A Second Execution Attempt?

[BomTek]

This story (http://www.newsweek.com/id/215924?GT1=43002)from Newsweek talks about the botched execution attempt of an Ohio inmate convicted of the rape/murder of a 14-year-old girl. The debate now is whether or not another execution attempt would be considered a cruel and unusual form of punishment. According to the article, "Ohio is the only state that has a statute that requires a quick and painless execution," so there's also the question of whether or not the inmate was subjected to too much pain during the first attempt.
1. Should the State of Ohio be allowed to attempt to execute this individual a second time?
2. Did the individual experience a level of pain that would is incompatible with Ohio's requirement that he receive a painless execution?
3. Should the State of Ohio consider an alternative/additional method of execution? (According to the article, they've struggled with lethal injections in the recent past.)

Any other questions that arise from this case? I'm sure there are plenty that didn't really occur to me before I decided to post this, but I read the article and immediately wondered what the Dopers would think about it.

[/nice, objective voice]

1. Yes. Yes, they should. There's precedence from the Supreme Court regarding a botched first execution attempt, and that guy was half-electrocuted as opposed to poked a few times. The article notes that we don't know how much pain that guy suffered, but you can almost guarantee that it was more than our rapist/murderer here.
2. No. As someone who's given blood dozens of times, including a few that were botched in some way, I can't believe this is even a debate. Needle sticks are mildly uncomfortable at their worst, and someone who's managed to survive in prison for 25 years ought to be able to handle a little boo-boo.
3. YES! For Og's sake, what kind of clowns do they have in charge of administering lethal injections in Ohio?!?! How the hell can you stick someone 18 times and not find a suitable vein? In my opinion lethal injection is the most humane method of execution (as if that should matter), but they ought to be able to do it another way if they've only got Day 1 Med Student to perform the venipuncture and he fails.

Despite taking off my objective voice (and I hope the first part of my post was objective), I still tempered my answers there, I guess. This asshat gets no sympathy from me. Anyone with a trace of a soul should be able to understand that any small amount of suffering he experienced because of a few pricks of a needle can't compare to the amount of suffering he inflicted on his victim and her family, and it shouldn't be enough to get him off of death row.

I hope this guy's got a seat reserved for him in Hell, right on Satan's cock.

[Der Trihs]

3. YES! For Og's sake, what kind of clowns do they have in charge of administering lethal injections in Ohio?!?! How the hell can you stick someone 18 times and not find a suitable vein? In my opinion lethal injection is the most humane method of execution (as if that should matter), but they ought to be able to do it another way if they've only got Day 1 Med Student to perform the venipuncture and he fails.For one thing, they probably can't GET a Day 1 Med Student. People with actual medical training generally won't have a thing to do with executions. And second, if he's a drug addict the odds are good the blood vessels in his arm are damaged.

[Bryan Ekers]

Always seemed to me a much better method would be suffocation, in the form of putting the condemned in an air-tight chamber (possibly even a modified former gas chamber) and use industrial fans to evacuate the air to a level comparable with, say, an altitude of 25,000 feet. By all indications, including the experiences of pilots, one drifts off quite painlessly, perhaps not even aware it is happening. If there's a last-minute reprieve (preferably one that happens less than four minutes after the start the of the execution and before brain-death begins), the air can be reintroduced and the (formerly) condemned revived with oxygen and CPR.

Painless, tidy, simple, no medical-professional intervention required (beyond confirming death afterward) with the only drawback that the process takes several minutes, inviting the possibility of a reprieved prisoner being alive but brain-damaged.

[BomTek]

For one thing, they probably can't GET a Day 1 Med Student.

Damn... I thought the phrase "Day 1 Med Student" was obvious enough to be metaphorical for the ineptitude of the people doing this that I wouldn't have to worry about this sort of nitpicking. Apparently I was wrong. My bad.

And second, if he's a drug addict the odds are good the blood vessels in his arm are damaged.

I know this, because I actually read the article, but maybe that's why they need someone with medical training. Doctors and, particularly, nurses should be able to administer an IV to a drug user fairly efficiently since they would presumably have to do it more often than the prison officials.

[PrettyVacant]

25 years to get to this?

[Ranchoth]

"Here we are, you and I, languishing in our hospitals. You have your pain and I am without my books—the learned Dr. Chilton has seen to that. We live in a primitive time—don’t we Will?—neither savage nor wise. Half measures are the curse of it. Any rational society would either kill me or give me my books."—Hannibal Lecter

Okay, that was probably pretentious and needlessly creepy.

But really, doesn't this underscore the whole problem? We say we want the death penalty as a society, but the squeamishness and hand-wringing about trying to make the whole thing "civilized" makes it ineffectual, and increasingly a farce.

I mean, come on—who here couldn't figure out a "quick and painless" way of killing a human? That's not the big technical problem—it's that they want a pretty way of doing it. Something all clinical and fancy and legaled-up, so they can say they're carrying out a judicial execution. You're killing a man. Man up and do it, or get back on the damn boat.

[Magiver]

Always seemed to me a much better method would be suffocation, in the form of putting the condemned in an air-tight chamber (possibly even a modified former gas chamber) and use industrial fans to evacuate the air to a level comparable with, say, an altitude of 25,000 feet. By all indications, including the experiences of pilots, one drifts off quite painlessly, perhaps not even aware it is happening. If there's a last-minute reprieve (preferably one that happens less than four minutes after the start the of the execution and before brain-death begins), the air can be reintroduced and the (formerly) condemned revived with oxygen and CPR.

