You currently do not have JavaScript enabled in your web browser.
The ABA website relies on JavaScript for display purposes.
To fully experience the ABA site, please enable javascript.
Scott Hain - Juvenile Death Penalty

Juvenile Death Penalty
Scott Hain

Scott Hain was executed by the state of Oklahoma at 8:39 pm Central Time on April 3, 2003.

 

Scott Hain, Juvenile Offender on Oklahoma's Death Row

On June 6, 1988, Scott Hain was sentenced to death for the murder of Michael Houghton and Laura Sanders on October 6, 1987. At the time of his arrest, Scott was only 17 years old. While we in no way seek to excuse Scott's crime or minimize the pain and suffering endured by the victims and their families, we believe that the state of Oklahoma should not execute Scott Hain for this crime.

The Crime

On October 6, 1987, Scott Hain and Robert Lambert were in a parking lot in Tulsa, OK. They approached a car in which Michael Houghton and Laura Sanders were sitting; and with Scott using a knife and Robert using a BB gun, they forced their way into the car. After having driven the car a short distance from the parking lot, Lambert and Scott tried to rob Houghton. When Houghton resisted, he was placed in the trunk of the car. A short time later, Sanders was also forced into the trunk. Lambert and Scott returned to the parking lot where, with Houghton's keys, they took Houghton's pickup truck. Lambert drove Houghton's truck, and Scott followed in Sanders' car. Upon reaching a rural road, Lambert set fire to Sanders' car, and he and Scott left the scene in Houghton's truck. Houghton and Sanders died in the trunk of the car from smoke inhalation.

Scott's Childhood was Marred by Trauma, Abuse, and Neglect

Scott was born to Don and Aleta Hain on June 2, 1970. Ms. Hain dropped out of school in the ninth-grade and worked a variety of low paying jobs. At the time of Scott's trial in June 1987, she was under court-ordered treatment for her alcoholism. Scott's father was also a heavy drinker. In fact, nearly every mention of Scott's parents in his juvenile records refers to them as alcoholics in need of treatment. Furthermore, Scott's sister testified at his remanded sentencing phase (Sept. 27 1994) that every day their mother would come home from work and drink until she passed out. As a result, Scott and his sister, Shawn, were forced to fend for themselves. They did their homework by themselves and put themselves to bed each night.

Not only were Scott's parents neglectful, but they were also abusive physically and emotionally. Scott's father would beat him on the arms and legs with a wooden paddle. When Scott was in third grade, he was sexually abused by a 16-year-old babysitter. After having personally witnessed the sexually abusive act, Scott's father would openly discuss sexual matters in front of Scott and even chide him to "be a man." When Scott was approximately 9-years-old, his father introduced him to marijuana, which Scott began to smoke on a regular basis a few years later. In 1987, after Scott escaped from the Rader treatment facility, his father found him work in a warehouse and devised a plan where Scott would steal items from the warehouse, which his father would take to sell in a neighborhood bar.

Scott's troubles at home clearly contributed to his problems at school. Scott was first held back in first grade. He eventually came to be held back in the fifth and sixth grades, as well. The latter he repeated possibly three times. Given these difficulties, Scott finally dropped out of school in the seventh grade. Despite these clear signs of problems, Scott never received special education services.

Evidence of the destructive influence that his family life was having on Scott can be found in the stability he exhibited when he was not in their care. When Scott was 12 or 13, in an attempt to escape debt, his family was forced to move to Texas. It was then that Scott began to regularly smoke marijuana and was placed on probation by the Texas authorities for stealing a bicycle. At this time, Scott left Texas and returned to Tulsa to live with his "grandmother," Ms. Lou Mayfield, a family friend. Ms. Mayfield helped Scott with his schoolwork and took him out to eat and to ballgames. While living with Ms. Mayfield, Scott stayed out of trouble and stayed in school.

In 1984, Scott's family moved back to Tulsa, and he resumed living with them. It was then that he began to get into more serious trouble. In May of that year, Scott was charged with grand larceny and knowingly concealing stolen property. At the ages of 14-15, Scott was often in juvenile courts for various non-violent offenses, such as trespassing, theft, and unauthorized use of a motor vehicle. In October 1985, he was incarcerated at the Rader Treatment Center in Sand Springs, near Tulsa. Less than a week after his arrival, Scott ran away and was involved in another unauthorized use of a motor vehicle charge.

Although Scott was returned to Rader for treatment, he did not make much progress. In February 1987, Scott went AWOL. During this time, he was involved in a burglary with his father, who was now divorced from Scott's mother. Although the burglary charges were dropped, Scott was returned to Rader for "treatment." However, just a month later, he went AWOL again. Once again he was caught and returned. Again, in July 1987, he absconded. This time, as previously mentioned, Scott went to work with his father in Kansas, where he helped him sell stolen goods. After being questioned by the police, they quickly returned to Oklahoma.

