Intellectual Disability and Punishment: The Influence of Culpability in the Application of Punishment Among Intellectually Disabled Offenders

Abstract

Intellectually disabled offenders do not have the intellectual capability to understand or comprehend capital punishment or its consequences. Under interpretations of the Eighth Amendment of the United States Constitution, intellectually disabled offenders have been excluded from capital punishment, with the United States Supreme Court ruling in Atkins v. Virginia (2002) that capital punishment for intellectually disabled offenders violated the Eighth Amendment’s prohibition against cruel and unusual punishment due to the evolving public standards of decency. Expanding from this exclusion from capital punishment, this thesis aims to determine whether the punishment of intellectually disabled offenders in non-capital cases also violates the Eighth Amendment’s prohibition against cruel and unusual punishment. Additionally, the thesis explores the role of intelligence and cognition, culpability and understanding, national standards, and alternative punishment options. This thesis focuses on the legislative and judicial landscape within the United States relating to intellectual disability, intelligence quotient, and capital punishment and non-capital punishment concerning intellectually disabled offenders. The thesis uses conceptual jurisprudence to investigate the relationships between intelligence and cognition, legislative history, the Eighth Amendment, and alternative punishment methods. The thesis also adds a New Zealand link to the punishment of intellectual disability via sports-related traumatic brain injuries. A basic alternative punishment model is proposed for use with intellectually disabled offenders. This thesis concludes that the Eighth Amendment should apply to all forms of punishment, capital, and non-capital alike, for intellectually disabled offenders. Intellectually disabled offenders lack understanding, culpability, and responsibility for the consequences of their actions. These findings imply that there should be a national standard for the legal classification of intellectual disability and consideration for the inclusion of other individuals, such as those who have sustained traumatic brain injuries. Further, many alternative methods of punishment can be utilised for intellectually disabled offenders that would enable successful rehabilitation and reintegration into society. To summarise, this thesis lends weight to the view that various alternative forms of punishment are better suited to the successful rehabilitation of intellectually disabled offenders and their reintegration into society.