Painless, tidy, simple, no medical-professional intervention required (beyond confirming death afterward) with the only drawback that the process takes several minutes, inviting the possibility of a reprieved prisoner being alive but brain-damaged. That's not a bad idea. The other being a concoction of injected drugs that work by injecting into muscle.

OTOH this guy was a junkie so give him full strength heroin and let him figure it out in his cell while listening to his favorite music. Then they can drag his carcass out past all the other prisoners. He can mime his last official job as a motivational speaker.

[aruvqan]

For one thing, they probably can't GET a Day 1 Med Student. People with actual medical training generally won't have a thing to do with executions. And second, if he's a drug addict the odds are good the blood vessels in his arm are damaged.

I was severely dehydrated and it took 14 sticks to finally get enough blood to crossmatch me ... there are blood vessels all over the fucking body.

Or, in a word, back of the knee, back of the foot, armpit .... no excuse.

Hell, mrAru chimed in that there are plenty of navy emts [general guys in the sub fleet] who would probably volunteer to set the IV in scum like that.

[Alessan]

I mean, come on—who here couldn't figure out a "quick and painless" way of killing a human? That's not the big technical problem—it's that they want a pretty way of doing it. Something all clinical and fancy and legaled-up, so they can say they're carrying out a judicial execution. You're killing a man. Man up and do it, or get back on the damn boat.

Exactly. I'm no fan of capital punishment, but I'm even more disturbed and disgusted by government attempts to make it more "scientific." Know who else tried to kill people scientifically?

[Snowboarder Bo]

Although I think that Mr. Broom deserves to die for his heinous crime, I'm not sure that Ohio should get another chance to be the agent of his death. The state specifies that his death needs to be quick and painless, and according to the Newsweek article, the attempt was neither quick nor painless:

During the attempted execution, Broom was pricked more than 18 times to find usable veins on both arms and one leg. Some of those injections hit bone or muscle.

This story was on abcnews.com (http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/US/convicted-killer-romell-broom-appeals-state-federal-court/story?id=8613608) a couple of days ago, as well.

In an affidavit filed with the court, Broom says nurses tried 18 times to insert a needle in one of his veins, but never could.

"He attempted to insert the IV," said Broom of one male nurse's attempts, "but he lost it and blood started to run down my arm. The female nurse left the room. The correction officer asked her if she was OK. She responded, 'no' and walked out."

So, it seems to me, the state should be made to play by their own rules. If they cannot, they should not be allowed to play. I'm not sure there should be "do-overs" in legal matters, especially not ones as serious as the death penalty.

1. Should the State of Ohio be allowed to attempt to execute this individual a second time? Not sure, but leaning heavily towards "no".

2. Did the individual experience a level of pain that would is incompatible with Ohio's requirement that he receive a painless execution? Yes, it seems likely that the pain he experienced went far above the legally allowed threshold of "painless".

3. Should the State of Ohio consider an alternative/additional method of execution? (According to the article, they've struggled with lethal injections in the recent past.) Yes, they prolly should. Not sure what method, tho, since Ohio requires that the death be quick and painless, and I'm not sure there is a method of killing that guarantees that, short of medically inducing a coma first, but then the method is not quick, just painless.

[furt]

"Here we are, you and I, languishing in our hospitals. You have your pain and I am without my books—the learned Dr. Chilton has seen to that. We live in a primitive time—don’t we Will?—neither savage nor wise. Half measures are the curse of it. Any rational society would either kill me or give me my books."—Hannibal Lecter."Well, get on with it, motherfu... " -- Russell "Stringer" Bell

[Snowboarder Bo]

Exactly. I'm no fan of capital punishment, but I'm even more disturbed and disgusted by government attempts to make it more "scientific." Know who else tried to kill people scientifically?

Fred A. Leuchter, Jr. (http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=654178281151939378#)

[Sandwich]

I may regret asking this, but given that you want to kill the bloke, what's wrong with a soft heavy bullet at point blank range into the back of his head?

Quick and painless, reliable, and hardly either cruel nor unusual? Does it really have to be pretty?

(I agree the state botched the first execution. Proportionate response would be say a $300 fine for causing unnecessary minor suffering. The responsibility on the state to complete the execution would not fall away - why would it?)

[flickster]

So just knock him out prior to trying to find a vein to tab into...He won't know how many times it takes cause he won't be waking up....

I can think of so many alternative methods he is deserving of, but none would be quick of painless

[PrettyVacant]

I was musing on the psychology of the method. I suppose firing squad and gas wouldn't quite strike the right note. Electricity is nice and dramatic, sure to afford a thunderous sense of wrath and vengence.

A needle perhaps suggests science, a civilised, calculated way to execute someone.

Personally, I'd give him a choice, drink this yourself or it's our game.

Happy days.

[Grumman]

I agree with Sandwich. Unless there's something I don't know that makes it impractical, the firing squad sounds like a pretty good option.

[Alessan]

Firing squad, the noose or the axe. Any other method is just jerking off.

[Alessan]

...

[aruvqan]

Exactly. I'm no fan of capital punishment, but I'm even more disturbed and disgusted by government attempts to make it more "scientific." Know who else tried to kill people scientifically?

