Abstract
This thesis explores the interplay of class, race, gender and insanity in those who were tried for capital crimes in late nineteenth century Texas. It argues that the field of medical jurisprudence existed in such a state of confusion that medical considerations of insanity alone could not explain jury verdicts. Thus, this thesis examines the additional factors involved in influencing a jury’s decision to either acquit or impose death in the absence of definitive medical evidence regarding a defendant’s insanity. Notions of class, race and gender fill the divide. This decision making process is further examined at the level of executive clemency. When a jury had deemed a defendant’s crime to be worthy of the most severe punishment, what combination of factors convinced Texas governors to commute a prisoner’s death sentence to life imprisonment? While the matter of insanity dominated a trial, the process of obtaining executive clemency was the only point at which a prisoner could raise issues of mental disability with hope of being granted mercy. Furthermore, the subject of clemency will be discussed with particular reference to the State’s patronage networks and the symbolic nature of punishment. Finally, the way in which the Texas press represented the executions of those prisoners who had raised claims of insanity will be examined. The protection of State interests by the Texas press means that in evaluating the portrayal of condemned prisoners the reading of unstated information is just as important as that information that was made explicit.
Original language | English |
---|---|
Qualification | Doctor of Philosophy |
Awarding Institution |
|
Supervisors/Advisors |
|
Award date | 1 Jun 2016 |
Publication status | Unpublished - 2015 |