Assignment Task: David Upchurch
Manage Discussion by David Upchurch
Reply from David Upchurch
Hello all,
For this discussion, I chose to review Gary Otte's execution in 2017 for offenses committed in 1992. Otte was 20 when he planned, murdered, and robbed two people in Ohio. While there are mitigating circumstances in this case related to age at the time of the crime, there is an overwhelming amount of aggravating evidence. Based on his previous actions, it seemed he was on a path to becoming a lifelong criminal.
Additionally, Otte's age is difficult to overcome in this case. Perhaps it is because Otte was no longer a teenager then, but my reasoning is based more on perception and bias than scientific findings. Twenty years of life experience seems difficult to overcome when examining culpability and responsibility for such a serious crime. When I hear twenty, I instinctively think "adult," not "juvenile," a reaction that I recognize as biased and not objective reasoning.
For adolescents and young adults, there is continuous brain development leading up to age 25 (Stewart, 2021). The prefrontal cortex, which is attributed to reasoning, planning, and impulsivity, is the last portion of the brain to mature (Stewart, 2021). Juveniles are also more susceptible to negative influence and peer pressure and are shortsighted in decisions that could have long-term (or lifelong) effects (Stewart, 2021). For Otte, his actions of stealing his grandfather's car, firearm, and credit cards to meet friends out of state could be attributed to impulsivity, outside pressure, and negative influence. His plan to commit robbery could be attributed to peer pressure, especially since it was later determined that his IQ was below 90 (Death Penalty Information Center, 2017). Where I struggle with peer pressure as a mitigating factor is that Otte was alone when he murdered his first victim in his home. Otte was also alone when he murdered his second victim, and his peers were the ones who led the police to his arrest. You could argue that there was residual pressure and positive reinforcement from the first murder, in that he found $400 on his first victim, which was shared during a night of drinking and drug use with his friends. I find it difficult to look beyond Otte's predatory actions prior to murdering two victims for beer money. To take speculation one step further, who is to say Otte would have stopped at two? While there is an ethical dilemma surrounding the age at which Otte committed pre-meditated murder (of his second victim), it is my opinion that Otte received a suitable punishment for his actions in that he spent 25 years of his life in prison. However, the quarter-century gap between conviction and death raises an important question: Does his prolonged incarceration, followed by his execution, represent a double dose of retributive "justice"?
Based on the research associated with neurological development, I agree that more emphasis should be placed on age as a mitigating factor. We should also strive to provide juveniles more leniency related to part-1 crimes to leave room for rehabilitation. However, I do not think we should remove the option for capital punishment against 21-year-old "juveniles." Need Assignment Help?
References:
Death Penalty Information Center. (2017, September 13). Ohio executes Gary Otte as state and federal courts decline to review use of death penalty against those under age 21.
Stewart, T. (2021). Capital Punishment of Young Adults in Light of Evolving Standards of Science and Decency: Why Ohio Should Raise the Minimum Age for Death Penalty Eligibility to Twenty-Five (25). Cleveland State Law Review, 70(1), 91-119.