M Guillotin for one, at the behest of a number of people back in France in the 1700s.

Why, who did you have in mind?

and what is that law, godwins?

Look, as long as execution is legal, why not try to make it scientific if that will make it fit the not cruel or unusual bit that is in the lawbooks? Though I dont see what is cruel or unusual about a guillotine, it is fast and reasonably torture free as long as the blade is sharp and heavy enough and the mechanism works properly.

[gonzomax]

I may regret asking this, but given that you want to kill the bloke, what's wrong with a soft heavy bullet at point blank range into the back of his head?

Quick and painless, reliable, and hardly either cruel nor unusual? Does it really have to be pretty?

(I agree the state botched the first execution. Proportionate response would be say a $300 fine for causing unnecessary minor suffering. The responsibility on the state to complete the execution would not fall away - why would it?)

Because we discovered that the executioner suffered. Many think it would be easy, but often mental problems followed the guy doing the deed. That is why a shooting squad had one gun with a blank. A member of the squad had a chance to convince himself that he did not actually shoot a helpless man. Even that proved too weak. Many people think it is easy. It is not.

[RTFirefly]

Exactly. I'm no fan of capital punishment, but I'm even more disturbed and disgusted by government attempts to make it more "scientific." Know who else tried to kill people scientifically?No. Why?

[alphaboi867]

Clearly this man is actually innocent of his crimes or else God would not have spared him. :rolleyes: Just how is the "The Bible says an eye for an eye" crowd reacting to this?

[LilShieste]

1. Should the State of Ohio be allowed to attempt to execute this individual a second time?
2. Did the individual experience a level of pain that would is incompatible with Ohio's requirement that he receive a painless execution?
3. Should the State of Ohio consider an alternative/additional method of execution? (According to the article, they've struggled with lethal injections in the recent past.)
1. No. They weren't able to successfully find a vein at least 18 times during the last go-round. Why do they think this time will be any different?

2. It sure sounds like it. Unless Ohio uses a completely different definition of "pain/painless" than the rest of the world.

3. What else have they got right now? Is lethal injection currently their only legally supported means of killing a person?

Look at the amount of work that is being put into killing this guy. That in and of itself makes this whole thing seem inhumane to me.

[dropzone]

Given a very high window, defenestration works first time, every time.

[Clothahump]

I have to ask why we are screwing around with needles or electric chairs. The most humane method of execution would be to take the prisoner into the chamber, sit him down and put a .38 round into the back of his head, right where the spine goes up into the brain. Like turning off a light switch.

[dropzone]

Too Stalin.

[villa]

2. No. As someone who's given blood dozens of times, including a few that were botched in some way, I can't believe this is even a debate. Needle sticks are mildly uncomfortable at their worst, and someone who's managed to survive in prison for 25 years ought to be able to handle a little boo-boo.


So to you the cruelty in Cruel and Unusual is all about the physical pain? You don't think cruelty can be psychological? Obviously not, if you think in any way shape or form the mental state regarding giving blood, and feeling multiple pin pricks is the same as the mental state regarding feeling those sticks, not knowing if that is going to be th eone that shuffles you off this mortal coil.

To be honest, I don't think this rises to the level of cruel and unusual (nor do I think the DP as a whole does, though I am persuadable on that). But your comparison here is utterly laughable.

[Kimmy_Gibbler]

Damn... I thought the phrase "Day 1 Med Student" was obvious enough to be metaphorical for the ineptitude of the people doing this that I wouldn't have to worry about this sort of nitpicking. Apparently I was wrong. My bad.

Maybe you can ask a mod to move this thread out of Great Debates and into Please Categorically and Uncritically Agree with My OP?

[Bryan Ekers]

Too Stalin.

I dunno, it sounds pretty quick to me.

[Ranchoth]

Too Stalin.

All right...how bout a restraint chair (maybe they could even reuse an electric chair—Gruesome Gertie (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gruesome_Gertie) seems apt) with a very short barreled, large gauge shotgun (say...6 gauge?), mounted at skull level, and modified to be electrically fired (either from a timer, or some elaborate "two executioners press a button each, the machine randomly chooses which fire button to ignore").

The question then becomes if you reenforce the execution chamber to safely absorb the shot, or build some kind of armored box to lower over the condemned's head. The latter would spare the witnesses the sight of the prisoner's head exploding, which is either a "pro" or "con," depending on your point of view.

There, that took me about ten seconds to think up; typing it was longer. :)

Plus, this actually could re-introduce some language of capital punishment back into the parlance. "You could get The Chair!" "Send 'im to Gruesome Gertie!" We really don't have that these days. "Get 'The Needle'"? There's no visceral connection there; no intimidation, no sense of reality.

[BomTek]

So to you the cruelty in Cruel and Unusual is all about the physical pain? You don't think cruelty can be psychological? Obviously not, if you think in any way, shape, or form the mental state regarding giving blood and feeling multiple pin pricks is the same as the mental state regarding feeling those sticks, not knowing if that is going to be the one that shuffles you off this mortal coil.

To be honest, I don't think this rises to the level of cruel and unusual (nor do I think the DP as a whole does, though I am persuadable on that). But your comparison here is utterly laughable.

Fair point. That was an incomplete argument on my part.

Telling someone that you are going to kill them is going to be psychologically damaging, no doubt, but that doesn't dissuade me from wanting society to have the death penalty as an option. This guy had a choice; his victim didn't. The amount of suffering he inflicted makes me less concerned about hurting his feelings than about teaching him (and others who might do the same thing he did) a lesson in the most emphatic way possible.

[BomTek]

Maybe you can ask a mod to move this thread out of Great Debates and into Please Categorically and Uncritically Agree with My OP?

I don't think I asked anyone to do this. We're engaging in debate as a group here... the fact that I posed the question at the start shouldn't mean that I can't also form an opinion. The quote you referenced was just my trying to keep this on track a little bit: I'm more worried about the larger questions than the obvious one of whether someone just starting his/her medical training would be the one performing a lethal injection.

In spite of my snarky tone in the quote you referenced, I am glad Der Trihs brought that up, though, because it made me look into the involvement of medical professionals in capital punishment, thereby fighting my own ignorance.

[Rhythmdvl]

So to you the cruelty in Cruel and Unusual is all about the physical pain? You don't think cruelty can be psychological? Obviously not, if you think in any way shape or form the mental state regarding giving blood, and feeling multiple pin pricks is the same as the mental state regarding feeling those sticks, not knowing if that is going to be th eone that shuffles you off this mortal coil.

To be honest, I don't think this rises to the level of cruel and unusual (nor do I think the DP as a whole does, though I am persuadable on that). But your comparison here is utterly laughable.

Fairly aligned with this. Given the general human instinct to survive, this is as close to maximum agony as one can get under controlled circumstances.

We have a detached, impartial, and dispassionate judicial system for a reason; imperfect humans can still strive for a perfect system. Whereas if it were my loved one's killer in question, emotionally I'd likely crave something quite in line with cruel and unusual. But with death--state sanctioned death--on the line, as a society we should treat the implementation in accordance with the severity of the penalty (bets with Sicilians notwithstanding).

So despite what the state can do, I think what they ought to do is recognize the inconceivable horror inflicted on a perpetrator of inconceivable horrors, and not compound the error.

(As for method, I always thought that nitrous oxide in sufficient concentrations would knock someone out quickly and effortlessly, with an unaware death following shortly.)

[Cyberhwk]

I have to ask why we are screwing around with needles or electric chairs. The most humane method of execution would be to take the prisoner into the chamber, sit him down and put a .38 round into the back of his head, right where the spine goes up into the brain. Like turning off a light switch.Because in addition to killing the condemned, we also insist on glossing over the reality of the situation. Therefore we want our methods to be not only quick and painless, but also very clean so we can feel better about ourselves. If that weren't the case, why even mess with the .38? Bring back the guillotine.

[Blaster Master]

1. Should the State of Ohio be allowed to attempt to execute this individual a second time?

If a man has been sentenced to death, the execution should be carried out. Sometimes things will mess up, but that doesn't mean it qualifies as cruel and unusual. And even if it is cruel and unusual, does he still not deserve the sentence he was given?

I do think this may be a special case since he may not be able to get a lethal injection through the traditional methodology. Can they find an alternate vein? Are there other execution options?

2. Did the individual experience a level of pain that would is incompatible with Ohio's requirement that he receive a painless execution?

Absolutely not, especially if it's due to past drug use. I think it MIGHT stand a chance if they poked a guy who had strong veins 18 times, but if they can't find a viable vein in a guy that probably used drugs, it's not exactly normal circumstances either.

I think the provision that it is quick and painless doesn't mean that if it's not and it fails he shouldn't be executed. I think that it's, instead, that he shouldn't be deliberately killed slowly and painfully, as that would be a violation of his constutional rights, but attempting to do it painlessly I think should fulfill that provision.

3. Should the State of Ohio consider an alternative/additional method of execution? (According to the article, they've struggled with lethal injections in the recent past.)

Yes, lethal injections are probably considered the most humane form of execution, but as this case demonstrates, when dealing with prior drug use, dehydration, or potentially other medical conditions, there needs to be an alternative.

My prefered solution is to make a list of possible methods of execution, some of which are relatively quick and painless (eg, injection, asphyxiation, electrocution, etc.), and others that may not be (eg, hanging, beheading, firing squad, etc.) and let the inmate choose. To some, "falling asleep" may be less desirable than staring death in the face and, as long as there is a quick and painless option and the inmate chooses otherwise, I wouldn't think a more painful method should be considered to violate such provisions. And if an inmate refuses to choose, they prioritize a list with the most humane at the top and choose the top one.

Thus, in a case like this, they can simply disallow one method that isn't viable and let him choose another or, if he refuses, choose the next most humane method.


Besides, if you think about it, if this guy gets off, it sort of defeats the whole damn purpose of execution. One person who may have done the same crime but didn't do drugs would get executed, while someone else who did drugs gets a lesser sentence for the same crime and potentially others. That is not justice.

[jtgain]

I don't understand why there is even a question that he SHOULD be executed. Fine, they botched the first one and violated OH law.

But nowhere does it say that the "punishment" for OH not complying with the law is that there can't be another attempt.

Regardless of whatever "suffering" these poor inmates have to go through, they will go through a thousand times less pain than most of us will on our way off this Earth..

[villa]

Fair point. That was an incomplete argument on my part.

