Louisiana to use controversial lethal injection drugs

[LSN80]

Mere weeks after an Ohio inmate took 24 minutes to die in a controversial execution that was labeled "torture" by the family of the now deceased, death row inmate Christopher Sepulvada of Louisiana is expected to be put to death on February 5 with the same drugs used in the Ohio execution.

http://www.cnn.com/2014/01/28/justice/louisiana-execution-drugs/index.html?hpt=ju_c2

The controversy that has arisen began when European manufacturers blaced a ban on their drugs being used in executions. The Danish-based company Lundbeck, which manufactures Pentobarbital, is included in this ban. WIth pentobarbital being the go-to drug for executions for some time now, states like Ohio and Louisiana have had to scramble to find replacement drugs to fit protocols for lethal injection.

The result has been the introduction of the combination of potent pain-killer Hydromorphone, more commonly known as Dilaudid, and Midazolam, a sedative/anxiety/seizure medication most commonly known as Versed. What would seem an addicts' dream has become a center of controversy due to Dennis McGuire, the Ohio inmate who was put to death using the combination of the two on January 17th.Gary Clements, a lawyer for Christopher Sepulvada, had the following to say with regards to the February 5th execution upcoming for his client.

"We're not challenging capital punishment in his case ... just how it's going to be done."

To get the full picture, I believe, it's important to look at the crimes of which McGuire and Sepulvada were convicted and summarily sentenced to death. In McGuire's case, he was tried and convicted of the 1994 rape and murder of 22-year-old Joy Stewart, who was seven months pregnant. Stewart was found with her throat slashed and to have been sodomized.

In Sepulvada's case, he was convicted 22 years ago in the murder of his six year old step-son.

So, what happened when McGuire died that lead to his family labeling it torture? Columbus Dispatch reporter Alan Johnson wrote the following regarding the execution:

"The whole execution process took 24 minutes, and McGuire appeared to be gasping for air for 10 to 13 minutes. He gasped deeply. It was kind of a rattling, guttural sound. There was kind of a snorting through his nose. A couple of times, he definitely appeared to be choking."

Call me cynical, but there's a part of me that thinks the way McGuire died was a good thing. I don't care that he (supposedly)found Jesus in prison or apparently made peace with Stewart's family. He raped and slit the throat of a woman who was seven months pregnant. If he suffered a bit as he died, so what? With one act, the man caused immense suffering by ending two lives, and undeniably changing the lives of the Stewart family and the child's father forever.

McGuire's attorney, Allen Bohnert, had a slightly different take on the execution then I.

"At this point, it is entirely premature to consider this execution protocol to be anything other than a failed, agonizing experiment. The people of the State of Ohio should be appalled at what was done here today in all of our names. Ohio, like its citizens, must follow the law. The state has failed."

What say you, Wrestlezone? Are you appalled at the way and manner in which Dennis McGuire died?

Is the inability of Louisiana to get Pentobarbital a valid reason to switch to the controversial Ohio cocktail?

This raises issues of 'cruel and unusual' punishment, of course, and arguments altogether regarding the death penalty as well. For me, it's important to remember that the victim's rights don't die with them, and if the suffering of sadistic killers even makes a dent in crimes as these, I don't have a problem with it, regardless of the rights their attorneys believe are being violated.

Stories such as these always generate discussion of the viability of the death penalty as a whole, and while I'd like to keep this thread from devloving into a debate over the use of the death penalty, I'm interested in opinions regarding it as well.

For or opposed to the death penalty?

As always, I welcome your thoughts and discussion regarding the subject manner.

 

[klunderbunker]

I'm with LSN on this (as usual): what difference does it make if someone being executed suffers for a bit? It was ok with them to make their victims suffer before killing them, but it's not ok for suffer at all because it's violating their rights? If you want to make it as quick and painless as possible, bring back the guillotine and don't let them face it. Quick, FAR cheaper and painless.

I see no reason why taxpayers should have to pay to make sure this guy is comfortable for the last few seconds of his life. Is that inhumane? I don't particularly care if it is or not. If you're going to use the death penalty, use it rather than spending 22 years worrying if the guy is going to be executed properly (and yes I'm aware most of that time is spent on appeals. Either execute him or don't but cut the time down).

 

[Mighty NorCal]

I have a good idea for a humane "lethal injection"....inject a bullet into the back of someone's brain, via a 9-mil handgun. Or bring back the gullotine, like KB said. We over-complexify (not a word) things like this, and bad things happen, like they did to that guy in Ohio.

As for the death penalty in general, no I dont agree with it, because most of the time, death is far too good for these individuals. As in the case of the ohio man, they should have turned the woman's husband loose on the man with a large hammer, or something of the sort. Weekly.

 

[Mustang Sally]

Are you appalled at the way and manner in which Dennis McGuire died?

Not appalled, no. I don't really care about how a person who has taken life from someone else manages to die himself. Still, there's a school of thought concerning imprisonment that believes it's okay to furnish prisoners with booze, women and cable TV: treat 'em as well as you want, just keep them separated from society....i.e., don't let him come into my back yard to do the crappy things they've proven themselves capable of doing.

I don't subscribe to that way of thinking; I believe the person is in prison to be punished....and punishment should amount to more than letting him/her live a life free of responsibility as opposed to how the rest of us have to make it through life. Of course, loss of one's personal freedom is a tremendous punishment; if people realized it before they committed crimes, it might give a few of them cause to pause. Maybe.

