Can Alabama Execute a Condemned Man Who Has Dementia?

Yes, but this case is compelling. Vernon Madison walked up to a Mobile police officer and shot him twice in the head, killing the victim. That was in 1985. Thirty-two years later, Madison is “legally blind. His speech is slurred. He cannot walk independently. He is incontinent. His disability leaves him without a memory of his commission of a capital offense.”

Here is the legal conundrum. A prior Supreme Court rulings bars the execution of people who lack a “rational understanding” of the reason they are to be put to death. This idea applied to insane people.
In this case a federal appeals court, on a divided vote, ruled that had Mr. Madison met that standard, even though Mr. Martin is not insane.

Judge Beverly Martin wrote: “Due to his dementia and related memory impairments, Mr. Madison lacks a rational understanding of the link between his crime and his execution.”

On Monday, the U.S. Supreme Court unanimously reversed the appeals court, opening the door to the execution chamber. They ruled on a 1996 law that limits post-conviction appeals.

However, three liberal justices said there will likely be future cases of senile prisoners facing execution. They signaled a willingness to consider whether their doctrine of “rational understanding” of a crime—applied to psychotic people— extends to condemned prisoners who suffer strokes and dementia.

Post-script: Some people process this type of case along the lines of “put the prisoner out of his misery,” or conversely, “he’s lucky he won’t suffer as much as his victim.” Fair enough to these points of view. But lawyers think about this differently. The main pillars of criminal law are deterrence, retribution, and rehabilitation. The latter has never been a consideration in Mr. Madison’s case. Punishment incorporates the idea of making a convict connect a state-imposed sanction—here, death— to his crime. For Mr. Madison, that concept has been discarded. But at a future date, the Supreme Court might consider whether a condemned person, strapped to a gurney, confuses the drip in his arm for medical care. The legal question: Is this punishment?