Opinion ID: 2344370
Heading Depth: 5
Heading Rank: 9

Heading: Roy Watson.

Text: Summary: Armed with a pipe, Watson broke into the home of an elderly couple. He went into their bedroom and severely beat them both. He then drank scotch while they died. He stole jewelry, furs, and money. He had an extensive, violent criminal record. He had been admitted to a mental hospital after his acquittal of the scalding death of his sister. At the time of the murder, he was a fugitive from a New York assault charge. Watson was addicted to barbiturates and crack cocaine. After convicting him, a jury found that the murder was committed within the course of a burglary. The jury also found his age (he was forty-four and his attorneys argued that his age meant he would likely never leave prison) and his impaired capacity were mitigating factors. Because the jury deadlocked on whether to impose death, Watson received consecutive life sentences. Comparison: Defendant concedes that the victimization in Watson's case, while severe, may have been less than in his case. But, defendant notes, Watson presented no personal mitigation whatsoever. Defendant contends that Watson had no indication of addiction, as opposed to use, of substances[.] The State, on the other hand, notes that the degree of victimization in defendant's case was greater than Watson's. The State also suggests that Watson was surprised by his victims in the midst of his crimes. Finally, the State argues that Watson's culpability is diminished by the fact that he was a severe and chronic drug abuser who was addicted to barbiturates and crack cocaine, and he was using drugs and alcohol at the time of the crimes. This conclusion is supported by the jury's finding that Watson suffered from mental disease, defect, or intoxication. Both parties include information about Watson that is unsupported in the AOC summary. Contrary to defendant's claim, Watson was a drug addict. Likewise, contrary to the State's assertion, there is no support in the summary for the idea that Watson was surprised by his victims: he entered the house armed and went directly to their bedroom, where he killed them. Nevertheless, Watson's addiction and intoxication may account for the disparate sentences he and defendant received.