It was around this time that Scott befriended Robert Lambert, whom he met at a drug dealer's apartment. Lambert became a devastating influence in Scott's life. Their first week was spent using crank and crystal. Scott began to use crack, speed, alcohol, crystal and marijuana on a daily basis. He also used LSD, PCP and barbiturates. One day, Lambert suggested that they rob a house for drugs and money, and together they stole a Mercedes and drove around getting high on crystal and marijuana. After breaking in through the back door, they entered a bedroom where a couple was sleeping. While Scott searched for drugs, Lambert hit the man over the head with a hammer and took the woman. He told Scott to drive, but after a few blocks he told Scott to pull over and let him drive. Lambert stopped in a wooded area and raped the woman. She fled on foot, and Lambert and Scott chased her. Lambert caught the woman, and ordered Scott to hit her over the head with a hammer, an order with which Scott complied. The two then fled to Kansas. Up until this moment, Scott had never before been involved in an act of violence.

Executing Juvenile Offenders Runs Counter to Basic Standards of American Justice and Fairness

The execution of a juvenile offender is contrary to fundamental principles of American justice which punish according to the degree of intent and culpability and reserves the death penalty for only the "worst of the worst" offenders. By their very nature, teenagers are less mature and, therefore, less culpable than adults who commit similar acts but have no such explanation for their conduct. Adolescence is a transitional period of life when cognitive abilities, emotions, judgment, impulse control, and identity are still developing. In fact, recent discoveries in neuro-science reveal that the brain continues to develop into the early twenties, with the executive functions, such as impulse control, identity, decision making, and morality, developing last. As a result, late adolescence is a time when youth are refining moral values and when they are most susceptible to adult moral instruction. Indeed, immaturity is the reason we do not allow those under eighteen to assume the major responsibilities of adulthood, such as military combat service, voting, entering into contracts, drinking alcohol or making medical decisions.

Immaturity, compounded by additional extenuating circumstances, may demonstrate why the death penalty is not an appropriate form of punishment. A high percentage of juveniles on death row have suffered from all, or a combination of, the following mitigating factors; mental abuse, physical abuse, sexual abuse, drug addiction, abandonment and severe poverty. These factors may cause serious distress for the children involved. Trauma ordinarily arrests development in children and can frustrate all aspects of the child's functioning, including brain development. Children who are physically or sexually abused may be functioning at an emotional level close to the age when the trauma occurred. Furthermore, trauma may affect the development of the brain, with an involuntary fear response remaining the child's coping mechanism for most if not all degrees of stress. The experience of an abused and traumatized child is one of fear and frustration. Further, adolescents reason differently from adults, their processes are immature, including non-anticipation of an out come, underestimation of danger, and notably, the presumption that only one choice is available for them.

This is not to say that juvenile offenders do not know right from wrong and should not be punished, but that we as a society and a legal system have deemed that juveniles are different from adults and should not be subject to the ultimate adult punishment. A number of organizations, such as the American Bar Association, the American Psychiatric Association, the European Union, Amnesty International, Human Rights Watch, Child Welfare League of America, the Children's Defense Fund, the Youth Law Center, The Juvenile Law Center, the National Mental Health Association, the American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry, the American Society for Adolescent Psychiatry, the National Education Association, the Coalition for Juvenile Justice, the Constitution Project, Physicians for Human Rights, the International Human Rights Law Group, World Organization Against Torture, the Reformed Church of America, the Episcopal Church, the Apostolic Nunciature, and the Unitarian Universalist Association, oppose executions for crimes committed by offenders under the age of 18. Similarly, the United Nations High Commission for Human Rights, the European Union, the Council of Europe, the Vatican and Nobel Peace Prize recipients, such as Archbishop Desmond Tutu and the Dalai Lama have expressed their strong opposition to the execution of juvenile offenders. Their message is the same; they urge that the execution for a crime committed while a juvenile is simply unacceptable in a civilized society.

A Majority of States and the Federal Government Have Recognized that Subjecting Adolescents to the Death Penalty is Contrary to Basic and Evolving Standards of Decency

Of the 38 states that permit the death penalty, only 22 permit the execution of persons who were under the age of 18 at the time of their crimes. Among these 22 states, only 15 have juvenile offenders on their death rows, while only 7 have carried out actual executions of juveniles since the death penalty was reinstated in 1976.

In October, 2002, the United States Supreme Court was one vote shy of reconsidering whether the execution of 16 and 17 year olds has become cruel and unusual punishment and, thus, prohibited by the Eighth Amendment to the US Constitution. Four Justices publicly dissented, writing that the Court should address this issue now. In June, 2002, in Atkins v. Virginia, the US Supreme Court found that executing those with mental retardation constitutes cruel and unusual punishment. The Court found that those with mental retardation "by definition…have diminished capacities to understand and process information, to communicate, to abstract from mistakes and learn from experience, to engage in logical reasoning, to control impulses, and to understand the reactions of others." Scientists have found that adolescents and those with mental retardation share many of the same diminished capacities.

