The Washington Press Article "Bill to ban death penalty for severely mentally ill clears GOP-controlled Va. Senate", 2019 January 17

Online content

Fullscreen
[pithe Washington Post
Virginia Politics

Bill to ban death penalty for severely mentally ill clears GOP-
controlled Va. Senate

By Laura Vozzella
January 17 at 3:19 PM

RICHMOND -— Virginia’s Republican-controlled state Senate voted Thursday to ban the death penalty for
criminal defendants with severe mental illness, despite warnings from one senator that it would allow

“monsters” to escape the ultimate punishment.

Four GOP senators sided with the chamber’s 19 Democrats to pass the bill on a 23-to-17 vote, which came after

sometimes emotional debate on the floor.

“I ask my colleagues to think about our responsibility for how we administer justice,” said Sen. Barbara A.
Favola (D-Arlington), who sponsored the bill.

She proposed similar legislation last year, but it died in a Senate committee, as did a companion bill in the
House. Her bill now heads to the House, where no companion has been filed this year.

During the debate, Sen. A. Bentin Chafin Jr. (R-Russell) rose to say the measure would protect “these monsters
who move through the dark and move through the day, and they slaughter innocent people.”

Senate Majority Leader Thomas K. Norment Jr. (R-James City) voted against the bill, noting that he had
represented defendants in capital cases as a court-appointed attorney.

He said the legal system already has “a number of safeguards” to protect someone with serious mental illness
from the death penalty, starting from the defendant's very first moment before a judge, who asks if the accused
understands the charges. Norment said more opportunities come during the trial, when a prosecutor must
prove the defendant had criminal intent, and during the sentencing phase, when the jury considers mitigating
factors.

Senate Minority Leader Richard L. Saslaw (D-Fairfax) advocated for Favola’s bill by touting his record as a
longtime death penalty supporter.

“T’ve been a pretty strong proponent of capital punishment,” noting as an aside that he was pleased to see it

imposed on Oklahoma City bomber Timothy McVeigh. “If anyone ever deserved the death penalty, it was him.”

But when it comes to someone who is severely mentally ill, Saslaw said, “probably we ought to think twice.”

HMQpo.1 Wer ry rer HHT Un U OL UUHULGUT V1 yt HG“ PUNLICO! MHIRU "Wart PUCE OPER UITOS VCH GLY “HHHEH LOH HILO" YUP LUE UID VEOCHONEIEU 1OIU HT Ere ve

Under Favola’s bill, “severe mental illness” is defined as: “active psychotic symptoms that substantially impair a
person’s capacity to (i) appreciate the nature, consequences, or wrongfulness of the person’s conduct; (ii)
exercise rational judgment in relation to the person’s conduct; or (iii) conform the person’s conduct to the
requirements of the law. ‘Severe mental illness’ does not include a disorder manifested primarily by repeated
criminal conduct or attributable to the acute effects of voluntary use of alcohol or any drug.”

It would be up to a jury — unless a case is tried without one — to decide whether the defendant met that
definition at the time of the offense. If so, the defendant would be sentenced to life, without the possibility of

parole.

Sen. Scott A. Surovell (D-Fairfax), a supporter of the legislation, said during the debate that between 5 percent
and 20 percent of death row inmates nationally meet the definition of severely mentally ill.

Two men are currently on death row in Virginia, which has not imposed the death sentence on anyone since
2011. The last execution was in 2017.

Laura Vozzella

Laura Vozzella covers Virginia politics for The Washington Post. Before joining The Post, she was a political columnist and
food writer at the Baltimore Sun, and she has also worked for the Associated Press, the Fort Worth Star-Telegram and the
Hartford Courant. Follow ¥

https:/Aww i ginia-politics/bill-to-ban-death-penalty-f ly tally-ill-clears-gop-controlled te/2019/01/17/af... 2/2


Metadata

Resource Type:
Document
Rights:
Image for license or rights statement.
CC BY-NC-SA 4.0
Date Uploaded:
December 30, 2025

Using these materials

Access:
The archives are open to the public and anyone is welcome to visit and view the collections.
Collection restrictions:
Access to this collection is unrestricted with the exception of select items noted in Series 5.
Collection terms of access:
This page may contain links to digital objects. Access to these images and the technical capacity to download them does not imply permission for re-use. Digital objects may be used freely for personal reference use, referred to, or linked to from other web sites. Researchers do not have permission to publish or disseminate material from these collections without permission from an archivist and/or the copyright holder. The researcher assumes full responsibility for conforming to the laws of copyright. Some materials in these collections may be protected by the U.S. Copyright Law (Title 17, U.S.C.) and/or by the copyright or neighboring-rights laws of other nations. More information about U.S. Copyright is provided by the Copyright Office. Additionally, re-use may be restricted by terms of University Libraries gift or purchase agreements, donor restrictions, privacy and publicity rights, licensing and trademarks. The Department of Special Collections and Archives is eager to hear from any copyright owners who are not properly identified so that appropriate information may be provided in the future.

Access options

Ask an Archivist

Ask a question or schedule an individualized meeting to discuss archival materials and potential research needs.

Schedule a Visit

Archival materials can be viewed in-person in our reading room. We recommend making an appointment to ensure materials are available when you arrive.