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.
John Lee Malvo - Juvenile Death Penalty

Lee Boyd Malvo

Lee's Case | The Case Against JDP | Editorials and Letters | Justice in Virginia | Juvenile Execution Index

Lee Malvo's trial took place in Chesapeake, Virginia in December 2003. The jurors returned a sentencing recommendation of life without parole on December 23, 2003. They deliberated for 8 1/2 hours before deciding to reject the death penalty for Lee, who was 17 years old at the time of the crimes for which he had been convicted the previous week. On March 10, 2004, Lee was officially sentenced to the recommended punishment.

Lee's Case
 
 
AP photo

 

Lee Boyd Malvo, born in Kingston, Jamaica, was arrested in the early morning of October 24, 2002 in Frederick County, MD in connection with the infamous "sniper slayings." Because these allegedly connected murders had been committed in a multiplicity of locations, a jurisdictional competition erupted over the right to be the first to try, convict, and execute the 17-year-old for these crimes.

While little is now known about Lee Boyd Malvo, initial reports suggest that he was desperate for a father figure and 41-year-old John Muhammad seemed to fill this gap. Having moved many times and been abandoned periodically by his mother, Malvo was searching for someone to provide guidance and structure in his life.

Should an impartial jury find Lee Boyd Malvo to be guilty of any of these horrific crimes, he should be punished. However, given his youth, malleability, and resulting diminished culpability, our Constitution, our justice system, and basic standards of decency demand that he should not be executed for crimes he committed as a juvenile.

Back to Top

The Case Against the Juvenile Death Penalty

EXECUTING JUVENILE OFFENDERS RUNS COUNTER TO BASIC AMERICAN STANDARDS OF JUSTICE AND FAIRNESS

The execution of a juvenile offender is contrary to fundamental principles of American justice which punishes 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.

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.

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 AND FUNDAMENTAL HUMAN RIGHTS

In continuing to execute juvenile offenders, the United States acts in defiance of international law and consensus. Indeed, such executions have all but ended around the world, except in the United States. 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. Both Yemen and Pakistan have now amended their laws to exclude such executions, while Saudi Arabia and Nigeria deny that they have executed juvenile offenders. In the year 2000, only three countries reportedly executed juvenile offenders, the Democratic Republic of Congo (1), Iran (1), and the United States (4). Since executing a 14-year-old in 2000, however, the Democratic Republic of Congo has commuted the death sentences of several juvenile offenders and has issued a moratorium on the practice. In the year 2002, only the United States has executed juvenile offenders (3).

Several international treaties, including the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR), the U.N. Convention on the Rights of the Child (CRC) and the American Convention of Human Rights, prohibit the use of the death penalty for juvenile offenders. While the United States has ratified the ICCPR, which specifically prohibits executing juveniles, it has reserved the right to continue this barbaric practice. The United Nations High Commission for Human Rights, which interprets the ICCPR, has concluded that the US' reservation should be considered void, as it violates the object and purpose of the treaty. Furthermore, while the US and Somalia (which has no recognizable government) are the only two countries that have failed to ratify the CRC (191 nations have adopted the fundamental standards articulated in this treaty), representatives from Somalia have recently informed the U.N. that it will soon ratify the treaty.

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."

At its best, the United States serves as an example and a protector of human rights throughout the world. However, by continuing the practice of executing juvenile offenders, the United States further alienates itself from the international community. Each execution damages our legitimacy as a leader on the protection and promotion of human rights, particularly the rights of children.

Back to Top

Editorials, Opinion Pieces and Letters

  • Please click here to read a selection of Letters to the Editor of the New York Times.
Commentary

   Back to Top

Justice in Virginia

Back to Top

 

 

Click here to return to the Juvenile Death Penalty Homepage



ABA Juvenile Justice Committee
740 15th Street, NW • Washington, DC 20005
Phone: 202.662.1520 • Fax: 202.662.1501