# data[].attributes.body
I personally disagreed with the ruling of the Supreme Court despite my deep empathy of having an unfair disadvantage against jury with misunderstood charges brought against you. My main reason for this opinion conjured with one question word: How?

Learning more in depth of how the crime took place, there is something that I don't understand how it works or that is brought up as the key point of the trial contradict Penry's actions. For a mental retarded adult, committing crimes is the last thing in his or her mind that he or she wants to do in life. Usually, the mentally retarded is under supervision by counselors, psychologists, and family members to help him or her to better the mental thought process. As a result, he or she was never fueled his or mind with crime. However, Penry somehow understood the actions performed of his crimes despite never understanding the circumstances and consequences of these actions. It is like as if a six year old knows how rape and murder works. It never cleared up for me nor mentioned anywhere in the court hearing.

# data[].attributes.body
The jurors said "yes" to all of these three questions with the consideration of all the evidence laid before them. The jury satated that the terms "deliberately", "probability", and "continuing threat to society" does not to be defined to pass down a sentence.

Website containing photo: http://www.stopdown.net/retarded__rudy__.htm

Johnny Paul Penry after crime committed.

# data[].attributes.body
For Penry: The death sentence of Penry violated the 8th amendment due to his mental retardation when he committed the crime. The charge against Penry failed to instruct the jury that it may take into consideration all of the evidence whether aggravating or mitigating in nature which was submitted in the full trial of the case.

Against Penry: Some psychologists stated that Penry was not suffering and mental disabilities or defencies at the time of the crime despite his limited mental ability; one said he has "full-blown anti-social personality". The following day, at the close of the penalty hearing, the jury decided the sentence to be imposed on Penry by answering three special issues:

(1) whether the conduct of the defendant that caused the death of the deceased was committed deliberately and with the reasonable expectation that the death of the deceased or another would result;

(2) whether there is a probability that the defendant would commit criminal acts of violence that would constitute a continuing threat to society; and

(3) if raised by the evidence, whether the conduct of the defendant in killing the deceased was unreasonable in response to the provocation, if any, by the deceased.

# data[].attributes.body
Voted for: 5

Voted against: 4

# data[].attributes.body
Argued: January 11, 1989

Decided: June 26, 1989

Docket Number: 87-6177

# data[].attributes.body
Johnny Paul Penry is mentally retarded at the mentally age 6 and a half. The victim, Pamela Moseley Carpenter, was brutally raped, beaten, and stabbed with a pair of scissors in her home. Before her death, she described her assailant, which threw suspicion at Penry. After confessing his guilt, Penry was arrested and charged with capital murder. At a competency hearing, Dr. Jerome Brown, a clinical psychologist, found that Penry was mentally retarded. At birth, he has organic brain damage and has an IQ of 54. After the trial, the jury rejected his insanity defense and found him guilty of capital murder.

Website containing photo: http://murderpedia.org/male.P/p/penry-v-lynaugh.htm

# data[].attributes.body
I personally agree with the majority opinion that Ford was not guilty of the charges of first-degree murder. First off, Florida's state court was being unfair of proceeding with Ford's due process with the facts that not only denied hearing arguments against the charges presented against him but also his habeas corpus petition. It is like if they only care about giving the death sentence to him because he murdered one of Florida's police officers.

# data[].attributes.headline
Two sides of Ford v. Wainwright arguments

# data[].attributes.subject
Two sides of Ford v. Wainwright arguments

# data[].attributes.body
For Ford: Justice Lewis F. Powell agreed that executing an insane person violates the 8th Amendment, stating that "the Eighth Amendment forbids the execution only of those who are unaware of the punishment they are about to suffer and why they are to suffer it." He argued that Florida's procedures violated due process. English common law states that killing people with insanity is insane itself. No state permitted executions of the insanity nor any state courts ever heard hearings of Ford being insane.

Against Ford: Justice Sandra O'Connor and Byron R. White argued that the 8th Amendment does not create substantive rights to be protected from execution even if Florida's prodecures didn't protect Ford's due process rights or being insane. Justice William H. Rehnquist explained that Florida withdraw at least some substanance from common law and was not out of bounds on contemporary practice. Also, Ford was mentally capable when the crime was commited and of understanding the death penalty.

Websites containing majority of information: http://www.oyez.org/cases/1980-1989/1985/1985_85_5542 , http://triallaw.weebly.com/

# data[].attributes.body
Voted for: 5

Voted against: 4

# data[].attributes.body
Argued: April 22, 1986

Decided: June 26, 1986

Docket Number: 85-5542

# data[].attributes.body
Ford was arrested and charged of first-degree murder of a police officer in a failed robbery attempt in July 21, 1974. He was under serious mental issues close to paranoid schizophrenia. Three psychiatrists were called in to examine his condition. Eventually, Florida's govornor, Bob Graham, signed a death warrent for Ford in 1984.

Website containing photo: http://triallaw.weebly.com/

Ford before death