In 2002, Indiana abolished the juvenile death penalty, while Florida came extremely close (a bill passed the Senate unanimously, but died in the House; a similar bill had passed the House the previous year). In 1999, the State of Montana abolished the juvenile death penalty, and the Florida Supreme Court raised the age of eligibility from 16 to 17. Further, the Washington State Supreme Court eliminated the juvenile death penalty under state constitutional law in 1993, and Kansas and New York excluded juveniles for eligibility when they reinstated the death penalty in 1994 and 1995, respectively. In the midst of the current national re-examination of capital punishment, many states are reviewing their current death penalty practices and have either introduced legislation to abolish the juvenile death penalty or are considering such legislation. Finally, when the federal death penalty was reinstated, Congress specifically excluded offenders under the age of 18 from eligibility.

Executing Juvenile Offenders is Contrary to International Law

The execution of child offenders is not only contrary to principles of American justice, but is also in contravention of international law and fundamental standards of human rights. The ultimate goal of the international community is to abolish the death penalty under all circumstances, however, until that time there are restrictions on the categories of persons who can be executed, juveniles being one of the restricted categories. The prohibition of the execution of juveniles is referenced in a number of international treaties, declarations, and statements by international bodies, in addition to the laws of the majority of nations. The execution of juveniles is expressly forbidden in the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR), Article 6(5), the American Convention on Human Rights, Chapter 2, Article 4, Section 5, the Geneva Convention Relative to the Protection of Civilian Persons in Time of War, Article 68 and the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child (CRC), Article 37.

Since 1990, only seven countries have reportedly executed juveniles: Iran, Saudi Arabia, Nigeria, the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC), Yemen, Pakistan and the United States. In the last three years this small number of nations known to have executed child offenders has further declined to only four: the DRC, Iran, Pakistan, and the US. In 1994, Yemen changed its law to prohibit the execution of juveniles. The Nigerian government has asserted to the UN Sub-Commission that an execution, which took place in 1997, was not of a juvenile, and Saudi Arabia emphatically denies the 1992 execution of a juvenile. In July 2000, Pakistan moved to outlaw such executions under the Juvenile Justice System Ordinance signed on 1 July 2000. However, it has been reported that Pakistan executed Ali Sher on 3 November 2001 for a crime he committed at the age of 13. Since that time, President Musharrah of Pakistan has commuted the death sentences of approximately 100 young offenders to imprisonment.

In December 1999, the DRC called for a moratorium on all executions. However, in January 2000, a 14 year-old child soldier was executed in the DRC. Since that time, according to OMCT-World Organization Against Torture, four juvenile offenders sentenced to death in the DRC in a military court were granted stays, and the sentences were commuted following an appeal from the international community.

In October, 2002 in Domingues v. Nevada, the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights held that the prohibition of the execution of juvenile offenders is a jus cogens norm of international law. The Commission explains that jus cogens norms "derive their status from fundamental values held by the international community" and "violations of such preemptory norms are considered to shock the conscience of humankind and therefore bind the international community as a whole, irrespective of protest, recognition, or acquiescence." It also cites other examples of such norms, including "genocide, slavery, forced disappearances and torture." The Commission held that the United States "acted contrary to a international norm of jus cogens as reflected in Article I of the American Declaration by sentencing Michael Domingues to the death penalty for crimes that he committed when he was 16 years of age."

It is unmistakable that beyond the borders of the United States, the application of the death penalty for child offenders is rapidly advancing towards total abolition. Of the six countries, other than the US, that have reportedly executed juvenile offenders, all have either changed their laws or the governments have denied that the executions took place.

Action Available

Under Oklahoma law, the Governor must have the recommendation of the Oklahoma Pardon and Parole Board in order to commute a sentence of death to life in prison. Please send appeals to the OK Pardon and Parole Board and to Governor Brad Henry requesting that Scott be granted clemency and his sentence commuted to life in prison:

Mr. Cary Pirrong, General Counsel
Oklahoma Pardon and Parole Board
4040 N. Lincoln Boulevard, Suite 219
Oklahoma City, OK 73105
Fax: 405/427-6648

The Honorable Brad Henry
Office of the Governor
State Capitol Building
2300 N. Lincoln Boulevard, Room 212
Oklahoma City, OK 73105
Fax: 405/521-3353

Please read Scott Hain's Petition for Writ of Certiorari to the United States Supreme Court.

Please read a selection of clemency letters to the Oklahoma Pardon and Parole Board and to Governor Brad Henry:

Please read a selection of articles: