Daniel Cook is sched­uled for exe­cu­tion on April 5 in Arizona, despite the fact that the lead pros­e­cu­tor at his 1988 cap­i­tal tri­al has said that he would not have sought the death penal­ty if he had known more about Cook’s trau­mat­ic back­ground and men­tal ill­ness. At tri­al, Cook waived his right to coun­sel and rep­re­sent­ed him­self after learn­ing his appoint­ed lawyer was suf­fer­ing from bipo­lar dis­or­der and was drink­ing heav­i­ly. The judge denied Cook’s peti­tion for a men­tal heath expert, and Cook pre­sent­ed no mit­i­gat­ing evi­dence. Since his tri­al, it has been revealed that Cook was sub­ject­ed to severe and repeat­ed abuse as a young child by his fam­i­ly. He has also been diag­nosed as suf­fer­ing from organ­ic brain dam­age and post-trau­mat­ic stress dis­or­der. In a state­ment signed in 2010, Eric Larsen, the lead pros­e­cu­tor in Cook’s tri­al and now in pri­vate prac­tice, revealed that he would not have sought the death penal­ty if he had known that Cook had suf­fered abuse that mir­rored the cir­cum­stances sur­round­ing the crime.” The pros­e­cu­tor also not­ed that the appoint­ed lawyer was at the low end of the com­pe­ten­cy scale for the han­dling of the defense of a stan­dard felony” and appeared nei­ther capa­ble nor will­ing to put forth the effort nec­es­sary to rep­re­sent a defen­dant charged with a capital offense.”

(“Prosecutor Opposes Arizona Death Sentence,” Amnesty International, March 2011). See Mental Illness and Representation.

Citation Guide