Subscribe to Common Dreams News Updates
Most Popular This Week
Popular content
Today's Top News
Lethal Injection Revisited
Hanging was the worst use a man could be put to.
- Sir Henry Wotton, The Disparity Between Buckingham and Essex (1651)
It is so easy to view the death penalty as nothing more than a means to an end that we sometimes overlook the fact that it should not be an unpleasant experience for the person involved. Thanks to Romell Broom we have been reminded of its niceties and the importance of administering it humanely. Not, however, that everyone agrees that it needs to be a pleasant experience. Indeed, in the death penalty's most recent experience in the United States Supreme Court it was met with a somewhat callous approach by a majority of the members of the Court.
The case involved death by lethal injection and whether, as presently administered, it constitutes cruel and unusual punishment thus violating the prospective decedent's rights. The issue was not complex and has been examined here and elsewhere over the years. At issue is the second drug that is administered in the three-drug cocktail that dispatches the participant. It is pancuronium bromide and it paralyzes the skeletal muscles but not the brain or nerves of the chemical's recipient. Unable to move or speak, the participant cannot let onlookers know that contrary to appearances, what the participant is undergoing is extremely painful. In Tennessee its use is prohibited when euthanizing non-livestock animals because, as the American Veterinary Medical Association said in a 2000 report, "the animal may perceive pain and distress after it is immobilized." The Court, and others are not troubled by this. Their position was neatly articulated in 2006 by New York Times reporter Denise Grady. In a column addressing the use of lethal injection she observes: "At the core of the issue is a debate about which matters more, the comfort of prisoners or that of the people who watch them die. A major obstacle to change is that alternative methods of lethal injection, though they might be easier on convicts, would almost certainly be harder on witnesses and executioners. With a different approach, death would take longer and might involve jerking movements that the prisoner would not feel but that would be unpleasant for others to watch."
When considering Base et al vs. Rees, a Kentucky case involving the three drug cocktail, Chief Justice John Roberts observed that: "Some risk of pain is inherent in any method of execution . . . . It is clear, then, that the Constitution does not demand the avoidance of all risk of pain in carrying out executions. Simply because an execution method may result in pain, either by accident or as an inescapable consequence of death, does not establish the sort of ‘objectively intolerable risk of harm' that qualifies as cruel and unusual." Justice Antonin Scalia, ever compassionate, observed during oral argument: "This is an execution, not surgery. . .. Where does that come from, that you must find the method of execution that causes the least pain?" In a 7-2 decision the court upheld the use of all three drugs in lethal injections. And now an up-date, courtesy of Mr. Broom.
Mr. Broom was convicted of the 1984 of the rape and killing of a 14-year old girl abducted in Cleveland. He was convicted and sentenced to death, his execution to take place on September 15 2009. The attempted execution began at 2:01 PM with executioners searching in vain for the vein that would serve as a conduit for the magic liquor that would extinguish his life. Mr. Broom was cooperative and did everything he could to help including flexing his fingers and guiding the tube up his arm, all to no avail. After two hours the execution was called off. Shortly thereafter the governor of Ohio granted Mr. Broom a one-week reprieve, a reprieve that was followed by subsequent stays of execution.
In addition to giving Mr. Broom additional time to contemplate the error of his ways, the stays provide his attorneys the opportunity to attempt to halt all further attempts at execution. A report in the New York Times says his attorneys will argue that (a) he needs more than 7 days to recover from the physical and emotional trauma of the executioners' failed attempt (a recovery that some might think would actually be helped by a successful subsequent and prompt execution), (b) that Ohio's lethal injection system is critically flawed, and (c) that lethal injection is cruel and unusual punishment. (The Supreme Court decision in the Brees case may dispatch two of those arguments more swiftly than Mr. Broom will be dispatched.) As a result, Mr. Broom, who had no right to expect to see another day, may live to see another day in court.
The foregoing proves that although we are the only Western nation that believes the death penalty is the best cure for recidivism, we are also a compassionate people and want to make sure that recipients of its benefits are given every possible consideration before receiving them.
12 Comments so far
Show AllAs I consider the pain and anguish of that 14 year old girl as she was raped and killed, the terrible and enduring pain inflicted on her family.....I simply don't waste too much sympathy on Broom.
I cannot see any need for pain at all in this day and age however.
henry8
That 'Broom would be moved' by your sympathy or its withdrawal is amazing.
Unless you have visited a prison, even a minimum security facility, you cannot appreciate the misery, every hour of each day, day in and day out, without end as long as you live in it: only then you would realize the 'irony' in the death penalty.
Death is death, whether you believe in an after life and forgiveness or not, when you are dead, as far as 'things go here on earth' you are 'out of the running'.
So an insane monster rapes and murders a child, and after his appeals have been exhausted, he is given a 'reprieve'----death will deliver him from a life of misery; and the child he murdered who might still be alive if he had not murdered her, will still be dead; but the murderer will also.
