Essay On Roper V. Simmons

In 1993, a young boy at the age of 17 thought that he could get away with murder, but completely made a fool of himself and ruined his life. The case Roper v. Simmons takes place in 2004, which explains how Christopher was given the death penalty for the murder of Shirley Crook. He had planned this days in advance with a couple of other buddies, Charles Benjamin 15 and John Tessmer 16 to rob her, kidnap her and murdered her. On the night of the incident Tessmer chickens out. Charles and Christopher continued to go through with the plan. They broke into her house around 2am in the morning, as they wake her up they wrestle her to the ground. They proceeded to bound her head in duct tape, not only put tape around her head, but tused electrical

wire to tie her hands and feet together. Christopher and Charles put her in the back of own car and drive her to a close bridge and throw her over landing in the river causing her to drown. She was later found by a couple of fisherman. Christopher was caught due to bragging about killing Mrs. crook and got arrested. He was not too quiet about it because he did not hesitate to confess either, not only he confessed, but agreed to reenact the scene. When Christopher was found guilty, he is given death penalty. Christopher himself disagreed with the court and appeals it because he is a minor and called it “cruel and unusual punishment” which is part of the 8th amendment and is not allowed by law.
The court's ruling was a 5-4 giving Simmons the win. The U.S supreme ruled that the execution of minors violated the 8th and 4th amendments. The four dissenting judges made their decision based on that they argued that the public's anger and opinion towards the decision of the case. Due to the fact that Christopher was a minor when he committed the crime, so the court reviewed the case after which lead to his post conviction. They decided that after the case of Atkins v. virginia which determined the natural consensus went against the death penalty for juveniles, which changed the attitudes of the society towards the decision. After reviewing the the old ruling they excluded juvenile defenders under the age of 16 and those with mentally disabled from the death penalty.

In the court, the main reasons and differences between the teenagers compared to older convicts, is that yes they are at an age where they are irresponsible and are curious about things every teeenager would be about. Most of these kids are also victims of peer pressure from friends. Although, we see them at a stage in their life where they are about to hit the age of maturity, but the form of character they possess is underdeveloped and with no understanding of life and that one person has the power to change their life, end a life, grow with life. The one other aspect to look at is that Christopher was at an age where he was understanding what was right from wrong, so that being said he wasn’t in a place to put himself in a criminal position. Christopher is in a state where maturity hasn’t reached him.
What makes a punishment cruel and unusual punishment and how does it apply to the death penalty?

This forbid the imposition of the death penalty on people younger than 18. This issue has been raised in cases of mental illness and mentally retarded and most recently and Roper vs Simmons. The eighth amendment states “excessive bail shall not be required nor excessive fines imposed nor cruel and unusual punishment inflicted”. This being brought up also leads me to believe that what Christopher further says isn't believable. Christopher opposed to the decision that was giving because the death penalty. He went along with saying that he was “mentally unstable” and due to the fact that he was 17, he would be able to get away with it. Christopher initiated the Supreme Court case because he felt like the that violated his 8th amendment rights, which protected him from the death

penalty.

In the article by Justice O’connor, she explains that this is “barbaric” and that is more than a death letter. This is considered cruel because of the fact that these kids are getting the death penalty only being 17 having committed “excessive” crimes. She explains that us teenagers are a “class” with less maturity and responsibility, we are less culpable of what we do than adults do. There is no evidence that shows that impeaching the conclusion that was upheld, we don’t know for a fact that kids less than the age of 18 are capable of being mature enough to deserve a spot in death row. I most definitely agree with her, yes teenagers are nowhere near having a stable mind being around the same kind of people. We teenagers are at a point in our life where we want to experience everything that everyone else does. This does very much is encouraged by the peer pressure, but also the fact that we know exactly what right from wrong is and still decided to do what would hurt them. I personally would not say that it is the age because you could be 17 and your birthday is the next day!? Do you automatically go from evil to good? (O’Connor. ROPER V. SIMMONS. N.p., 01 Mar. 2005. Web. 18 May 2017.)

In Stanford v. Kentucky court case, the Supreme Court ruled this 5-4 meaning that no execution is to be made on any juvenile offenders under 18, but was never unconstitutional. It never violated the contemporary standards of decency. This case involves a 17 year old boy who is convicted of murder, sodomy, and robbery. The story begins with the robbery at a gas station, they raped an attendant that worked their and after Kevin Stanford and his accomplice were done. Kevin shot her point blank in the face and continued to horrifically shoot her in the back of the head. During his conviction, he asked for his rights to treatment. Knowing that the 8th amendment disabled cruel punishment, he used that to appeal his death penalty. He argued that it wasn't fair because he committed the crime as a juvenile, but they denied it. Their decision was based on his criminal history and failure of him to reply to the reform, leading for them to choose the death penalty. Of course it being this unfair. Stanford had no other choice but, to take it to the kentucky supreme court. This connects to my case because the same exact same thing happened with Christopher, he was under age when he was going to get executed, but saved himself by arguing that it was cruel. Which once he turned 18, he was put on death row. My opinion is that this was not at all fair for them to take his rights away from him. They should also not be making them pay for their crimes after realizing that what they did was wrong and immoral. They were at an age that they had no control over their thoughts or what they did, at this moment in life they are sitting their locked up thinking about what they have done to their lives.
("{{meta.pageTitle}}." {{meta.siteName}}. N.p., n.d. Web. 18 May 2017.).

