Batman, Joker, and the Death Sentence.

[TuxedoKamen]

Hi. A friend of mine and I are in an e-mail discussion about why the State/Gotham hasn't incarcerated the Joker and the other highly dangerous killers in Batman's rogues gallery. We're actually focusing on the clown. Now, I'd like to give her the best explanation possible. I understand it has something to do with the legal definition of insanity, and the Joker being legally unfit to stand trial. Since he can't stand trial, he can't be convicted, and since he can't be convicted, he can't be sentenced? Is that right? Anyone have a better/more thorough explanation? She's from Australia, so the laws are a bit different there, so I want to be as clear as possible (we're on a 12 hour time difference...correspondence is a bit difficult...). Any help would be greatly appricated.

[Eddie G.]

Hi. A friend of mine and I are in an e-mail discussion about why the State/Gotham hasn't incarcerated the Joker and the other highly dangerous killers in Batman's rogues gallery. We're actually focusing on the clown. Now, I'd like to give her the best explanation possible. I understand it has something to do with the legal definition of insanity, and the Joker being legally unfit to stand trial. Since he can't stand trial, he can't be convicted, and since he can't be convicted, he can't be sentenced? Is that right? Anyone have a better/more thorough explanation? She's from Australia, so the laws are a bit different there, so I want to be as clear as possible (we're on a 12 hour time difference...correspondence is a bit difficult...). Any help would be greatly appricated.Actually there was a Batman story a while back in which someone did not only manage to get the Joker convicted, but got the death penalty. That's right the Joker was to be executed, only problem was out of the hundreds he's killed and all the crimes he comitted in this case he was actually not guilty.

[TimTwoFace]

Hey, I remember that one...BATMAN: DEVIL'S ADVOCATE, right? The one that Chuck Dixon wrote about the stamps? Very good story. I'd recommend picking it up to help flesh out your arguments - and it's a good read, besides.

-Tim

[Ed Liu]

Howdy,

You're actually conflating about two related, but entirely different things: a "not guilty by reason of insanity" verdict and a "not competent to stand trial" ruling.

Some googling turned up this article on howstuffworks.com (http://www.howstuffworks.com/question509.htm), explaining the insanity defense. This just means that you're NOT convicted of the crime, not that you CAN'T be convicted of the crime. "Not guilty by reason of mental defect" is a verdict between conviction and acquittal, but it's still a verdict determined at the end of a trial.

"Not competent to stand trial" is a tactic for before the trial happens. This article explains the distinction (http://www.psychologyinfo.com/forensic/competency_evaluations.html), and this is a page from the Mississippi Criminal Code (http://www.mssc.state.ms.us/rules/RuleText.asp?RuleTitle=RULE+9.06+COMPETENCE+TO+STAND+TRIAL&IDNum=1). The last paragraph of the criminal code says that civil proceedings begin if the court determines there is low probability that a defendant will ever be competent to stand trial, but that the defendant will be in custody in a state mental institution the whole time. I imagine most states have similar statutes. This ain't no free ride.

Of note is a closing statement in the legal insanity article: "A person who suffers from deep psychosis will still be considered guilty if he or she commits a crime intentionally." For many reasons, political and legal, the Joker probably would have gotten the chair a long time ago. As I suggested in a different thread in the DCUA board, I choose to interpret the Joker's continued existence as an indication of how badly the legal system has been corrupted in Gotham City (along with the recognition that they're never going to kill off one of their most licensable characters permanently).

-- Ed/Ace

[Eddie G.]

Of note is a closing statement in the legal insanity article: "A person who suffers from deep psychosis will still be considered guilty if he or she commits a crime intentionally." For many reasons, political and legal, the Joker probably would have gotten the chair a long time ago. As I suggested in a different thread in the DCUA board, I choose to interpret the Joker's continued existence as an indication of how badly the legal system has been corrupted in Gotham City (along with the recognition that they're never going to kill off one of their most licensable characters permanently).I like the current Gotham Knights incarnation of Joker, I dislike him being used in the arc since I think the Joker is over used, but I really like what they're doing with him. Baiscally they make Joker more satanic and slick, rather than an insane random murderer. He in this arc is actually able to blackmail the Warden into getting some one out of prison. Once again I like this better than a psycho who escapes kills some and is put back in prison, and being above the laws goes over the problem with why he hasn't been executed.

As for the realism of the Joker being executed, in the real world (okay in the real world there would be no Joker and he would never kill so many and escape prisons and institutes so easily, but just work with me) The Joker would be able to tie up the court systems so we would never be killed. See say the Joker has stood trial, had all his appeals, he still probably in this time escaped and killed someone eles, which means another trial, more appeals. He'd be retired anyway by the time they managed to kill him.

Iwould never like to see the Joker executed frankly, seems anti-climatic. Although I would honestly like to see the clown meet his end.

I believe your right T2F, but I barely remember the story and can't say for sure.

[TuxedoKamen]

I like the current Gotham Knights incarnation of Joker, I dislike him being used in the arc since I think the Joker is over used, but I really like what they're doing with him. Baiscally they make Joker more satanic and slick, rather than an insane random murderer. He in this arc is actually able to blackmail the Warden into getting some one out of prison. Once again I like this better than a psycho who escapes kills some and is put back in prison, and being above the laws goes over the problem with why he hasn't been executed.

As for the realism of the Joker being executed, in the real world (okay in the real world there would be no Joker and he would never kill so many and escape prisons and institutes so easily, but just work with me) The Joker would be able to tie up the court systems so we would never be killed. See say the Joker has stood trial, had all his appeals, he still probably in this time escaped and killed someone eles, which means another trial, more appeals. He'd be retired anyway by the time they managed to kill him.

Iwould never like to see the Joker executed frankly, seems anti-climatic. Although I would honestly like to see the clown meet his end.

I believe your right T2F, but I barely remember the story and can't say for sure.

Thanks for the responses, everybody--especially that bit on not guilty by means of insanity vs. unfitness to stand trial; oops. :) The chief reason I knew they'd never have Bruce kill the Joker was, of course, that he's one of their best mainline villians, and you don't kill cashcows as a rule. I'll buy the whole corruption and manipulation theory, but it seems a little weak, IMHO. As in, after ALL the people he's killed, no-one's managed to surmount this problem? It's a bit of a stretch. Especially when looked at from outside the US.

And no, I don't really want to see him executed either. I think it'll come down to Bruce doing it, or someone else who doesn't mind killing, just to keep the Bat from going any more insane. :P Maybe Diana...

Thanks for your help, once again. :)