
November 2003

FEB 08, 2005 05:19 PM

MisterSatan said:
On a totally unrelated note, I really wish you guys could find articles that weren't subscription-only.


If you are really intrested in reading it. http://www.bugmenot.com/

Fu

Fu

Los Angeles, CA
November 2003

FEB 08, 2005 05:21 PM

Why would we want to execute such a valued and productive member of our society? He has so much to offer.

delusion

delusion

Santa Barbara, CA
March 2004

FEB 08, 2005 05:31 PM

aj said:

delusion said:
It seems strange to me that the court system wouldn't use the same guidelines as the DSM.


The DSM is a moving target that doesn't follow precedent in the same way as the legal system. It wouldn't really work.


True. But, mental retardation is defined fairly statically in the ADA and the DSM from what I understand. I wouldn't think that the court would need it's own definition, especially since the experts have weighed in on the current definitions. But, regardless, IQ scores can't prove much and the word 'retardation' in itself implies developmental delay not the impossibility of intellectual development. I would think in the same way that a sexual partner's age at the time of the alleged crime denotes pedophilia, the intellectual capacity of a murderer at the time of their crime should denote responsibility for their actions.

delusion

delusion

Santa Barbara, CA
March 2004

FEB 08, 2005 05:33 PM

Fu said:
Why would we want to execute such a valued and productive member of our society? He has so much to offer.


If being in jail allowed him more of an education than he ever previously had, I don't see how it's fair to say that he is or isn't valued or productive. Are you saying ignorance should be punishable by death?

Lit_the_Filter

Lit_the_Filter

Tacoma, WA
August 2004

FEB 08, 2005 05:42 PM

What's the difference between an IQ of 69 and one of 74? I mean, I'd guess that there's probably a statistically significant difference between somebody who scores a 69 and an 89, but I can't imagine a five point difference means all that much.

Lit_the_Filter

Lit_the_Filter

Tacoma, WA
August 2004

FEB 08, 2005 05:43 PM

What's the difference between an IQ of 69 and one of 74? I mean, I'd guess that there's probably a statistically significant difference between somebody who scores a 69 and an 89, but I can't imagine a five point difference means all that much.

Fu

Fu

Los Angeles, CA
November 2003

FEB 08, 2005 05:43 PM

delusion said:

Fu said:
Why would we want to execute such a valued and productive member of our society? He has so much to offer.


If being in jail allowed him more of an education than he ever previously had, I don't see how it's fair to say that he is or isn't valued or productive. Are you saying ignorance should be punishable by death?


I'm saying I have no respect for and place no value on the life of a predator.
He knew how to:
1. Obtain and use a firearm.
2. Abduct and murder another human being.
3. Use an ATM to obtain currency.

... he knows the difference between right and wrong.

delusion

delusion

Santa Barbara, CA
March 2004

FEB 08, 2005 05:46 PM

Fu said:

delusion said:

Fu said:
Why would we want to execute such a valued and productive member of our society? He has so much to offer.


If being in jail allowed him more of an education than he ever previously had, I don't see how it's fair to say that he is or isn't valued or productive. Are you saying ignorance should be punishable by death?


I'm saying I have no respect for and place no value on the life of a predator.
He knew how to:
1. Obtain and use a firearm.
2. Abduct and murder another human being.
3. Use an ATM to obtain currency.



... he knows the difference between right and wrong.


He didn't act alone and the man he was with was neurotypical. But, other than that, I would say that the point you make is valid and whether or not he could understand those things should be more important than what his IQ is or was.

p0go

p0go

USA
July 2004

FEB 08, 2005 05:48 PM

my iq is over 150 and girls call me retarted all the time ooo aaa

Feild

Feild

Quakertown, PA
December 2004

FEB 08, 2005 05:49 PM

I'm totally safe........whew

delusion

delusion

Santa Barbara, CA
March 2004

FEB 08, 2005 05:50 PM

p0g0 said:
my iq is over 150 and girls call me retarted all the time ooo aaa


That's because you can't spell. biggrin

alpo

alpo

Portland, OR
OLD SKOOL

FEB 08, 2005 05:53 PM

MisterSatan said:
On a totally unrelated note, I really wish you guys could find articles that weren't subscription-only.



Login: sgnews
Password: sgnews

Learn it, know it, live it.

Fu

Fu

Los Angeles, CA
November 2003

FEB 08, 2005 05:59 PM

delusion said:
He didn't act alone and the man he was with was neurotypical.


true

...whether or not he could understand those things should be more important than what his IQ is or was.


Very true. That's what I should have just said right away but my sarcasm gets the best of me sometimes.

Fu

Fu

Los Angeles, CA
November 2003

FEB 08, 2005 06:01 PM

delusion said:

p0g0 said:
my iq is over 150 and girls call me retarted all the time ooo aaa


That's because you can't spell. biggrin


biggrin biggrin biggrin

fuck

fuck

Detroit, MI
April 2004

FEB 08, 2005 06:19 PM

hmmm...i see the prosecuters want to use his more recent tests. Is it still ethical if he had lower scores at the time? I say the prosecuters are retarded.

gutterman

gutterman

Austin, TX
August 2003

FEB 08, 2005 06:39 PM

I'm all for the death penalty. But in this case, I don't agree with it. The guy was "retarded" when he committed the crime. He shouldn't be executed.

If a child kills someone, and is tried as a child, they don't execute him when he's older. He was a child when he committed the crime.

They shouldn't penalize him for being smarter NOW than he was when he committed the crime.

Previous

PAGE: 

1 | 2 | 3

Next