Moving beyond ford, Atkins, and Roper: Jurors' attitudes toward the execution of the elderly and the physically disabled

Psychology, Crime and Law

Volumn 16, Issue 8, 2010, Pages 631-647

  Butler, Brooke ^a  

^a Public Defender's Office of the Twelth Judicial Circuit of Florida   (United States)

Author keywords

Death penalty; Juror decision making; Prisoner; Types of offenders; Vulnerable adults

Indexed keywords

EID: 77956547083     PISSN: 1068316X     EISSN: 14772744     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/10683160902998033     Document Type: Article

References (35)

1. Atkins v. Virginia, 536 U.S. 304 (2002).
2. Brank, E.M. (2007). Elder research: Filling in an important gap in psychology and law. Behavioral Sciences and the Law, 25, 701-716.
3. Butler, B. (2007a). The role of death qualification in capital trials involving juvenile defendants. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 37, 549-560.
4. Butler, B. (2007b). The role of death qualification in jurors' susceptibility to pretrial publicity. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 37, 115-123.
5. Butler, B. (2007c). Death qualification and prejudice: The effect of implicit racism, sexism, and homophobia on capital defendants' right to due process. Behavioral Sciences and the Law, 25, 857-867.
6. Butler, B. (2008). The role of death qualification in venirepersons' susceptibility to victim impact statements. Psychology, Crime & Law, 14, 133-141.
7. Butler, B., & Moran, G. (2002). The role of death qualification in participants' perceptions of aggravating and mitigating circumstances in capital trials. Law and Human Behavior, 26, 175-184.
8. Butler, B., & Moran, G. (2007a). The impact of death qualification, belief in a just world, legal authoritarianism, and locus of control on participants' evaluations of aggravating and mitigating circumstances in capital trials. Behavioral Sciences and the Law, 25, 57-68.
9. Butler, B., & Moran, G. (2007b). The role of death qualification and need for cognition in venirepersons' evaluations of expert scientific testimony in capital trials. Behavioral Sciences and the Law, 25, 561-571.
10. Butler, B., & Moran, G. (2009). Is 'more' mitigation 'better?' A comparison of the additive and averaging models in capital cases. American Journal of Forensic Psychology, 27, 57-70.
11. Butler, B., & Wasserman, A.W. (2006). The role of death qualification in participants' attitudes toward the insanity defense. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 36, 1744-1757.
12. Death Penalty Information Center (n.d.). The death penalty in 2008: The Year End Report. Retrieved 12 December 2008 from http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/.
13. Diamond, S.S. (1993). Instructing on death: Psychologist, juries, and judges. American Psychologist, 48, 423-434.
14. Doyle, J., Egelko, B., & Finz, S. (2006, 17 January). Ailing killer executed at age 76: Condemned for three slayings, Allen is oldest ever to be put to death in state. San Francisco Chronicle.
15. Dusky v. United States, 362 U.S. 402 (1960).
16. Fimrite, P. (2006, 15 January). Allen is first of many sick, aged in line at death row. San Francisco Chronicle.
17. Ford V. Wainwright, 477 U.S. 399 (1986).
18. Furman v. Georgia, 408 U.S. 238 (1972).
19. Gaydon, L.B., & Miller, M.K. (2007). Elders in the justice system: How the system treats elders in trials, during imprisonment, and on death row. Behavioral Sciences and the Law, 25, 677-699.
20. Haney, C., Hurtado, A., & Vega, L. (1994). 'Modern' death qualification: New data on its biasing effects. Law and Human Behavior, 18, 619-633.
21. Haney, C. (2005). Death by design: Capital punishment as a social psychological system. New York: Oxford University Press.
22. Haney, C. (2006). Reforming punishment: Psychological limits to the pains of imprisonment. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
23. Hingula, R. (2001). Jurors' understanding of instructions in death penalty cases. Unpublished honors thesis, Department of Psychology, University of Kansas, Lawrence, KS.
24. Kennedy v. Louisiana, 128 S. Ct. 2641, 2649 (2008).
25. Kravitz, D.A., Cutler, B.L., & Brock, P. (1993). Reliability and validity of the original and revised Legal Attitudes Questionnaire. Law and Human Behavior, 17, 661-677.
26. Lockett v. Ohio, 438 U.S. 586 (1978).
27. Luginbuhl, J. (1992). Comprehension of judges' instructions in the penalty phase of a capital trial: Focus on mitigating circumstances. Law and Human Behavior, 16, 203-218.
28. Luginbuhl, J., & Middendorf, K. (1988). Death penalty beliefs and jurors' responses to aggravating and mitigating circumstances in capital trials. Law and Human Behavior, 12, 263-281.
29. Lynch, M., & Haney, C. (2000). Discrimination and instructional comprehension: Guided discretion, racial bias, and the death penalty. Law and Human Behavior, 24, 337-358.
30. Martin, T.A., & Cohn, E.S. (2004). Attitudes toward the criminal legal system: Scale development and predictors. Psychology, Crime & Law, 10, 367-391.
31. Marushack, L.M., & Beck, A.J. (2001). Medical problems of inmates, 1997 (Special Report). Washington, DC: Bureau of Justice Statistics.
32. Miller, M.K., & Bornstein, B.H. (2007). Elders on death row: Should age be a basis for execution exception. Monitor on Psychology, 38, 60.
33. Narby, D.J., Cutler, B.L., & Moran, G. (1993). A meta-analysis of the association between authoritarianism and jurors' perceptions of defendant culpability. Journal of Applied Psychology, 78, 34-42.
34. Ring v. Arizona, 536 U.S. 584 (2002).
35. Robinson, R.J. (1993). What does 'unwilling to impose the death penalty mean anyway? Another look at excludable jurors. Law and Human Behavior, 17, 471-477.