#6 Georgia & Warren Hill: Was the Right Decision Made?

Tonight, prisoner Warren Hill was granted a stay of execution. Sentenced to execution in 1990 for killing a fellow inmate after having killed his girlfriend, Warren Hill has been the topic of many conversations in regards to his mental health. Due to the Supreme Court decision in 2002 which specified that the execution of the mentally disabled was unconstitutional, Hill has actually been granted a stay of execution more than once. His doctors in charge of the mental evaluation have changed their opinions about whether or not he should be classified as mentally retarded twice now, and their statement was that their evaluation in 2000 was "rushed" and therefore inconclusive. The shaky foundation to which the defense had built their claims from begs the question whether or not this new "evidence" can even be used.
The problem with classifying Hill as mentally retarded is the subjective nature of the standards. Georgia law states that mental retardation must be proved "beyond a reasonable doubt," but where can the line be drawn in relation to mental health? Those who believe that Hill should be executed cite testimonies from his family where they described him as "head of the house" and a "father figure," and others argue that a low I.Q. isn't enough to prove that someone is mentally retarded. All of those claims are arbitrary, though. Just because someone appear to be handicapped does not mean that the evidence supporting their mental health should just be thrown out. While it is understandable that one could have an issue with the way the evaluation was handled, the fact of the matter is that Warren Hill is mentally retarded. He has an I.Q. of 70, and has been through numerous updated evaluations, all of which have concluded that he classifies as a mentally retarded individual. Morality issues aside, if the man is classified as mentally retarded, then it is against the law to execute him.
Now, there is still the issue of whether or not that qualifies under Georgia law. As said before, two different people could believe that different evidence proves mental retardation "beyond a reasonable doubt." One person in charge of the case could review the evaluations and state that Warren's low I.Q. isn't enough, while another thinks that is all it takes to prove it. The issue here isn't whether or not the mentally handicapped should be executed, but that specifications need to clearly be drawn out to avoid issues like these. This case has been drawn out for over twenty years. Some of that could be in part due to the changing laws and amendments, but most of it has to due with the fact that "beyond a reasonable doubt" is hard to measure. It is phenomenal that the case is finally coming to a close, though. The law is being followed and an unjust ruling is not being carried about. Hopefully this final ruling will cease future attempts to change his sentence, lest there be more doubt thrown into the case after all this time.

Associated Press. "Court issues temporary stay of execution for Georgia inmate Warren Hill." Fox News. Fox News Network. 19 February 2013. Web. 19 February 2013.

CNN Staff. "Georgia inmate guaranteed last-minute stays of execution." CNN. Cable News Network. 19 February 2013. Web. 19 February 2013. 

Pilkington, Ed. "Warren Hill guaranteed stay of execution." The Guardian. Guardian News and Media. 19 February 2013. Web. 19 February 2013.

"Warren Hill Execution Stayed: Georgia Death Row Inmate Spared In Last Minute Decision." HuffingtonPost. The Huffington Post. 19 February 2013. Web. 19 February 2013.