Telling someone that you are going to kill them is going to be psychologically damaging, no doubt, but that doesn't dissuade me from wanting society to have the death penalty as an option. This guy had a choice; his victim didn't. The amount of suffering he inflicted makes me less concerned about hurting his feelings than about teaching him (and others who might do the same thing he did) a lesson in the most emphatic way possible.

It wasn't incomplete, it was utterly wrong. And you compound it.

If the constitutional standard is cruel and unusual, which it is, then your lack of concern regarding his feelings don't come in to play as regards whether the punishment is constitutional.

As I said, I don't think what they did rises to the level of C&U. For me, that implies a degree of either desire or at the minimum wilfull disregard of the obvious. This was a screw up by Ohio. Unless you can show me that they were aware the person putting the needle in was incompetent, and chose them either because of that incompetence, or without concern for it, then I don't see a constitutional problem here.

I also, even though I unequivocably oppose capital punishment, don't tend to think it is unconstitutional per se. I think it is unconstitutional as applied, for many grounds, including Equal Protection, Due Process and also the Cruel & unusual aspects of some forms of the death penalty.

But to turn around and say, in effect, it doesn't matter how cruel a punishment is, because this is a bad person, flies in the face of the constitution.

[LilShieste]

If a man has been sentenced to death, the execution should be carried out. Sometimes things will mess up, but that doesn't mean it qualifies as cruel and unusual. And even if it is cruel and unusual, does he still not deserve the sentence he was given?
Not if the state is unable to apply the sentence according to its own rules.

I do think this may be a special case since he may not be able to get a lethal injection through the traditional methodology. Can they find an alternate vein?
They tried sticking him multiple times, in multiple locations, to no avail. So, they've already tried to find an alternate vein.

Absolutely not, especially if it's due to past drug use. I think it MIGHT stand a chance if they poked a guy who had strong veins 18 times, but if they can't find a viable vein in a guy that probably used drugs, it's not exactly normal circumstances either.
Ohio law doesn't appear to care whether "normal circumstances" apply to a situation like this. The measure is "quick and painless". It was obviously neither, so the state - by its own rules - is unable to carry out this punishment. It needs to consider alternatives (as you describe in the rest of your post).

Besides, if you think about it, if this guy gets off, it sort of defeats the whole damn purpose of execution.
There are differing opinions on what exactly the "purpose of execution" is. Some may say it's deterrence, while others may say it's revenge. It certainly defeats the latter, but I personally don't see that as a bad thing.

One person who may have done the same crime but didn't do drugs would get executed, while someone else who did drugs gets a lesser sentence for the same crime and potentially others. That is not justice.
And if we applied life sentences to both criminals, we wouldn't even have to deal with this problem.

[LilShieste]

I don't understand why there is even a question that he SHOULD be executed. Fine, they botched the first one and violated OH law.

But nowhere does it say that the "punishment" for OH not complying with the law is that there can't be another attempt.
They botched the first one 18 times. Why should anyone think #19 will be any different?

Regardless of whatever "suffering" these poor inmates have to go through, they will go through a thousand times less pain than most of us will on our way off this Earth..
Are you in favor of life sentences in place of the death penalty? Maybe that way, the "poor inmates" will suffer as much as the rest of us.

[dropzone]

All right...how bout a restraint chair (maybe they could even reuse an electric chair....All it takes is a chair, one psycho, a water hose, and a couple people to drag out the body before the next guy is brought in. I have yet to track down the cite, but the NKVD had a "photo booth" that had the requirements, plus a TT-30 pistol, and with the hose crew implied.

[Ranchoth]

All it takes is a chair, one psycho, a water hose, and a couple people to drag out the body before the next guy is brought in. I have yet to track down the cite, but the NKVD had a "photo booth" that had the requirements, plus a TT-30 pistol, and with the hose crew implied.

Please! We're not a bunch of Stalinist savages, here!

I'm sure with modern materials engineering, we could do away with the hose crew in lieu of a sprinkler system.

[aruvqan]

Because in addition to killing the condemned, we also insist on glossing over the reality of the situation. Therefore we want our methods to be not only quick and painless, but also very clean so we can feel better about ourselves. If that weren't the case, why even mess with the .38? Bring back the guillotine.

Agreed. Hell, for what it is worth, you could even automate the dropping of the blade, so all someone would have to do is strap the guy in the correct position, and a computerized black box could drop the blade at a specific time, or a randomized time from when it was locked on. No need for a doctor, head goes bouncy in a basket, the body gets hauled off.

[drachillix]

A member of the squad had a chance to convince himself that he did not actually shoot a helpless man. Even that proved too weak. Many people think it is easy. It is not.

Why do I think many people would buy lottery tickets for the chance to pull the trigger.....

[Boyo Jim]

If I was a state of Ohio lawyer, I would argue that there was no first attempt to execute him. The preparations for execution failed, not the execution itself. The exectution was never even attempted.

[Critical1]

air tight room, with a fan inside to circulate the air around the room, and a very slow co2 leak.

when the room is open the co2 leak is irrelevant, when its closed it becomes deadly after some time )say 15 minutes to 4 hours, I dont really care. drop them in with a pillow and let them fall asleep. you dont even have to tell them that its the killing room. tell them its a temporary holding cell.

[Boyo Jim]

Yeah, tell them it's the shower room. That'll go over big.

