Court Overturns Ohio Death Sentence
| AR Articles on Race and Intelligence |
|---|
| A King Among Men (Apr. 2003) |
| The Global Bell Curve (Dec. 2002) |
| The Definitive Word on Intelligence (Sep. 1998) |
| Race and Intelligence: The Evidence (Nov. 1992) |
| Research That Was to Prove Jensen Wrong Proves Him Right (Mar. 1994) |
| Search AmRen.com for Race and Intelligence |
| More news stories on Race and Intelligence |
The Ohio Supreme Court on Wednesday overturned the death sentence of a double murderer, agreeing with defense lawyers who said the man shouldn’t be executed because he is mentally retarded.
The court ruled unanimously in favor of convicted killer Clifton White of Akron, citing the 2002 U.S. Supreme Court ruling that executing the mentally retarded violates the Constitution’s ban on cruel and unusual punishment.
{snip}
White was sentenced to death for the Christmas Eve 1995 murder of Deborah Thorpe in Akron. He also killed Julie Schrey in the same attack and wounded Thorpe’s 19-year-old son, Michael.
Prosecutors say White was angry over his breakup with Schrey’s daughter.
The court rejected lower court rulings that said White did not meet the U.S. Supreme Court’s three-prong test for mental retardation.
That test requires a low IQ generally under 70, a person’s lack of basic skills such as communication or living by himself, and the onset of mental retardation symptoms before age 18.
No evidence was presented “to suggest that White’s current impairments could be explained by anything that happened after he turned 18, such as a brain injury,” wrote Justice Robert Cupp. “Nor does anything in White’s history indicate that he functioned at a higher level before age 18 than he does today.”
{snip}
(Posted on April 11, 2008)
Comments
This is no more than a license to kill for most black males, because a vast number of them will test in the 70 range of I.Q.
Certainly they’re dysfunctional, which is revealed in their low I.Q. scores and their inability to learn on any appreciable level, which is why they turn to crime, but to judge them not culpable for murder just because they’re stupid is a very serious error.
These are the men that Barack Obama says are “diamonds in the rough,” which are not given a fair chance by whites, and he denigrates whites unmercifully because these men continue to fail.
Well, which is it Obama? If they’re too dumb to be executed how can whites be racist for realizing they’re not capable enough to function on a competitive level?
If they’re too dumb to pay for their crimes, how can they be smart enough to make it in an advanced civilization?
Posted by Ranger at 7:55 PM on April 11
If one were to take this seriously it would mean that effectively nearly half of all American blacks would never be subject to the death penalty and that the average sub saharan black would also be exempt.
Posted by at 8:22 PM on April 11
The problem (actually the reason liberals pushed for it in the first place) with the ban on executing retarded people, is that a full half of all blacks qualify. And likely far more of the blacks who commit murder, qualify. This rule exists for the sole purpose of preventing murderers from being executed. It’s a back door ban on the death penalty.
Particularly disturbing considering that liberals care nothing for the sanctity of human life. What they are after, quite frankly, is an increase in the number of victims murdered. The death penalty is a strong deterrent. Liberals want that deterrent removed. They actually want the murderers out of prison and back on the streets so they can commit even more murders.
Why? Because they think such things foster anarchy. If democracy cannot function effectively in the most basic tasks like preventing citizens from being murdered by psychopaths, then it will fall. They hope to replace it with a sick marxist/fascist dictatorship with themselves as the rulers of the rest of us.
That is the bottom line.
The question is, what are we going to do about it.
Posted by at 9:42 PM on April 11
There is something a bit strange here. They have tests for mental impairment, but they don’t seem to look at the more fundamental question of whether he knew right from wrong. That is the central issue in deciding that someone should not face the death penalty due to a mental impairment.
If he knew that his actions were wrong, is mental retardation an excuse for anything?
Posted by Reader-1 at 9:44 PM on April 11
I am confused here. When I was a kid at school my teachers always told me that an I.Q. of 70 or less was mental retardation. Later I heard many African blacks had an I.Q. of about 70. Now you never hear anyone (in academie) say that a 70 I.Q. is retarded. What gives?
Posted by at 10:07 PM on April 11
Liberals also believe in IQ when it comes to children (usually black) who have eaten paint chips. And in bogus blue state vs. red state IQ maps (see Steve Sailer on this issue).
Posted by Irish at 11:09 PM on April 11
“These are the men that Barack Obama says are “diamonds in the rough,” which are not given a fair chance by whites, and he denigrates whites unmercifully because these men continue to fail.”
Ranger,
I’ve come to the conclusion that no matter what Freebies Blacks get they will always blame Whites for their problems in perpetuity. We are the victims now. We are the crime victims, the work victims, the people who are forced to leave the neighborhoods that we grew up in to get away from these B _ _ _ _ _ _ S. They have power now and they want more of it. Collectively I think Blacks, if they could, most, would do violence on any White if they knew they could get away with it. With Obama in the White House I think this country will see Blacks become emboldened to commit crimes on an unprecedented scale and of course that includes crimes on us. Obama will attempt to pass more laws favoring Blacks over Whites. I actually think an Obama presidency while terrible in the short run will actually do Whites a great deal of good in waking them up to the situation much faster.
Posted by Thinking Freely at 12:02 AM on April 12
Amazing how many leftists can’t see the contradiction. I brought this point up at a certain site and here you can see some of the responses:
http://www.essembly.com/resolves/34816
Posted by jewamongyou at 12:59 AM on April 12
The median IQ of Black Americans is 85, meaning that only about 1/6th of them have IQs of 70 or below (versus just about half of sub-Saharan Black Africans, since their median IQ is just about 70). IQ alone does not explain the inordinately high Black crime rate, however, as Blacks also score remarkably high as a group on social-pathology scales, like the MMPI, even when controlling for IQ.
