Each of the seven medical professionals who evaluated Hill—including experts retained by Georgia’s Attorney General—unanimously concluded that he was mentally impaired. However, Georgia said that his intellectual disability must be proved “beyond a reasonable doubt”: a requirement that is not a federal standard, and according to experts, not based in science. 

“This standard means that you could have multiple expert clinicians agree that a defendant has an intellectual disability, as is the case here,” wrote Peter Berns, an advocate for people with intellectual and developmental disabilities, in an op-ed published Monday. “But any ‘reasonable’ doubt cast on their diagnoses will cancel the protection afforded under the U.S. Constitution. Medical diagnoses are made to a reasonable degree of scientific certainty and are not necessarily free from ‘reasonable doubt’ as that phrase is used in a legal context.”

“In rejecting guidance from medical experts, Georgia has created a uniquely stringent burden of proof that is simply unfair,” Berns continued.

Numerous organizations and people had called for a stay of Hill’s execution, including disability rights organizations, the American Bar Association, Georgia’s NAACP and ACLU chapters, and the Council of Europe.

The NAACP, the Georgia Council on Developmental Disabilities, and Georgians for Alternatives to the Death Penalty released a statement on Tuesday slamming the state’s legal system for “failing to protect those who are most vulnerable,” CNN reports.

Our work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 License. Feel free to republish and share widely.

Leave a comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Recent Comments

    Categories