Simmons Death Penalty

Should the death penalty be applied to juveniles?
I. Simmons and friends murder Shirley Cook
In the 1993 Missouri court case Ropers v. Simmons, Christopher Simmons (17 y/o), accompanied by his two friends Charles Benjamin and John Tessmer, devised a plan to kill Shirley Cook. The full plan was to commit burglary and homicide by breaking and entering the residence, tying up the woman, and tossing the victim off a bridge (We the People). The night of the murder the three met at midnight, Tessmer later decided to drop out of the plan. Without Tessmer, Simmons and Benjamin broke into Mrs. Crook's home, bound her hands, covered her eyes, and then drove her to a state park and threw her off a bridge. Although Simmons later pleaded innocence because of the evidence, leading up to the crime, Simmons had expressed to his two friends that he wanted to murder someone (Roper v. Simmons). He deliberately planned this murder for months and presented his plan to his two friends who later played a significant role in the ruling.
II. Simmons, Benjamin, and Tessmer burglarized and murdered Shirley Crook
When the case was brought to trial, the evidence was overwhelmingly against Simmons and his acquaintances.
Simmons had admitted to the homicide, performed a recorded reenactment at the crime scene, and had testimony from Tessmer against him that indicated intention. After the trial, the jury found him guilty. After the jury considered the cold, hard evidence, Simmons was sentenced to death. This sparked controversy within the court system and eventually worked its way up to higher courts (The Death Penalty for Juveniles). Simmons initially moved for the trial court to set aside the conviction and sentence, citing inadequate assistance of counsel. His age, and thus impulsiveness, along with a troubled background, were raised as issues. Simmons claimed this should've been addressed during the sentencing stage. The trial court dismissed the motion, so Simmons
appealed.
III. Simmons, Benjamin, and Tessmer burglarized and murder Shirley Crook
The Eighth Amendment prohibits the federal government from imposing excessive bail, excessive fines, or cruel and unusual punishment. Sentencing a juvenile to death was argued to be unconstitutional under this amendment. The primary issue brought to the forefront in the sentencing of this case was that it is “cruel and unusual punishment to execute anyone under the age of 18 at the time of the murder” (Roper v. Simmons). This sentence was considered cruel because of the uncertainty of whether or not executing a juvenile was morally correct. Executing a juvenile is not mentioned in the Constitution, therefore the Supreme Court treated this case with the mindset of what the Constitution should say instead of what it actually says. Furthermore, jurors used their moral values to evaluate the ruling of this case. Some jurors agreed with the choice of the Supreme Court and others didn’t. Ultimately these disagreements led to the decision of the ruling. Most jurors were subjective to the choice of this ruling. Another central to the court’s decision was the maturity level of juveniles. It was argued that juveniles have a “lack of maturity and sense of responsibility compared to adults” (Roper v. Simmons). This lack of maturity is what brought up the idea that juveniles are not capable of understanding what they are doing, and are, thus, exempt from being sentenced to death. For a juvenile to be capable of committing such crime they would have to be at the same level of maturity as an adult. These issues caused disputes over the juvenile death penalty during the ruling phase of the case. Whether or not juveniles are fully capable of being sentenced to death under the Eighth Amendment rights.
IV. The Court’s Decision
In a 5 to 4 decision the Supreme Court ruled in favor of the defendant because the Justices found the case violated of the defendant’s Eighth Amendment rights. The court ruled that it was cruel and unusual to sentence a minor to the death penalty. This choice was made because it’s believed that juveniles lack maturity and are, “more vulnerable to negative influences and outside pressures, including peer pressure” (Roper Vs. Simmons). Although peer pressure can play a role in situations involving juveniles, serious cases like these do not happen solely because of peer pressure. Peer pressure is an inadequate excuse. People still have a moral sense and conscience, regardless of age, as long as they grew up exposed to mainstream society. The tension of these situations are extremely high leading minors to make choices on their own and react to their first thoughts. The court’s decision was also grounded in the fact that only 11 states apply the death penalty to juveniles and the numbers are becoming fewer as the years pass. At the time of the decision, “20 states had the juvenile death penalty on the books, but only six states had executed prisoners for crimes committed as juveniles since 1989” (Roper v. Simmons). These statistics made the Supreme Court reconsider the death penalty for juveniles, ultimately banning application of the death penalty to minors. V. Simmons should be held responsible
The ruling of the Supreme Court does not ensure everyone’s rights however, the court definitely protects the rights of some small groups over the majority at times, particularly in a case like this. Therefore, if a juvenile is capable of rape or murder, it is not because their maturity level is substantially lower than the average adult. It is because their maturity level is at, or near the same level of an adult causing them to commit the crime. Using one’s “age” or “immaturity” as an excuse for such a blatantly intentional crime is itself a great sign of one being at the same intellectual and moral level as an adult. The Supreme Court’s justification of this case was based on their opinion of what the law should say and not what it currently says. The guarantee of people's rights were not demonstrated here.