Front Page  »  

No needle now for Death Row club

November 4, 2011

There will be no state-sanctioned executions in California until 2013 because of a federal judge’s decision Thursday. [San Francisco Chronicle]   

Executions have been delayed since 2006 by court order as lawyers argue the issue of California’s lethal injection procedures. This state presently has 718 Death Row inhabitants.

A timetable proposed by attorneys for both the state and a variety of condemned individuals was approved by U.S. District Judge Richard Seeborg in San Francisco, to give both sides time for evidence exchanges. At issue is California’s constitutional ban on cruel and unusual punishment.

Several federal court rulings during the past five years have required prison officials to revise execution techniques to conform with existing law.

The only U.S. manufacturer of one of the lethal drugs used in executions has since stopped production, forcing authorities to seek foreign sources. This has helped foster the argument that a mishandled execution could cause an inmate to remain conscious and die in agony.


Loading...
Subjects:     
Related:


35 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments

Use Doctor Jack Kevorkian’s method, it is not cruel, just illegal!


0

I also think the Death Penalty should be abolished, but if we can’t do that then there is another way that death can be accomplished without any physical suffering at all, simply take them on an airplane ride to 25 thousand feet and open a window. (this can also be done in a hyperbaric chamber) The person will immediately go to sleep then die in a few minuets. This is what killed famous golfer Payne Stewart and his friends on a private jet flight, happened so fast that the pilot didn’t have time to turn off the autopilot, the plane just kept going untill it ran out of fuel. Of course in the case of an execution flight the pilots and crew would be outfitted with Oxygen.


0

I’ll bet this ruined Rick Perry’s day.


0

He shed a single tear of Sodium thiopental


0

Meh…..


If I was guilty of terrible crimes and sentenced to death, I would prefer the guillotine.


.


0

facing UP?


0

“facing up” LOL…… You made me laugh and I’m still laughing. As to chorrzul, I’ll keep my head on my shoulders thank you very much. I would prefer the Oxycontin treatment myself washed down with a bottle of fine wine.


Frankly, Why do we have such a problem with deciding how to kill somebody? Our troops die by gun fire everyday. It was by the gun that we earned our freedom so why is dying by the gun not appropriate for a convicted criminal who is sentenced to death? If we are going to impose the death penalty what’s wrong with a firing squad?


0

I guess that there’s always people like the86er^ that enjoy killing people but people with a conscience can’t shot other people unless it’s in self defence. I think that the people appointed to be the shooters would have to be pretty messed up or else they’ll come out messed up afterwards.


0

It costs us more to execute someone than it does to incarcerate them for life. Why that is, I don’t know but I guess it’s because they get extra appeals, free attorneys, special housing (private cells) etc. They also get special guards who keep an extra eye on them when they are depressed because God forbid that they actually kill themselves and thus deprive “us” from killing them first!


Death is easy in my opinion, it’s living in a cage that would be torture. If you want to punish somebody why but them to death with an injection when you can really punish them by locking them in a cage?


Frankly, I think the death penalty is a bad idea not only because of the above mentioned but because we have learned over the last decade (thanks to DNA testing) that innocent people get convicted and it happens more often than many of us would like. Likewise we must remember that while the DNA evidence has exonerated the falsely accused we must consider what caused the convictions of innocent men and woman to begin with. False witness testimony, over zealous prosecutors and sometimes intentional misinformation provided by law enforcement, are a few of the reasons. I don’t have to remind anybody that we can’t breathe the breath of life back into an innocent dead man.


All in all, in my opinion there is absolutely nothing positive for any of us that comes out of the death penalty. If you’re a Christian then you know it’s wrong. If you’re an agnostic then why shut the guy’s light’s off when you can punish him some more and besides, like I said, it’s cheaper to keep them alive. The Death Penalty is about big money and big expense.


0

The answer is Vengeance. This is still in our reptile DNA, and our government carries it out on behalf of the victims families. I know that reasoning is not “on the books” but really is the reason to keep it. If someone I loved was killed in a violent and malicious manner I’m sure I would also look for vengeance. Would that person being locked up in a corrupt prison system be enough for me? I don’t know.


It would be an interesting experiment to have the victims family decide to put a person to death or not. If they choose yes, then a date is set, say 5 years. During that 5 years the defense can continue the appeals process and look for exonerating evidence. Also at ANY time during that 5 years, including up to minutes before the condemned is led to the death chamber, the family can re-vote to stay the execution. But once an execution is stayed, thats it. No going back. Former condemned then gets life with no parole.

Its not without flaws, but the current system is broke, so why not try something new and work out the kinks?


BTW, I looked up the difference between Vengeance and Justice. Vengeance is personal, and Justice is societal.


