"When we execute a capital defendant in this country, we rely on the belief that the individual was guilty, and was convicted and sentenced after a fair trial, to justify the imposition of state-sponsored killing. . . . My 24 years of overseeing the imposition of the death penalty from this court have left me in grave doubt whether this reliance is justified and whether the constitutional requirement of competent legal counsel for capital defendants is being fulfilled." (Blackman as quoted in Davis: 1999).
It can therefore be seen that the issue of responsibility is of crucial importance when investigating any criminal activity, including those that are not committed by the mentally ill or by the mentally retarded. The degree of responsibility determines whether or not the individual is aware of the severity of the crime - If so, then the degree of the crime is escalated. For example, a pre- meditated murder suggests a greater degree of criminal culpability than that of an accidental homicide. The basic acceptance of the crime in terms of the perpetrator's conception of that crime suggests that there is a greater awareness of the moral issues involved in the situation. The presence of morals - and the conscious acknowledgement to ignore them - allows the perpetrator to have a greater degree of ethical involvement within a specific crime. .
The implications of this are clear: When the individual chooses to ignore the ethical issues found within this type of situation, this indicates that they also have a lower degree of moral and social conformity within their lives. In addition, the more often this particular type of behavior occurs, the less moral character the criminal can be said to experience. However, when such repeat behaviors occur within an individual who is determined to be mentally ill or mentally retarded, this demonstrates that the person might not be capable of experiencing the value qualities that aid in clarifying morals and social judgments.
