Vulnerability of Mentally Ill Individuals to False Confessions
It seems reasonable to state that mentally ill persons should not be eligible for the death penalty. Such individuals may be more susceptible to police coercion and more inclined to make false admissions. According to empirical investigations, impulsivity, poor cognitive processing, suggestion, delusions, and excessive compliance are all traits connected to mental illness that might result in false confessions (Salzer, 2020).
Other studies show that mentally ill offenders (who are not mentally impaired) have great difficulty comprehending the cautions against self-incrimination and access to an attorney that is given to them. At the same time, they are being questioned by the police. Therefore, when confronted with a police questioning, individuals with mental illness are more likely to surrender rights they do not comprehend and are more prone to make false confessions.
Impaired Intent and the Challenge of Capital Murder Standards
The majority of capital murder laws demand that the State establishes beyond any reasonable doubt that the person being charged knew they were going to kill the person in question. However, many people facing the death penalty who have severe mental illnesses were unable to create a precise intent to murder at the point of their crimes (McCullough, 2022). The United States Supreme Court decided that such offenders do not have a right guaranteed by the Constitution to provide evidence that they experienced a major mental illness to prove that they did not have a particular motive to murder in the problematic case of Clark v. Arizona, 548 U.S. 735 (2006). Such a state of affairs does not seem reasonable and should be changed.
Barriers to Fair Trial Participation Among Mentally Ill Defendants
Throughout the trial, mentally ill defendants have additional special difficulties. They may mistrust their attorneys due to their mental problems and find it challenging to participate in their defenses actively. Frequently, mentally ill death row inmates dismiss their attorneys, represent themselves, or forego appeals (Salzer, 2020). These defendants may firmly feel that they have the ability to represent themselves in court due to the same framework of delusional beliefs that fundamentally hinder certain seriously mentally ill offenders from being able to offer a coherent defense.
References
Clark v. Arizona, 548 U.S. 735. (2006).
McCullough, J. (2022). Texas tries again to prove that Scott Panetti is just sane enough to be executed. The Texas Tribune. Web.
Salzer, J. (2020). Ending the death penalty for people with severe mental illness. Journal of Constitutional Law, 22(5), 101–127.