0

We aren’t supposed to be a vengeful country, we are a country of laws and compassion. I understand what you’re saying, if someone killed one of my loved ones then I’d want to personally inject the needle. That is why we don’t have family members on the juries. We can’t judge people based on emotions. Emotions can taint facts. Family members might truly believe that someone is guilty of a crime but that doesn’t mean that they are right. There was a recent case where a guy was let off of death row because he was found to be innocent but the victims mother still believes him to be guilty.


0

Sounds like someones got a case of the “supposed tahs”. :) – Sorry, Simpsons reference.


0

I have to agree with typo on this. She is right in everything she is saying (in my opinion) and I’m familiar with the case she is referring to. It’s also true that human nature seems to lean towards a want or need for revenge when we are hurt to the extent that a loved one is taken from us. I, just like typo would probably want to be the executioner if someone I loved was murdered or even seriously injured by an assailant. This is a difficult issue and as much as leaving it to the family of the victim is something we have heard many times before, typo is right and as much as I’d like to see a victims family get a few minutes alone with these guy’s, it’s a bad idea. Too bad we can’t have different punishments for “slam dunk” cases where there is no shadow of a doubt but it doesn’t work that way. Supposedly no one convicts based on doubt to begin with!! Yet the innocent end up on Death Row ………….


One thing for certain, if there was a truth machine that could play back events that were 100% accurate, I would be AN EYE FOR AN EYE PERSON right down to the number of stab wounds all based on the victims families wishes!


0

gomeztogo


I like that even though its a day dream and will never happen

Let the justice system determine if a person is absolutely the culprit without a doubt

Then let the victim’s family have say so to be considered in the sentence, its weird but I like it


0

gomeztogo


I am even for allowing the victim’s family to carry out the execution with their own hands as they see fit (I know its cruel and unusual) but I like the idea (When there is absolutely no doubt the person is the culprit).


0

I agree completely with your post Cindy. It just doesn’t make sense.


0

Agree, DNA has created a new playing field and has exonerated some who have been falsely accused and convicted. Thank God for DNA. But on the other hand DNA has supported the guilty verdict of murderer’s beyond any doubt. Those are the killers that need to be put to death.


0

So then in a hypothetical world where you make the rules, do you make the “special circumstance” required for capital cases 99.9% accurate DNA evidence AND the conviction?


0

But there’s not always DNA evidence. The majority if not all of the cases of innocent people being put to death were poor or/and mentally challenged. In this country if you kill someone and you can afford a dream team ie. OJ then you walk but if you’re poor or not of sound mind then you can’t get good representation. The judicial system needs to be equal and fair to everyone, especially if there’s a death penalty or a life sentence involved. A poor or mentally challenged person should the same rights and equal protection as a wealthy person.


0

Understood Typo. Creating a hypothetical new rule to keep up the debate.

In our pretend world death penalty is only a permitted sentence if there is 99.9% DNA evidence as part of the conviction.

If you have no DNA but still get a conviction, max penalty is life.

For or against?


0

I can’t really say, I’d have to see the trial and see all of the evidence. I can’t just say ‘no DNA let em go or give em life’ not all cases have DNA evidence and there are different reasons that people commit murder. Life sentences and death sentences are not that cut and dry when you’re talking about putting a person in prison for life, but I’m not against life sentences in general.


As I said in Death AND life sentences the system isn’t fair. I would say if it proven that someone murdered someone in cold blood, not self defense, not an act of passion but someone like Manson or Dahmer then they are menace to society so yes I’m in favor of life in prison (forever life). But the system needs to be reformed. When someone like OJ walks while there was so much blatant evidence and then some poor innocent schlep in Texas that can’t afford proper representation gets the chair then something is wrong with the system and that doesn’t just pertain to death sentences, the whole system is screwed up. Three strikes is a perfect example of how screwed up the system is.


Having more people in our prisons than any country in the world including China, having the highest amount of non violent offenders in our prisons then any country in the world, murdering innocent people at the hands of our judicial system, having a judicial system that works better for the rich than the poor all tells me that that it’s just a mess.


A good movie that illustrates what a mess our courts are is ‘And Justice For All’ starring Al Pacino.


0

The death penalty is barbaric. As a society we should be better than this.


0

If government can’t be trusted to pave your roads, why oh why would you trust them to decide is who will live and who will die.


0

The time to totally eliminate the death penalty is now, period.


0

The time to totally eliminate libraries, exercise yards, cable TV, stereos, phones, etc. from within prisons is now, period.


0

Poor title since when is this a “club”.This is a serious issue not a joke for CCN.Don’t care what your politics are this is in poor taste.


0

Oh come on, have a sense of humor. 99% of these Club Members are guilty as hell and have taken innocent lives and destroyed the lives of many families. If for no other reason, it’s the 1% who are falsely convicted that I worry about and therefore can not condone the death penalty.


0
1 2