The rather-popular notion here that the principled opposition to executing verified retardates is simply cover for crypto-Marxists or crypto-fascists seeking to overthrow American civilization, or for people unduly fond of murderous Blacks, says a lot more about the people holding such ludicrous and paranoid fantasies than it does about those who oppose the death penalty, generally, let alone the execution of the retarded.
Do these self-styled saviors of American civilization really believe that their personal Lord and Savior— himself a supposed victim of a particularly gruesome form of capital punishment, under color of Roman law— favors the state execution of people with the mental capacity of grade-school children?
Posted by Jake Prufrock at 1:38 AM on April 12
Look at the bright side, with a 70 to 85 IQ they get caught for their crimes at an extrodinary rate.
Posted by cartman at 2:03 PM on April 12
TO Jake Prufrock,
The Lord and Saviour I follow is the Prince of Peace. Peace for a killer racist black african means executing the poor racist bastard. I fear God and believe that not wanting to execute a racist killer is a mortal sin.
Posted by at 4:54 PM on April 12
The left doesn’t want to execute Blacks, who they see as the downtrodden and oppressed. So Blacks will commit more murder and get away with it. This will lead to a breakdown in civil society, leaving it vulnerable to being taken over by marxism.
Posted by at 5:08 PM on April 12
“I actually think an Obama presidency while terrible in the short run will actually do Whites a great deal of good in waking them up to the situation much faster.”
Posted by Thinking Freely at 12:02 AM on April 12
I think you might be right.
For certain, his candicy has brought to light to many unaware whites just how many Jeremiah Wrights are out there who hate them.
The blacks are spinning nosensically that the raging rhetoric is whitey’s fault, trying to turn it all around to where they hope whites will conclude that if it wasn’t for them there wouldn’t be these anti-white haters rife within the black community. In other words they want everybody to believe blacks hate, because whites made them that way, and the remedy for the situation is in changing white attitude.
Pure poppycock. Blacks hate, because blacks are haters and they’re ingrates that appreciate nothing and they never will.
If we continue to hammer on the uncalled for anti-white racism, pointing out how much they’re catered to nowadays, it might get a few spineless white elitists to also point it out on some of the talking head shows.
But don’t hold your breath.
Posted by Ranger at 5:52 PM on April 12
Some IQ experts were concerned that the Supreme Court’s ruling would make the low IQ appear as morally less than fully human by officially labeling them as inherently less able to comprehend basic ethical rules such as “Thou shalt not kill.”
Most individuals below the 75 IQ level understand the basic rules of society, they know that hurting other people is wrong.
Posted by A. Windaus at 6:10 PM on April 12
“Look at the bright side, with a 70 to 85 IQ they get caught for their crimes at an extraordinary rate.”
Actually, white criminals are more likely to be caught. And when they are caught, are more likely to face the death penalty (whites commit 45 % of all murders but are over 60 % of those executed).
I must say, it’s interesting to note that, finally, AmRener’s have come to realize, low IQ doesn’t impair one that much after all. : )
Posted by Just another AmRener at 10:18 PM on April 12
A few points:
According to some stats I saw recently, whites are more likely to be sentenced to death for murder than blacks, and the sentence is more likely to be carried out on whites than blacks.
The IQ issue is interesting. If blacks start using IQ to mitigate their crimes, the ploy will backfire on all blacks, a good thing for race-realism. However, if this becomes a trend, prosecution lawyers could call race experts to demonstrate how low IQ does not correlate with mental retardation. Africans are not retarded, but, as we know, their average IQ is less than 70. Whites with an IQ of less than 70 are generally considered retarded. Courts will have to get to the nitty-gritty of what is going on.
Posted by at 10:41 PM on April 12
“These are the men Obama says are ‘diamonds in the rough’.”
—Ranger
As a trained chemist, the term “diamonds in the rough” brings to mind… coal.
Posted by Michael C. Scott at 12:29 PM on April 14
“Do these self-styled saviors of American civilization really believe that their personal Lord and Savior— himself a supposed victim of a particularly gruesome form of capital punishment, under color of Roman law— favors the state execution of people with the mental capacity of grade-school children?”
Jake- Yes. I am a cleric, and the Law of God is clear. American Jurisprudence was modeled on Biblical law, and that law was, ‘Thou shalt not kill.’ No ifs, ands or buts.
To posit that the “gentle Jesus” of the N.T. is not the same God as the “YHWH” of the O.T. is considered heresy. “I and the Father are ONE”, John 10:30.
Jesus was INNOCENT. This beast was not. Death is reserved to the State as the ‘arm of God,’ and MUST be applied equally, or the wrath of God will descend, and our [collective] sins will be punished. Frankly, if the perp is mentally retarded, (and an IQ of 70 was very recently considered a prima facie evidence of such!) then, if he is able to procreate, and cannot control his sexual lust, all the more reason to purge the land of this evil.
Posted by Fr. John at 6:01 PM on April 14
10:07pm, your question was answered, if indirectly, at the most recent American Renaissance conference, by both J. Philippe Rushton and Eugene Valberg in their talks.
The point they made was not to think about a 70 IQ as a drooling moron. That is what an average 11 year old white child has in comparison to an average white adult. Now white 11 year olds tend to have poor long-term and abstract thinking skills, but they can carry on a coherent conversation, be taught fairly complex skills, including advanced arithmetic, and have been employed in factories.
Would you want them to be outside strictly enforced externally imposed sources of order? No. Would you want them to be making important political decisions, or given grave responsibilities, especially when deferred gratification is necessary? No.
Posted by Irish at 11:06 PM on April 14
If they can’t pass a test its because of “testing biases”
If they face the chair, they are metally retarded….
Posted by George at 5:18 PM on April 17