Texas executes ‘intellectually disabled’ inmate

The state of Texas executed convicted murderer Robert Ladd Thursday, despite a last-minute appeal from defense attorneys who argued Ladd was severely mentally disabled. He was killed by lethal injection at the state’s facilities in Huntsville and pronounced dead at 7:02 p.m., according to a prison official.

Ladd, who in 1996 was convicted of beating a Texas woman to death, had an "intellectual disability" that should preclude him from receiving the death penalty, according a statement issued Tuesday by his defense attorneys at the American Civil Liberties Union.

After the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals rejected the ACLU's request for a stay of execution, Ladd's defense attorneys made a last-minute appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court, which declined to get involved. The court also rejected an appeal in which Ladd's attorney challenged whether the pentobarbital Texas uses in executions is potent enough to not cause unconstitutional pain and suffering.

Ladd was executed for the 1996 slaying of 38-year-old Vicki Ann Garner, who was strangled and beaten with a hammer. Her arms and legs were bound, bedding was placed between her legs, and she was set on fire in her apartment.

In his final statement, Ladd addressed the sister of his victim by name, telling her he was "really, really sorry."

As the drug took effect, Ladd said, "Stings my arm, man!" He began taking deep breaths, then started snoring. His snores became less and less pronounced, and then he stopped all movement.

Prison officials pronounced Ladd dead 27 minutes after the drug was administered.

Teresa Wooten, Garner's sister, said afterward that she accepted Ladd's apology and held no anger toward him.

"We hate the sin he committed. We hate the deed he committed," Wooten said. "But at the end of his life we no longer hated the man and have sympathy for his family."

The evidence submitted by the ACLU included a 1970 psychiatric evaluation in which the examiner concluded that Ladd, then 13, was “obviously retarded.” The psychiatrist noted that Ladd had received a scored of 67 on an IQ test — a score so low that it is widely thought to indicate mental impairment.

In the 2004 case Atkins v. Virginia, the Supreme Court ruled that executing mentally disabled inmates violates the Eighth Amendment’s ban on cruel and unusual punishment. However, the Atkins ruling left it up to the states to determine who qualifies as mentally disabled.

The battle over whether Ladd was fit to be executed revolved around the Texas criminal justice system's unusually narrow definition of who qualifies as exempt from the death penalty. In the 2004 case ex parte Briseno, the Texas Criminal Court of Appeals determined that inmates who are able to “lie effectively,” “show leadership,” or display other such traits may not be exempt even if medical professionals consider them to be mentally disabled. The ex parte Briseno ruling also famously referenced a character in John Steinbeck’s 1937 novel “Of Mice and Men” while making its argument.

“Texas citizens might agree that Steinbeck’s Lennie should, by virtue of his lack of reasoning ability and adaptive skills, be exempt,” according to the ex parte Briseno opinion, referring to a character in the book who kills animals and a woman before finally being killed himself. “But, does a consensus of Texas citizens agree that all persons who might legitimately qualify for assistance under the social services definition of mental retardation be exempt from an otherwise constitutional penalty?”

The ruling was subsequently denounced by the author’s son, Thomas Steinbeck, who said he was “deeply troubled” at the book being used “as a benchmark to identify whether defendants with intellectual disabilities should live or die.”