also about how shocking it is that a young man made mentally much younger by his mental retardation and who is guilty only by accountability nevertheless faces spending the rest of his natural life in prison regarding doctors confession even after a year in the cook county jail doctor he had an i q of sixty four he was unable to read or write anything more than his own name he was incapable of abstract thinking rendering him the mental equivalent of a  between five and nine years old miranda warnings are quoted to the vocabulary and understanding of a twelve at an average twelve to thirteen year old this is well above dante's ability a valid miranda waiver requires information processing you cannot read he has the vocabulary of a six year old child when hearing words or concepts that he does not understand he codes them down to his level into something he can understand which  say exactly whether say for certain whether dante understood miranda at the time he waited because she was unable to conduct a contemporaneous examination of him she did say that she doubted very much that he could understand the rights or the consequences of waving them given that he could not understand the vocabulary of miranda he could not understand the concepts that miranda was trying that miranda involves the rights waiving those portions of the test and was unable to complete the final portion of the test because he could night he could not read and his attention deficit disorders prevented him from as i believe she phrase upholding the concept in his head for long enough to be able to say whether he understood comparison between two different phrases involving miranda rights but his doctor was also careful to explain that his ability to identify those pictures and discuss miranda in the context of those photographs did not mean that he understood the rights that was illustrating his that he does have good nonverbal skills and community skills that he's very good at masking his disability that he will answer questions yes or yes generally even if he doesn't actually understand the question and even if yes is not the appropriate had some criminal history she was unaware of the details of it who hid the facts of his criminal history the record does not indicate whether he was ever read his miranda rights before whether he had ever been interrogated before as opposed to him dating some sort of understanding of miranda through his experience in the system if he didn't understand even have a system works he's unable to comply with the terms of his juvenile probation and dr karen also said that simply repeating something over and over to an individual if the individual does not understand the words and concepts involved in what you're repeating repetition does not mean parts understand it the trial court had the video taped accurate and all the pictures of what happened at the time an infant yes well regarding giving him the miranda warnings again repeating the miranda warnings to him that day does not necessarily mean he portion of the of it yes but regarding his rights he very quickly answered yes he didn't ask for any clarification and the state's attorney didn't do anything to ensure that he actually understood them as far as the rest of the statement goes he is able to tell a coherent narrative he does answer the questions aren't really that doesn't necessarily show that he understood the consequences of that miranda waiver this court held in daniels that a linear narrative  interview does not show that an individual is not mentally retarded or that that an individual understands that he or she waived understood his miranda rights and then no understandingly i'm saying the you if if i may turn to sentencing this court should not ignore the reality that upon entering the department of corrections at the age of nineteen done he will never become eligible for parole even though he did not kill or intend to kill the victims in this case and even though he can't read or write anything more than his own name because of his mental retardation in graham versus florida the united states supreme court held that when an individual faces the most serious punishment available the sentencing judge must consider not only the circumstances of the crime but also the individual characteristics of the defendant in this up in other words graham rejected a one size fits all approach when an individual is facing  the most severe penalties available in a state under that analysis the mandatory natural life sentencing as applied to dante is unconstitutional because it prohibited the judge the sentencing judge from  considering any of dantes characteristics namely his mental retardation making him much younger than his physical nineteen man may interrupt you just for a moment certainly you are you're not asking us to evaluate the sentence under the categorical analysis of graham oh yes in this as applied and i making it as a five challenge but nevertheless using the categories you know you are making and supply yes as applied to dante i've argued that as applied to him the mandatory natural life sentencing is unconstitutional the supreme court's opinion in graham opens opens the doors to using the categories previously reserved for death penalty only cases into non death penalty cases so it is appropriate and in fact justice requires that when an individual is facing the most serious penalty available judge consider the individual's characteristics including those categories that have been carved out as special in rio or particular in regards to sentencing  repeatedly that he was fully aware of the miranda warnings the inquiry here is whether he understood that he had a right to remain silent and as for a lawyer and whether he understood that the statement he gave could be used against him in the videotaped statement he repeatedly states that yes he understands those rights he then gave a coherent narrative he was responsive to the questions why did the state's attorney not give further instruction to be sure they understood because there is absolutely no indication that he did not understand everything about  understand what's going on when you look at the defendant's own witness his own expert dr coward and again the tests reveal that he understood what was going on in one portion of the gristle test terming what the miranda warnings  comprehensive miranda warnings he did very well according to the hour and a page even a b fifty three fifty four and the nature of interrogation one hundred percent and the meaning of the right to silence one hundred percent on the he's been through the system before he was well acquainted with miranda rights the consequences of it of getting a statement he knew from the prior experience in fact he initiated the statement he was he had been arrested for extensive had she known about it she would have wanted to look into that she one of them would know what he would have learned from that what he had known about that the bottom line is she did not know about his extensive history nor has she defended we say that he did not the point is though with or without the burden no matter what the burden is because the evidence was there under any burden under anyone's burden the evidence was there to show that the defendant knowingly intelligently file also oh he did not commit murder let's say check he committed our burglary and attempted robbery attempt armed robbery those are the two crimes he was originally given probation and when he didn't follow through the probation it went from probation to natural life it's not what we have here here we have a double homicide committed and very cold very premeditated which if it was not suddenly caught unaware he was not standing trick or handed a gun or so you'll come with us you know he didn't have a gun i new category for an adult who may or may not be mentally retarded who wonders that is his waiver who participated in a double homicide makes no sense i think there is there is no basis for any president  honour's first i think shows that dante used his knowledge of this double murder as a bargaining chip there's something nothing in the record that shows anything beyond him asking can i tell you something he doesn't ask he doesn't reveal anything he doesn't try to make some deal out of it he just gets this office chest which is something much more consistent with someone of his mental age between five and nine then it is someone who was fealty by kind of belief was not inappropriate even though it was a multiple murder case is not that far off dante is physically nineteen his mental retardation makes him much younger and he has he is unquestionably guilty only by a credibility