In this thread, we’re discussing a movie in which a character is sentenced to die in the electric chair. The execution is botched so that it takes him several minutes to die, during which he is aware, screaming in pain, and eventually shooting out flames and burning up. I asked why one of the armed guards didn’t shoot him the moment he realised what was wrong, and was told that that would be murder.
Is this correct? Has it ever occurred and been tested in court?
If this would in fact be illegal, does the same thing apply when, for example, I’m with a friend who’s been shot in the stomach, the circumstances are such that he cannot be saved but will slowly and painfully die, and he asks me to end his suffering? If I comply, would that be murder? Would I go to jail?
Classic law school hypothetical: You’re on the fiftieth floor of the Empire State Building. A jumper fron the roof plummets past your window, and you, being a highly skilled trap and skeet shooter, shoot him dead as he passes your window, and his dead body thumps to the ground moments later.
Chock full of law school exam type complicating factors. Guy intends to shoot unloaded shotgun at wife. Gun was loaded by angry son. Misses wife. Hits person falling past window. . .
I’m not up on crimial law, but off the cuff, it sounds like murder all around. The guard has no authority to kill the prisoner. The argument that “he was about to die anyway” is no defense because that would justify killing anyone… after all, we are all going to die at some point. “Mercy killing” is no defense. Assisted suicide is no defense.
I would think murder again here. The shooter killed the guy with the requisite intent. Again, the fact that he was probably about to die soon anyway is no defense because we are all going to die in the future anyway, so why not kill anyone now?
Of course, to some extent, moral luck comes into play here. If they guy had died of a heart attack on the way down, and was shot post-mortem but before landing, the shooter would be guilty of corpse abuse and maybe some firerarms related offense, but not murder.
I’m not convinced shooting Del would count as murder. They were state appointed executioners with the authority to kill people on the state’s behalf. He was under sentence of death and scheluled to die. They were given the specific task of killing that particular man at that specific instant. Changing the actual method of death perhaps might not be murder.
Also, he was struggling to get out of the chair, they might have shot him “while trying to escape”
Problem is, they are only authorized, both by statute and by the death warrant, to execute the convict in a certain manner. Here is a list of the approved methods. So legal authority does not look like a very promising defense. Perhaps the mistaken belief that one was authorized to “finish him off” would reduced the crime to manslaughter, but the excutioner simply lacks a valid legal authorization to shoot a convict in a botched execution.
The wording of death warrants usually say something like “to be placed in the electric chair at So-And-So prison where electricity shall be passes through your body until you are dead.” Not much wiggle room, in other words. If the set-up was botched and the execution becomes painful or lengthy, all the executioner is authorized to do is turn the chair on again-- that’s the only way he can legally “finish him off.”
Secondly, guards in modern prisons usually don’t have firearms, out of fear of the inmates stealing them. Firearms are only issued to guards outside the fences, and on an as-needed basis. An execution is supposed to be a dignified affair when the prison puts on its best face for the public, so (at least in my state) they don’t carry guns to executions.
It would be really difficult for an executioner to argue that he didn’t know what he was authorized to do. Just like in the movies, they do many practice runs, hold meeting to discuss procedure and contingency plans. The State is pretty anal about this-- every detail must be nailed down, and every person must know exactly what their job is. Executioners are professionals, well-schooled in what their job is, and others on the execution team are carefully selected for their skills and trained intensely. Most have been on execution teams before.
My husband was once on an execution team, and he was quite impressed by the professionalism and effeciency.
An excellent point. I have no idea whether it applies to guards at executions too, but if it does, the guard doesn’t even have the option. Then a guard could really only strangle the convict or bludgeon him. And that’s not gonna go over very well.
Thanks for the clarification. I bet there are also written procedures in most jurisdictions that include what to do if the exection goes wrong. And I bet they don’t say to shoot the convict if the chair doesn’t work.