[LilShieste]

If I was a state of Ohio lawyer, I would argue that there was no first attempt to execute him. The preparations for execution failed, not the execution itself. The exectution was never even attempted.
:confused:

The preparations didn't fail (all of the equipment was there, and everything was in working order) - the attempts failed. I think it would be crazy (like Michele Bachmann crazy) to argue that the execution was never attempted.

when the room is open the co2 leak is irrelevant, when its closed it becomes deadly after some time )say 15 minutes to 4 hours, I dont really care. drop them in with a pillow and let them fall asleep. you dont even have to tell them that its the killing room. tell them its a temporary holding cell.
That wouldn't exactly be a quick death, though, would it? I mean, if you're displacing the oxygen with CO2, then it's death by asphyxiation, which is particularly inhumane.

[Boyo Jim]

They never attempted to give him the lethal injections. Simple as that. The necessary conditions to attempt the execution were not met. As a lawyer, that would be my story and I would stick to it. And I think it is defensible -- though of course I'm not actually a lawyer. It certainly isn't Michelle Bachman crazy. Nobody else is that crazy.

Serious question... if they were strapping him in the electric chair and there was a power failure before they even tried to flip the switch, would that be a botched execution attempt.

[LilShieste]

They never attempted to give him the lethal injections. Simple as that.
That's like saying someone who held up a bank can't be guilty of attempted robbery just because they were never handed any bags of money.

The necessary conditions to attempt the execution were not met.
The execution attempt encompasses a broad set of actions. It's not the teeny-tiny window of time that takes place during the transfer of the lethal chemicals from the machines to the man's body.

It certainly isn't Michelle Bachman crazy. Nobody else is that crazy.
You're right - that was kind of a low blow.

Serious question... if they were strapping him in the electric chair and there was a power failure before they even tried to flip the switch, would that be a botched execution attempt.
Absolutely.

[Boyo Jim]

That's like saying someone who held up a bank can't be guilty of attempted robbery just because they were never handed any bags of money.


No, I'd say it was more like you make all the plans for the robbery but chicken out as you come to the entrance, turn around and leave.

The execution attempt encompasses a broad set of actions. It's not the teeny-tiny window of time that takes place during the transfer of the lethal chemicals from the machines to the man's body.

I'm sure that's what the defense attorney will say. I would argue that it starts when the executioner pushes whatever button they push. If he tries and fails to inject the drugs, he has botched the execution. Until then, he hasn't. One would think there would already be some case law on this. I'll take a look around.


Absolutely.

So you say. Do you have an actual knowledge to back up your opinion? If so, I would be happy to see it.

[Chronos]

I'm sure that's what the defense attorney will say. I would argue that it starts when the executioner pushes whatever button they push. If he tries and fails to inject the drugs, he has botched the execution. Until then, he hasn't. One would think there would already be some case law on this. I'll take a look around.If I went in for a blood donation, and the phlebotomists poked around a bit but couldn't find a usable vein, I would be perfectly justified in saying that they tried and failed to draw blood from me. Or if you're using the bank robbery example, it's not the robbers chickening out, it's them finding that they couldn't defeat the locks on the front door. At every stage in the process, the executioners had the intention of killing the prisoner, and they took all steps available to them to carry out that intention, therefore they made the attempt.

More on topic, I don't know whether this qualifies as "cruel and unusual", as laid out in the US Constitution, but the US constitution isn't the only one at issue here. There's also the Ohio constitution, which specifies that an execution must be quick and painless, and this is certainly not quick. If they go ahead and execute him now, then they're killing a man outside of the procedures provided for in law for legal killing, which makes the executioners murderers.

[MovieMogul]

No, I'd say it was more like you make all the plans for the robbery but chicken out as you come to the entrance, turn around and leave. Oh please, they didn't just walk into the room and then walk back out. :rolleyes:

It's like a robber who walks into a bank, disables the cameras, ties up the guard, threatens the tellers, and then realizes he didn't load his gun. Even if he didn't get around to asking for money yet, it's pretty specious to say that an attempt hadn't been made.

[LilShieste]

No, I'd say it was more like you make all the plans for the robbery but chicken out as you come to the entrance, turn around and leave.
But you didn't leave; you actually got to the point where another person (the target) was involved.

I'm sure that's what the defense attorney will say. I would argue that it starts when the executioner pushes whatever button they push. If he tries and fails to inject the drugs, he has botched the execution. Until then, he hasn't. One would think there would already be some case law on this. I'll take a look around.
Thanks, I would be interested in hearing any information you find on this.

Here's how I see it:

The execution attempt consists of several steps:

Preparing the lethal chemicals
Hooking up the prisoner
Pushing the button (or whatever)
Waiting for the prisoner to die


The bank robbery attempt consists of several steps:

Walking to the bank
Threatening the teller to hand over the money
Receiving the money
Making the getaway


IMO, your argument could probably hold water (in both cases) up until the beginning of step #2. After that point, the actions have progressed far enough that it's very apparent that an attempt is being made.

It doesn't matter that the actions never even make it to step #3; consequences have already begun. Sure, the deed isn't done, but you can't act like the attempt never even occurred.

So you say. Do you have an actual knowledge to back up your opinion? If so, I would be happy to see it.
Sorry, I didn't realize you were asking for precedent. In that case, I should have prefaced my earlier response with "IMO".

[Qin Shi Huangdi]

Just shoot the murderer, it's far less painless and cheaper then lethal injection.

