Return to Transcripts main page

CNN Live At Daybreak

Texas Inmate Set to Die

Aired August 15, 2001 - 07:15   ET

THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.

THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.
COLLEEN MCEDWARDS, CNN ANCHOR: A Texas man is set to die for a murder he committed as a teenager.

Napoleon Beazley was 17 years old at the time. He was convicted of killing a 63-year-old man, while try to steal his car.

Beazley spent yesterday talking with parents and friends from inside a cage in the visiting area of Death Row. Unless there is an emergency stay, Beazley's execution would become the 19th in the U.S. in the last quarter century for a murder committed by a killer younger than 18.

So how young is too young? Two sides to explore this this morning: Nancy Bothne has worked with Amnesty International for the past 25 years trying to abolish the death penalty. She joins us from Chicago. And on the other side of the debate is former federal prosecutor, Paul Rosenzweig.

Thank you both for being here.

PAUL ROSENZWEIG, FORMER FEDERAL PROSECUTOR: Good morning.

NANCY BOTHNE, AMNESTY INTERNATIONAL: Good morning.

MCEDWARDS: Napoleon Beazley, 17 years old at the time, commits a horrible crime. Should he be facing the death penalty?

Paul, let me go to you first.

ROSENZWEIG: Well, I think the answer that we shouldn't have the bright-line rules. You have got to answer that question with respect to each and every case. Beazley's case is a case that certainly is within the zone of being death-penalty eligible. He traveled over 60 miles from his hometown to Tyler for the purpose of carjacking a car, and he fired at least three shots - at least one at close range in a pretty horrific manner.

The question is, you know, why would we want a bright-line rule that excludes that from consideration as a death-penalty eligible crime?

MCEDWARDS: Nancy?

BOTHNE: Well, there are certainly reasons why we want to prohibit the execution Napoleon Beazley. There is clear international consensus that the execution of juvenile offenders is a human rights violation. That's the provisions included in two international human rights treaties, one of which the United States has signed, and the other one of which has been signed by 191 countries. The United States is a rogue nation on execution of juvenile offenders.

MCEDWARDS: Paul, is there a point at which no matter how horrific the crime is, society can say, look, this person was too young to know any better. This person is rehabilitatable.

ROSENZWEIG: Well, absolutely. I mean, there is certainly - I think nobody questions that a nine year old can't form the intent to commit a crime. That's why I believe that the right answer is to evaluate each one individually.

Remember, Beazley was 17 years old. The question that you can't answer just by invoking international treaties is why there should be a different rule for somebody who is 17 years, 11 months and 28 days from somebody who is 18 years and two days old. There is no difference in their intent, and I would submit no difference in what their sentence should be.

MCEDWARDS: Well, so are you saying there shouldn't be a stated age? That it really should be based on each individual case?

ROSENZWEIG: Well, I think in the end, that's right. I mean, I don't think that there is anybody in America who thinks it's likely or possible that we would ever execute a nine year old or even an 11 year old. They just can't form that intent. We know that, and - but I am not going to attempt to draw a bright-line rule that says under 18, no, over 18, yes.

MCEDWARDS: Nancy...

ROSENZWEIG: The question is...

MCEDWARDS: ... Nancy, do you want to respond to that?

BOTHNE: Well, of course. You know, the world has indicated that juveniles are different from adults. They are less mature. They are more impulsive. They are more easily manipulated. They are more readily rehabilitative. The line we draw is at the age of 18, because that too is an age that we reach by consensus.

You know, there are many laws that affect juveniles differently than adults. The ability to engage in military service, the ability to sign contracts, the ability to drink, the ability to vote. Juveniles are all prohibited from that in the United States, and yet, they are eligible for the execution.

You know, it's not an arbitrary standard. It is a standard that we use as a measurement between the passage of childhood and the passage of adulthood. And, you know, certainly when juveniles commit crimes, it's not just a failing of the juvenile. In many ways, it's a failing of this society that has been unable to keep that juvenile from following this path.

MCEDWARDS: You know, Paul, the Supreme Court, you know, did not grant a stay in this. The vote was 3-3 with three abstentions. Can you read anything into that?

ROSENZWEIG: I don't think so. I mean, the obvious answer is that there weren't four votes to stay the case. Obviously there is some concern on the court about the issue we have been discussing, but that goes back to the case, I guess, it was about 11 years ago, which was a very closely-decided case.

The court may want to reconsider the issue. It may be thinking about that. But I suspect frankly that with the 3-3 vote, some of the justices that people thought might be reconsidering the issue were not on Mr. Beazley's side, since the three votes were probably the chief and Justices O'Connor and Kennedy.

MCEDWARDS: All right.

ROSENZWEIG: So it's unlikely they'll reconsider it.

MCEDWARDS: OK. Thanks both - we have to leave it there. Paul Rosenzweig, Nancy Bothne - thanks very much for your time this morning. We appreciate it.

ROSENZWEIG: Thank you very much.

BOTHNE: Thank you.

TO ORDER A VIDEO OF THIS TRANSCRIPT, PLEASE CALL 800-CNN-NEWS OR USE OUR SECURE ONLINE ORDER FORM LOCATED AT www.fdch.com.