Capital Punishment and Intellectual Disability: The Execution of Lisa Montgomery

By: Lilly Hardin

In 2004, an eight month pregnant Bobbie Jo Stinnett, was murdered in her home. Her murderer was a woman named Lisa Montgomery, who entered the home, murdered Stinnett, cut the infant from her stomach, and attempted to pass the baby off as her own (Niau, 2021). Montgomery was subsequently charged with kidnapping resulting in death, she was found guilty, sentenced to the death penalty, and eventually executed on January 13, 2021 (Larson, 2023). Despite the violent nature of the crime, Montgomery’s execution has been highly scrutinized and labeled as a violation of federal law by legal and medical specialists. Expert testimony and Montgomery’s diagnoses indicate she suffered from severe emotional and cognitive impairments, arguably rendering her execution unlawful under Atkins v. Virginia (Atkins v. Virginia, 2002).

Lisa Montgomery’s life was a myriad of physical and emotional traumas. Her mother consumed alcohol during her pregnancy, and Montgomery endured numerous physical beatings, resulting in her having a traumatic brain injury (Lynch et al., 2021). Montgomery suffered from sexual abuse at the hands of her mother and multiple men. Notably, the trauma Montgomery suffered manifested itself in, “depression, dissociation, borderline personality disorder, psychosis, and post-traumatic stress disorders” (Larson, 2023, 118). Neurologists who examined her brain also diagnosed her with functional deficits and temporal lobe epilepsy (Larson, 2023). 

Atkins v. Virginia prohibited government-sanctioned executions of mentally disabled individuals based on the Eighth Amendment, which prohibits cruel and unusual punishment. Executions of intellectually disabled offenders were found unconstitutional on the basis that these individuals are unable to understand the death penalty and have diminished capacities to communicate with their counsel, control impulses, etc. (Atkins v. Virginia, 2002). As Montgomery was an offender with intellectual impairments, she should have in theory been protected from the death penalty under Atkins v. Virginia; however, her execution was still carried out. 

Furthermore, journalists and Lisa Montgomery’s clemency lawyers have noted many issues in her defense (Larson, 2023). Notably, Montgomery’s long history of abuse and multiple psychiatric disorders was understated by her defense, and she was also on strong antipsychotic medication during her trial, which made her appear apathetic and unremorseful. Following Montgomery’s 2008 sentencing, a series of attempts were made to prevent her execution. Days before her scheduled execution, Montgomery received her fourth and final stay of execution after her attorneys argued she lacked the mental capacity to comprehend a death sentence. This ruling was reversed on January 12, 2021, because of the last-minute timing of Montgomery’s final application for a stay of execution (Wall, 2021).She was never given the chance to prove her lack of mental capacity in court, therefore making her execution a violation of the Eighth and Fifth Amendments (Lynch et al., 2021). To reiterate, Lisa Montgomery’s diagnoses and medical history indicated she was intellectually disabled; however, she was still executed, despite executions of mentally disabled criminals being ruled unconstitutional. 







Sources:

Atkins v. Virginia. 536 U.S. 304. 2002. https://www.law.cornell.edu/supct/pdf/00-8452P.ZO

Larson, S. R. (2023). Killing a “Monster”: Lisa Montgomery, Carceral Logics, and the Rhetoric of Sexual Trauma. Women's Studies in Communication, 46(2), 117-136. https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/epdf/10.1080/07491409.2023.2171935?needAccess=true

Lynch, A. J., Perlin, M. L., & Cucolo, H. (2021). "My Bewildering Brain Toils in Vain": Traumatic Brain Injury, the Criminal Trial Process, and the Case of Lisa Montgomery. Rutgers University Law Review, 74(1), 216-250. https://heinonline.org/HOL/Page?handle=hein.journals/rutlr74&id=227&collection=journals&index=

Niau, A. (2021, June 16). Female Offender, Victim of the Patriarchal System: A Critical Discourse Analysis of the Case of Lisa Montgomery. DiVa Portal. Retrieved November 17, 2024, from http://www.diva-portal.org/smash/record.jsf?pid=diva2%3A1566563&dswid=2177

Pifer, N. A. (2016, Fall). The Scientific and the Social in Implementing Atkins v. Virginia. Law & Society Inquiry, 41(4), 1036-1060. https://www.jstor.org/stable/26630899?sid=primo&saml_data=eyJzYW1sVG9rZW4iOiI5MjQyOGY4ZS1kOGMzLTQ2NzgtYTNlOS0yMDQwMGM3ODY5NmMiLCJpbnN0aXR1dGlvbklkcyI6WyJmNDg0ZDNlZS05NGU4LTQzMDQtOWFjZi1hNjNkYmUyNmFhOTYiXX0&seq=1

Wall, J. B. (2021, January). United States v. Lisa Montgomery, No. 20A125. Supreme Court. https://www.supremecourt.gov/DocketPDF/20/20A125/166083/20210112202040908_USA%20v%20Montgomery%20Stay%20App%20Judgment.pdf

Image Source: https://www.themarshallproject.org/2021/01/08/what-lisa-montgomery-has-in-common-with-many-on-death-row-extensive-trauma


Previous
Previous

United States v. Skrmetti - Updates from December 4, 2024 Oral Argument

Next
Next

Is the presidential pardon too much power?