“I TURNED TWENTY-ONE IN PRISON, DOING LIFE WITHOUT PAROLE”

 

 

These lyrics from the popular country song have special meaning for a small but determined group of veterans in prison today.  Most States have a sentencing structure that allows for some form of parole or early release for “good behavior” for even the most serious crimes. Even a sentence of 25 to life holds out the possibility of parole after twenty-five years behind bars. Some States, however, have “life, without parole” as a form of capital punishment for very serious crimes such as murder.  It is the right of each State to determine what the consequences of committing a crime should be. No one disputes this.  However, for a small group of men incarcerated today, life without parole seems harsh and extreme.

 

These men do not, for the most part, dispute that they have committed grievous crimes and that they should have received severe sentences. They are not seeking pardons, new trials, or other legal remedies for their convictions.   What they do demand, and in the opinion of this writer, rightly so, is to have their sentencing reviewed, allowing for a diagnosis of Post Traumatic Stress Disorder be considered.  The Courts are routinely allowing cases to be revisited when DNA suggests that the wrong man has been convicted, even when the case is many dozen years old.  This group of PTSD suffers is asking for the same consideration.

 

Well, of course the valid, well documented diagnosis of this crippling medical condition should be considered in a diminished capacity argument at sentencing.  PTSD like many other psychiatric illnesses has been recognized as a mitigating factor in determining the proper sentence of convicted felons for years.  For 28 years, to be precise.  And there’s the catch.  PTSD has been recognized as a syndrome for many years. References of the physiological damage to combat veterans are seen as far back as the Revolutionary War. “Shell shock”, “battle fatigue”, “combat stress” and other labels have been used over the years to identify the condition that is a collections of clearly connected, observable, and measurable behaviors, beliefs, and physical manifestations. Veteran’s hospitals, State mental hospitals, and countless jail and prison mental health professionals have been treating the individual symptoms of this disease for years.  Recognizing this, the American Psychiatric Association eventually, in 1980, quantified the diagnosis and included POST TRAUMTIC STRESS DISORDER in their Diagnostic and Statistical Manual, 3^rd Edition.  Prior to that date, PTSD was not recognized as a valid mental illness and was not uniformly permitted in Court as a factor to be weighed during the sentencing phase of a trial.

 

What this means, in a nut shell, is that there is a small group of veterans incarcerated today who had well documented symptoms of PTSD at the time they committed their crimes.  Most of these situations involve men who suffered combat related PTSD due to their experiences in Viet Nam.  But because they committed their crimes prior to 1980, the date when the APA recognized PTSD as mental illness, these men were denied the right to introduce PTSD in their trial, and, as a result, received the harsh sentence of life without parole. 

 

The question is, “Is it fair to deny these veterans the chance to have their sentencing revisited, allowing PTSD to be considered?”  This writer has the obvious opinion that they should.  State legislatures should do whatever legal manipulations they need to do to permit the Courts to reopen these cases and allow these veterans to introduce PTSD as a mitigating factor in the sentencing phase of their trials.  Remember, we are talking about men who have already served at least 28 years.  The few inmates this worker knows who are included in this group are asking for nothing more than the chance to have their sentences reduced from life without parole to 25 to life.  In all likelihood most of the men in this group would not be paroled, even after 25 years.  But at least they would have the chance.  They deserve the chance.

 

*This article contains the opinion of the writer and does not necessarily represent the opinions of Veteran Journal