This reminds me of the story of Karla Faye Tucker (from your cherished state of Texas). She was convicted of a double murder. While in prison, she 'found jesus' (he was under one of the tables in the mess hall, lol) 'accepted jesus as her personal savior' and was such a 'good christian thereafter' the State of Texas would take her from unit to unit to 'share her story of salvation and joy at being saved'. Then when GW Bush was Governor; the state of Texas executed her; fulfilling her desire to be with Jesus, instead of 'delaying her rapture' until the 'lord decided to bring her home'.
I wonder if those two that she killed were 'Christians' and how they felt about sharing the 'golden streets of heaven' with the same 'cute little killer who found jesus'---('under the table in the mess hall in a Texas prison')--- who had killed them with a pick ax while they slept?
From this 'unbelievers' point of view that would hardly be 'punishment'.
That is the irony of the death penalty 'for' the Christians who in most cases in Texas and elsewhere are the 'pushers of the death penalty'.
If more people were to study the long term effects of continued incarceration over the long term they may realize that 'death' is a relief---not a punishment. Especially if the 'dead offender' is 'expecting to be greeted in heaven with eternal 'bliss and joy'; it can only be a fulfillment.
There is no arguing with 'logic' is there?
Texas isn't the only one with the highest execution rate. Virginia and Florida are competing with that state.
Two hours of passes is sort of like torture, but one should remember that on the other side of this torture is death. It's doublely horrendous. Was the vein totally severed? Nobody tells us. At least if phlebotomists do repeated sticks in the hospital the patient most likely believes it's for his/her benefit, though in many cases I suspect that an anguished state of mind precludes this realization. I say all this especially for the sake of the condemned who are wrongly convicted (there are statistics on this about).
Are we insane? My blind and deaf cat went through this, and my cat felt the pain and sensed death at hand. It is too difficult to come up with some carbon monoxide these days??? Wait a minute, there's profit involved in what's injected isn't there?
There is some other deep problem regarding such phenomena too I suspect. I can only guess that, say, in medicine in general for example, there must be a feature of medical training that PROTECTS med students from experiencing empathy, that deadens them to it. [For them the "shock doctrine" of no rest & big responsibilities all through rotations?] It is harder to treat the terror of patients in many cases I suspect than to do the surgery. So, medicine in the US is losing attributes of an "art," and as future doctors are desensitized...it's becoming more simply an elite-job provider? "Generation A" doctors? Is that the way the U.S. is going along in all spheres that touch death in any way? You think I have no evidence don't you? Sorry, I have some. You may not get the message, however, unless you listen to the report linked below all the way to the end. The evidence should be echoed on every talk show out there. If it isn't, we've become too callous for any hope.
scroll to "The Telltale Wombs of Lewiston, Maine" All Things Considered, Thur, Oct 8
http://www.npr.org/templates/rundowns/rundown.php?prgId=2&prgDate=10-8-2009
As the only industrialized nation on earth that permits the barbaric practice of premeditated societal revenge, I am appalled at our hypocrisy. We dither over how a condemned person (was that verdict just?) may suffer some discomfort prior to his death rattle, and yet righteously tear an unborn child limb from limb from his mother's uterus 4,000 times a day because we are allowed to by law. Thankfully there are no screams from these innocent ones; after all think of the discomfort the participants might endure and most likely the mental anguish would be unbearable. A nation that accepts genocide will never live in....
Peace
Yeah!! NUKE THE GYNACOLOGISTS!!!
Actually, I find the story of Ohio's Mr. Broom bizarre.
How is it possible to be unable to find a vein sufficient for an injection of anything at all, unless of course you are using a very oversized needle? When I was a kid I watched my father, an experimental biologist, inject mice, rats, rabbits, all the time with no problem, and their skin is hidden by hair.
Most of the time I find Mr. Brauchli's efforts at humor to be a bit too flippant, but this article is rather illuminating for what it says about two of the most rapacious appointees to the Supreme Court.
(quote) When considering Base et al vs. Rees, a Kentucky case involving the three drug cocktail, Chief Justice John Roberts observed that: "Some risk of pain is inherent in any method of execution . . . . It is clear, then, that the Constitution does not demand the avoidance of all risk of pain in carrying out executions. Simply because an execution method may result in pain, either by accident or as an inescapable consequence of death, does not establish the sort of ‘objectively intolerable risk of harm' that qualifies as cruel and unusual."
This is precisely the same twisted logic used by John Yoo and others to justify torture. What the hell does the Chief Justice, whose background is in corporate law, mean by pain "as an inescapable consequence of death"? Pain is an inescapable consequence of life, not of death!
(quote) Justice Antonin Scalia, ever compassionate, observed during oral argument: "This is an execution, not surgery. . .. Where does that come from, that you must find the method of execution that causes the least pain?"