[LilShieste]

Just shoot the murderer, it's far less painless and cheaper then lethal injection.
Except that in Ohio, the state in question, they're not looking for "less painless".

[Critical1]

That wouldn't exactly be a quick death, though, would it? I mean, if you're displacing the oxygen with CO2, then it's death by asphyxiation, which is particularly inhumane.

nah the slow build up of co2 causes you to get sleepy then fall asleep then you simply never wake up. for some goofy reason blood will bond with c02 in preference to oxygen so you dont really realize you are suffocating. its not like getting dropped in a tank of something we cant breathe and gasping for air, you body just keeps on like nothing is going on.

[LilShieste]

nah the slow build up of co2 causes you to get sleepy then fall asleep then you simply never wake up. for some goofy reason blood will bond with c02 in preference to oxygen so you dont really realize you are suffocating. its not like getting dropped in a tank of something we cant breathe and gasping for air, you body just keeps on like nothing is going on.
I was thinking that it would be akin to holding a plastic bag over your head (not to the point where you couldn't draw in any breaths, but rather each successive breath doesn't seem to be "enough"). If it's indeed closer to what you're describing, then it would definitely be more humane than the other execution methods currently in use.

[Boyo Jim]

...Sorry, I didn't realize you were asking for precedent. In that case, I should have prefaced my earlier response with "IMO".

I didn't start by asking for a precedent. But your posts contain such certainty, and such disdain for another opinion, that I had to assume you had some authoritative knowledge. Since you don't, your opinion is worth no more than mone, and I doubly don't appreciate the Michelle Bachman comment.

[Boyo Jim]

I swear I didn't know this when I posted, but my argument is apparently going to be played out in court. According to this MSNBC story (http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/32916157/), a federal judge has issued a restraining order preventing Ohio from another attempt.

The county prosecutor is taking the position that I laid out -- there was no first attempt. While the state consented to the delay, the prosecutor in Cuyahoga County — where Broom's crime occurred 25 years ago — opposed it, saying the execution had never begun because the lethal drug cocktail never began flowing into Broom's body.

There is a reference to a 2008 Supreme Court ruling that upheld Kentucky's lethal injection procedures. From the article: Chief Justice John Roberts suggested at the time that the court will not halt scheduled executions in the future unless "the condemned prisoner establishes that the state's lethal injection protocol creates a demonstrated risk of severe pain."

But according to the defense attorney, in that some ruling:The court said that a "hypothetical situation" involving "a series of aborted attempts" at execution "would present a different case," Sweeney said in his federal court filing.


It sounds like (and I hope it isn't) that the court is looking more at the protocol design, than the, ahem, execution. Personally I think the court is going too far if that is the case -- if the staff bungles the execution in a manner that causes undue pain and suffering, I wouldn't want to argue that there is any significant difference between that and a bad protocol.

BTW, I have experienced something akin to the prisoner, though admittedly not with a threat of death hanging over me. I am a regular blood donor, and the Red Cross nurses regularly have trouble finding a vein. I've been poked as many as six times, had attempts in both elbows and both hands on the same day, and they've given up on me more than once. I'm sure this guy's terror was indeed excruciating, but I am doubtful that the physical pain was. My physical issue seems to be related to being mildly dehydrated on occasion.

There's no direct link to the 2008 ruling, but I'm going to go look for it.

[Qin Shi Huangdi]

Except that in Ohio, the state in question, they're not looking for "less painless".

It is painless. If it's a direct headshot you feel a slight surge of pain and then you blank out and then go to Hell/be reincarnated as a cockroach/lose consciousness.

[appleciders]

nah the slow build up of co2 causes you to get sleepy then fall asleep then you simply never wake up. for some goofy reason blood will bond with c02 in preference to oxygen so you dont really realize you are suffocating. its not like getting dropped in a tank of something we cant breathe and gasping for air, you body just keeps on like nothing is going on.

Uhh... Really? I think blood bonds with oxygen more easily than carbon dioxide. I'm pretty sure our whole circulatory system is based on that premise. Might you be thinking of carbon monoxide? That would do what you describe, and by all accounts it's quite a painless death- just dropping off to sleep.

[Snowboarder Bo]

It is painless. If it's a direct headshot [b]you feel a slight surge of pain

Dude, I cannot believe that you typed these words with a straight face.

Do you know that the word "painless" means "without pain"?

Do you understand that feeling "a slight surge of pain" is not "painless"? WTF?

[BomTek]

It wasn't incomplete, it was utterly wrong. And you compound it.

Hang on a second: are you telling me my opinion is wrong or just the argument I used to support it? If you're doing the former, you're being asinine... my opinion, being an opinion, is no more wrong than yours. But in my OP, I said the prisoner didn't suffer an extraordinary level of pain because he only recieved a few needle sticks. I didn't take the psychological aspect of a failed execution attempt into consideration, which is kind of the definition of incomplete: lacking a part.
On the other hand, I didn't say anything in my answer to question number 2 that was actually wrong. So if you're saying that answer was wrong, I can only say this: The prisoner was poked by a needle, which is not painful. Aside from mishandled blood donations, I've also had IVs given to me by other bomb technicians in Combat Lifesaver courses. I think I have a fairly low pain tolerance, but even the worst stick I've ever been given wasn't painful as much as it was inconvenient and uncomfortable.
I admit that I didn't take all kinds of pain into account in my OP. If Ohio is the only State that has the requirement for a quick and painless execution, and they are also concerned with the psychological pain involved in telling someone that they are going to kill them, they either need to abolish the death penalty or amend their constitution.

