Teen murderer searches for fairness in court

They were both 17 when they committed murder. They were both African-Americans convicted by all-white juries. And they were both sentenced to death in the state of Texas.

But one, Napoleon Beazley, ignited a national firestorm of controversy around his August execution, so much so that - in a rare move - the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals granted a stay while considering his age and other factors in the case.

The same court last week denied the appeal of the other, Gerald Mitchell, who sits in a sterile cell quietly contemplating his execution scheduled for tonight. The juxtaposition of the cases, and their disparate handling by both the courts and death-penalty opponents, raises significant questions about whether justice is being administered with an even hand. Beyond that, though, is a broader question of whether it is legally or morally right to execute those who commit crimes as juveniles.

Granted, there are significant differences in the details. But human rights activists - who admit they haven't spent as much time on Mr. Mitchell's case - say the underlying issue is the same. Juveniles should not get the death penalty.

What they don't say is that Mitchell's case is simply not as compelling. When he killed two people in a drug deal in 1985, Mitchell already had a long and violent record. Beazley, on the other hand, was a star athlete and president of his high-school class. He hadn't been in trouble before murdering the father of a federal judge for his car and, since then, he has been a model prisoner.

"The fact is, Napoleon Beazley was the poster child for why juveniles should not be executed," says Ellen Marrus, a law professor at the University of Houston and director of the Southwest Regional Juvenile Defender Center. "But the details of Gerald's case do not make [his execution] any less outrageous."

She says studies show that juveniles are still developing morally, emotionally, and intellectually at age 17, and can be more easily rehabilitated than adults.

That may be where Mitchell's case stands out. Far from his wild days on the streets, Mitchell now spends his time studying the Bible, writing music and poetry, and eloquently speaking of his struggle "to kill off the character that has done so much wrong to so many people."

But most of these life changes are going unnoticed - even among death-penalty opponents. The prison in Huntsville, home to the nation's busiest execution chamber, says it has received few inquiries about Mitchell. Letter-writing campaigns are nonexistent, and prayer vigils consist of a few staunch death-penalty opponents. "We were a little more adamant in Beazley's case than in this one," admits Nancy Kremers, Amnesty International's antideath-penalty coordinator in Houston.

She says there are many reasons for the unequal attention, reasons that go beyond the character of both juvenile offenders. Beazley's case was more complex, with questions about legal representation and racism. And the US has been thrown into war since Beazley's case made national headlines.

Page: 1 | 2