For starters, Mr Scalia, the administration of this elixer of death requires medical practitioners (who can't find an appropiate vein!). How about a bullet to the brain, Mr. Scalia?
An interesting exercise would be to go back to the Senate confirmation hearings and to review, as a retrospective, what lies these two men now in charge of our lives, told our solons. They are part of the Bush legacy.
That NYTimes reporter, Denise Grady, had it exactly right. We as a society impose pain and suffering but then censor the twitching.
Abolish the death penalty or remain psychotic.
-30-
The process is a state ritual. capital punishment is essentially designed for peasants. I am told these creatures of god apply alcohol swabs to the soon to be deceased skin before injecting the elixir of poisons. guess it's OK to kill but not right to infect the receipient with germs. The petty pretenses of "civilised" behaviour.
Why dont they just execute like the holy people do in Saudi Arabia and spare us all the pretentions of process. What man does to man.
Yes, I've also read that the victim's arm is swabbed with alcohol.
This is indeed a superstitious ritual for the purpose of sterilizing not the victim, but the killers.
· Yr Obd't Servant
You are right, Ole Man. It is by no means inescapable. It's possible to be unable to find the vein because, as you say, the needle might be too large. Nowadays it may be too dull. Are you sure your dad's substances always had to go into the mouse's vein itself? What may appear simple [especially if you have healthy veins eg] for many, many patients actually demands care, imagination, concentration, and poise; but I have seen many fail who possess these attributes. The patient's anxiety and apprehension leaps over to the member of the same species attempting to inject or extract.
'.... It is clear, then, that the Constitution does not demand the avoidance of all risk of pain in carrying out executions.' Chief Justice John Roberts
If that is so, then it is my conviction that the Constitution needs changing. The penalty of death is absolute. Isn't it grave enough presumption to endorse the idea that execution is justified for anything? The cocktail itself does not seem to me to reduce the pain commensurate to a hanging. There is no need to add pain to the mix. We decry "terrorists" incessantly, but why insist that the condemned be terrorized in addition to being deprived of life...to spread terror among those who read about our methods of execution? Knowledge should be enough under our law; promulgating any degree of terror I should think uncharacteristic of the governance Americans desire in our world today. Pain should be "escaped" for the sake of the unjustly accused. The notion seems to be that since death is the maximum...adding a huge dose of unnecessary pain will not increase the karma entailed in an unjust judgement. If that's the assumption...there is no reason I can see to back it up. Depriving life could never be truthfully described as an insufficient punishment for any crime [at least if Jesus was right re who rightfully should do the judging]. Insisting on adding pain...on top of already unnecessary pain...is more than bizarre, which is why for instance Radio Havana Cuba kept on reporting this story to the world.
IF (I say if) we know embryos are going to be terminated, to me the logic appplies there as well. I don't know how you could inject enough of that stuff Limbaugh liked to gobble without impacting the mother's own circulation, but to me it seems we should at least attempt to FIND a way...or another means BY WHICH PAIN IS ESCAPED. Please recall for a moment the means our civilization deployed the other day to determine if there's water on the south pole of the moon.
The main objection I have to the death penalty is that as long as it is on the books it can be, and will be, occasionally administered to the innocent. It is actually cheaper to lock someone up for the rest of their life than it is to go through all the appeals that are necessary to supposedly insure that an innocent life is not taken. Even with the appeals an innocent person is occasionally killed by the state.
The death penalty is an anachronism that we should only read about in history books, not in the pages of our current newspapers. If someone is exonerated by new evidence after a lengthy incarceration an apology can be made and some kind of compensation offered. The death penalty is not about justice, it is about revenge.
The Innocents Project via use of DNA has demonstrated many times that people on Death Row were innocent. In some states, their actions and those of independent defense lawyers to present such evidence was denied. If vague memory serves, one such case not long ago went to the Supreme Court. My point is that for political and perhaps also economic reasons, too many states have resisted the exoneration of the wrongly convicted even when they agreed that the conviction was wrong.
Yes, the death penalty is a ritual for the peasants. But there is a sense, is there not, that we are all peasants. Is that not why the top one per cent of our population is trying to shield itself from any such association with the bottom 95 per cent! After all, we know that Dubya is guilty of international war crimes, etc.
The State shields its sanctioned criminals from prosecution while it refuses to exonerate those it knows to be innocent (including at Guantanamo).
***
Concerning the alcohol swab administered to the executable victims of our Justice System, now that you mention it, I had a flashback to having seen that in a film. Sort of proves my contention that those performing executions are medical personnel who may have taken an oath to First Do No Harm.
One final question: given that three-drug elixer of death which probably perfuses, can the executed be valid organ donors? What happens to their bodies? Any investigative reporters left out there?!
Eat the State?
-30-