If the constitutional standard is cruel and unusual, which it is, then your lack of concern regarding his feelings don't come in to play as regards whether the punishment is constitutional.

Can you clarify this sentence at all? I just didn't understand it the way you worded it.

[Qin Shi Huangdi]

Dude, I cannot believe that you typed these words with a straight face.

Do you know that the word "painless" means "without pain"?

Do you understand that feeling "a slight surge of pain" is not "painless"? WTF?

Sorry for my self-contradiction. I should have said it's less painful then lethal injections going wrong.

[Snowboarder Bo]

Sorry for my self-contradiction. I should have said it's less painful then lethal injections going wrong.

Well, "less painful" isn't what the state law mandates. And even properly performed lethal injections aren't painless. Do you know what many (if not most; can't find #s on it) states use for lethal injections? Potassium chloride. And it's not a painless way to go.

Remember the guy I mentioned in an earlier post, Fred A Leuchter, Jr.? He for a time designed, built and sold execution machines of varying types. One of those types was a lethal injection machine.

in 1985 the state of New Jersey purchased Leuchter's proposal for a lethal injection system for $30,000.

On October 24, 1990 The New York Times described him as "self-proclaimed execution expert and manufacturer of death machinery" who "was charged today in a Middlesex County District Court with fraudulently practicing engineering." It quoted Dr. Edward A. Brunner, chairman of the anesthesia department at Northwestern University Medical School, as saying Leuchter's lethal injection system would indeed paralyze a condemned criminal, but far from being humane this paralysis would merely stop the prisoner from screaming at the "extreme pain in the form of a severe burning sensation" caused by the potassium chloride injection.

cite (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fred_Leuchter)

So even when done properly, lethal injections cause pain, and Ohio state law specifically forbids an execution method which is not "quick and painless". Not "mostly painless" or "somewhat painless" or "less painful than a lot of other ways", but "painless", no qualifiers.

Frankly, the easiest way to fix this problem is to remove that language from Ohio state law. But who wants to stand before the citizenry and advocate a painful execution method? I certainly wouldn't vote for anyone who wanted that, and I suspect most people would feel the same.

[Chronos]

Actually, I don't think that a bullet directly to the head would cause any physiological pain at all, not even a short surge of it. A high-powered bullet travels faster than a nerve impulse, meaning that the brain would be destroyed before the pain signals from the breached skin or whatever could reach it. The reason we don't use a bullet to the brain is not that it's inhumane, but that it's messy. And the fact that we choose execution methods by how messy they are, in preference to how humane they are, should give us all pause.

[Qin Shi Huangdi]

Well, "less painful" isn't what the state law mandates. And even properly performed lethal injections aren't painless. Do you know what many (if not most; can't find #s on it) states use for lethal injections? Potassium chloride. And it's not a painless way to go.

Remember the guy I mentioned in an earlier post, Fred A Leuchter, Jr.? He for a time designed, built and sold execution machines of varying types. One of those types was a lethal injection machine.



cite (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fred_Leuchter)

So even when done properly, lethal injections cause pain, and Ohio state law specifically forbids an execution method which is not "quick and painless". Not "mostly painless" or "somewhat painless" or "less painful than a lot of other ways", but "painless", no qualifiers.

Frankly, the easiest way to fix this problem is to remove that language from Ohio state law. But who wants to stand before the citizenry and advocate a painful execution method? I certainly wouldn't vote for anyone who wanted that, and I suspect most people would feel the same.

Not really, I think. Most members of the Silent Majority/the Middle Class/Hillary Clinton Democrats probably don't care if a some guy who raped, tortured, and murdered a young girl is shot or lethally injected or quartered or whatever.

[Snowboarder Bo]

Not really, I think. Most members of the Silent Majority/the Middle Class/Hillary Clinton Democrats probably don't care if a some guy who raped, tortured, and murdered a young girl is shot or lethally injected or quartered or whatever.

First, do you have a cite to back up that opinion with anything? I doubt it.

Second, I do have a cite to back up my opinion; it's called the 8th Amendment to the U.S Constitution, and has not been changed or repealed in over 225 years.

[Qin Shi Huangdi]

First, do you have a cite to back up that opinion with anything? I doubt it.

Second, I do have a cite to back up my opinion; it's called the 8th Amendment to the U.S Constitution, and has not been changed or repealed in over 225 years.

Painful does not equal cruel and unusual punishment.

[Critical1]

Uhh... Really? I think blood bonds with oxygen more easily than carbon dioxide. I'm pretty sure our whole circulatory system is based on that premise. Might you be thinking of carbon monoxide? That would do what you describe, and by all accounts it's quite a painless death- just dropping off to sleep.

monoxide, dioxide, one of those silly oxides.

yeah it would be the one that makes you sleepy and then dead.

[Magiver]

monoxide, dioxide, one of those silly oxides.

yeah it would be the one that makes you sleepy and then dead.
They will both kill you due to lack of oxygen.

Nighty night, sleepy sleepy..... dead. The diference here is the prisoner goes out peacefully versus all the fun ways everybody else experiences.