"Death is different, but is it all that different from life without parole?"

That's the long term agenda of the anti-death penalty crowd--once they get it eliminated, it will be LWOP next.

BlueEyesAustin:

"Death is different, but is it all that different from life without parole?"

That's the long term agenda of the anti-death penalty crowd--once they get it eliminated, it will be LWOP next.

Hardly. Remember the context. This is a person who's brain is physically prevented from having adult mens rea and yet was prosecuted as an adult

I recall that in early America that children as young as seven (having reached the age of reason) were treated as adults before the law. Of course that was a society that did not consider itself infinitely rich as does our own (and therefore able to bear the cost of infinite stupidity).

Alaska, Kansas and New Mexico - states that are not known as liberal hotbeds - do not know LWOP - all life sentences include the chance for parole.

So you have it already.

businessanalyst:

I recall that in early America that children as young as seven (having reached the age of reason) were treated as adults before the law.

Except that we now know that they HAVE NOT reached the "age of reason". It wasn't the wealth of the society at the time, it was that their understanding of medicine and neurology was limited to "The Four Humours"

Now perhaps you want to run your business on the authoritarian hierarchical manner that was in vogue at that time. But tell me the business you are going to run this way and where its located, and I will open up across the street with modern practices and eat your lunch.

degsme:

This is a person who's brain is physically prevented from having adult mens rea

There's no such thing as "adult mens rea". You may cite a lesser ability to make responsible decisions as a mitigating factor, but the plain fact remains that any 13-year-old without a severe mental disability is perfectly capable of understanding what a rape or murder is, how society views such acts, and why they are wrong.

Actually there is. mens rea means the ability to cognate the commission of the crime. And under normal law this requires one to be 100% legally competent (an insane person cannot form this mens rea because of mental impairment). A minor cannot be legally competent - and for good reason, their brains simply are not fully physically developed

but the plain fact remains that any 13-year-old without a severe mental disability is perfectly capable of understanding what a rape or murder is, how society views such acts, and why they are wrong

Simply biologically FALSE. And you cannot marshall ANY actual FACTUAL evidence to support your claim.

I had the mental development to be able to read The Lord of the Rings at 11...I'm sure the notion that murder and rape are bad was fully part of my mental makeup at 13! I think that you grossly understate the mental capacity of young adults...the one thing missing at that age tends to be an understanding of probability and long-term consequences NOT amorality.

I had the mental development to be able to read The Lord of the Rings at 11...I'm sure the notion that murder and rape are bad was fully part of my mental makeup at 13!

You had the Cerebral Cortext development sufficient to read LotR and comprehend the language and some of its implications. But that is very different than being able to link the intention of future consequences to your current decisions.

"murder, rape...bad"

Is not sufficient to form criminal mens rea. You have to have the INTENT TO CAUSE THE CONSEQUENCES. And if your brain is unable to make that connection, and without a developed OFC you cannot make that connection.

That's different than in a cerebral context making a prospective analysis of the long term consequences of an arbitrary act.