In the case of Graham v. Florida , Graham was a 16 year old boy who was sentenced to life in prison due to armed burglary and other crimes he might of committed. At first he was given probation, but violated terms by adding to his crime list. Due to that, the court revoked his probation and sentenced him to life in prison for the burglary charge. He then followed to challenge the court by presenting them with the 8th amendment for cruel and unusual punishment. The punishment Clause did not permit juveniles to be sentenced to life imprisonment without parole for a homicide charge. Only in some states is it allowed to give them a sentence like that regardless if it was a homicide crime or not. The court has already considered when it is fair if a long term sentence is excessive for particular juveniles. In comparison to my case Christopher committed his crime when he was under aged or in Atkins case where he was mentally unstable with little to no understanding. Both of these victims were mistreated from their right. In my opinion, Graham was not treated fairly. In his case, they shouldn’t of given him the death penalty in his situation. By law they can’t do that if there was no homicide involved. It’s like looking at racism, people are discriminated for life and judging them for who they didn’t chose to be, how is that fair that someone can’t pick the race they want to be and then be hated for life.
( GRAHAM v. FLORIDA. N.p., 09 Nov. 2009. Web. 19)

In another case, Miller v.

Alabama,, a 14-year-old boy who was sentenced to death without parole due to aggravated assault. Like most cases, the ruling is going to have an effect on hundreds of individuals where their age and mitigating factors were left out. In this cases, the lower courts had to conduct new sentencing with factors that need to be considered about the juvenile. Whether it's character, life circumstances, age. Everything that should be acknowledged before making a decision. The court didn’t fully abandon juveniles that are to be given life without parole in all circumstances. We look at the facts once again that juveniles are biologically different than adults and less responsible for their mistakes. In the article it also states that some juveniles would receive the death penalty due to their race, historical background, and how they economically live is what determines the status. This connects to my case in the sense that Christopher had a troubled childhood. When he committed the crime involving two other friends, and the murder of his neighbor Shirley crook. When he did this, he felt to confident in what he was doing or else he wouldn’t of stated that he could get away with it due to his age. In fairness, Christopher didn’t have any sense in what he was doing. He knew it was wrong, but will it ever be confirmed why

?
( "Miller v. Alabama." Equal Justice Initiative. N.p., n.d. Web. 22 May 2017 )

Has support behind the death penalty fallen in the last 2 decades? Yes it has, but people still are in favor for it. In the year of 2016, we look at research and 49% of people were in favor of the death penalty and the other 42% opposed it. According to the article, the death penalty does not stop people from committing crimes, 71 % of people agreed that there is a high risk that an innocent person is more likely to be put to death. Even the people who support the death penalty said that there is a risk of taking an innocent life. A majority of white people support it, compared to the black and hispanic communities and also men being the main victims because women are less likely to favor capital punishment. This supports my case in the matter of Christopher having a mid-stable conscience, and what he did was not okay. He was at an age where understanding was difficult for him due to his past and of course this crime he committed, but we can’t really say he was a bad person just because of this. He may of not thought about his future, but at least he’s locked up for life without hurting anyone anymore. He can sit in there and think about what he got himself into, but killing someone is not gonna help anyone. The only people that would get any satisfaction are the families of the victims, but what good does it have to kill someone for one very serious mistake. I would like to put into consideration that he was mentally unstable, emotionally stable enough to know what he was doing.
( Masci, David.Pew Research Center. N.p., 24 Apr. 2017. Web. 23 May 2017.)

I personally think the death penalty should be executed, a life sentence is less barbaric than putting someone in a electric chair and calling it a day. Democrats support it a hundred percent depending on the situation, being a totalitarian thing to do. Life imprisonment is way cheaper because capital trials cost a pretty penny, but if you think about it an execution cost three times as much.a life sentence can save us hundreds of millions of dollars. Also, the death penalty has increased the amount of homicides that occur because a society views it being a horrific thing. Its called the brutalization effect, this makes the society even more dangerous than what it already is. This basically condoms people to be more violent. This does have a major effect on the way people act because they see it as unfair treatment and let's not forget about the cost if money is a main concern to the government. People are expecting justice to be served, but in the matter of it being fair without letting the court take the rights of these juveniles.
In conclusion. Christopher and the rest of the kids that were given the death sentence all were under the age of 18 when they committed the crimes. Assigning the death penalty to a minor is cruel and barbaric. Not a lot of people would assume that people change. They learn from a lesson to change who they are and to better from what they have caused. In another example, these are just teenagers with no sense of what life is really about. Why end someone's life as a for of revenge ? why is that the family of the victims think they’re going to get some sort of satisfaction. It comes to a point where someone grows up and sees the evil that they have in them. Killing someone is not okay, but serving fair justice is something that's well deserved.
( commondreams.org/viewments-against-capital-punishments/2014)