So, when it comes to death, I don't know that it's fitting justice to make them die hard. At that point, there are no further lessons for the person to learn; he's about to be deprived of the most precious thing anyone can have......life.

Make it easy, make it quick.....and get the bastard out of here.

 

[jmt225]

I have a good idea for a humane "lethal injection"....inject a bullet into the back of someone's brain, via a 9-mil handgun.

Yes, exactly.

In a perfect World, this would be the way to execute someone, and it would take place immediately after the trial, not 20 fucking years later, especially when in this day in age DNA evidence makes it near impossible to wrongly convict someone on a case like this.

I am 100% for capital punishment and always will be, but at the same time, I'm 100% against any form of torture. If someone's crime is awful enough for him to be sentenced to death, then send his ass to the grave in the quickest, most harmless way possible and it's as Norcal suggested, a quick gun shot to the back of the head.

 

[Jack-Hammer]

The death penalty is an issue that I've gone from being a staunch supporter of to straddling the fence over the past several years. One big reason for my change of heart has had to do with my job as a corrections officer; I've seen people get run over by the system a good number of times over the years. There are inmates housed in my facility that, based on evidence that I've personally read & looked over, including court transcripts, who either shouldn't be there or who's sentences should be greatly reduced.

Judges and district attorneys sometimes use certain cases to push their own agendas rather than serving the interests of justice. If it's an election year and a judge wants to show voters that he/she takes a hardnosed stand against drugs, he/she may very well decide to make an example out of someone. For instance, in Kentucky, first degree drug possession is defined as possessing any amount of methamphetamine, cocaine, heroin, LSD, GHB, or any narcotic classified as a Schedule I or II substance. If you're convicted, the penalty you face often depends upon prior criminal history. If someone with a clean criminal history is charged with possession in the first degree, it's a Class D felony and faces 1 to 5 years in prison if convicted. One inmate, who's been housed here for almost 2 years, was given the full 5 year sentence for possession of a quarter of an ounce of cocaine. He had no prior criminal history, not even so much as a parking or speeding ticket, but he won't have a parole hearing until he's served 3 years. Death penalty cases are an even bigger opportunity for ambitious judges or DA's to strut their stuff.

In this particular case, if there's no doubt whatsoever that Sepulveda committed the crime he was convicted of, then I feel more at ease. For me, personally, I don't feel I have the right to decide who should live or die, but that's just what I hold myself to rather than others. DNA can often be the difference between guilt & innocence.

Since 1989, there've been 312 convictions overturned due to DNA testing, 18 of which have been death row inmates. For most of these exonerations, it's taken many years of jumping through one legal hoop after another just to get the courts to run DNA tests. All the I's & T's have to be crossed, all the various procedures have to be followed, a hearing for this has to be set up, a hearing for that has to come next, etc. By the time all the procedural red tape is finished, years have passed by and, for some, the date of their executions aren't far off.According to The Innocence Project, the average amount of time these 312 exonerated people have served in prison is 13.6 years. If there's DNA evidence that suggests someone else may have done the crime, then a judge often decides if all the various legal niceties and technicalities are in place before the DNA can be tested and offered as evidence. That's especially true pertaining to older cases regarding convictions that happened when DNA testing was in its infancy.

If it sounds like I don't trust the system, it's because I'm smart enough to know that mistakes do happen, they happen more than we probably know about and they can happen to ANYBODY. Sometimes the mistakes are honest, good faith mistakes without any degree of malicious intent by judges and prosecutors. Some amends can be made to a wrongly incarcerated person, but that's not the case when someone is executed. It's easier to have strong faith in the system if it hasn't sat on your head or if you haven't seen it sit on the heads of a lot of others. That's why in death penalty cases, in my opinion, there should be as close to NO DOUBT as is possible.

The law says that a person is innocent until proven guilty, but that's not how it works in the eyes of everyday people. If someone is charged with a crime as serious as murder, how often have you heard someone say something like "I hope they fry his ass" when they have absolutely no knowledge of the case whatsoever? They know that someone has been charged with it so, to them, that means the person is guilty; or they feel that somebody needs to pay and this poor sap is as good as anyone else, so long as it isn't them or someone close to them.

 

[nightmare]

If his family or reporters would have not been witness to the execution, would this have made the news? Not likely. Torture is a funny word to use in these cases, especially when torture is something they were actually spared. 24 minutes? How long did he spend actually torturing his victim?



It is terrible to have to let go of a family member, let alone watch an execution of one- but it does not change why he was there. It raises the question of how it should be handled in the future, but not for the right reasons. Who cares if they suffered. Why show mercy in death to those who gave none in life?


As has been said- we spend too much time keeping these people alive. Norcal has it right. End them & end them quick. Why should we waste time and money to keep alive & or humanely execute people who had no regard for human life? None of these people took 'doing things nicely' in regard when committing their crimes so why are we bothered with making sure they get the nice way out? Especially when some of these crimes are far from humane in the first place.

 

[Eyebrows]

I see no reason why taxpayers should have to pay to make sure this guy is comfortable for the last few seconds of his life.

I've read that it's cheaper to incarcerate somebody for life without chance of parole than it is to execute somebody. The execution is cheap but the trial process is that much more expensive in capital cases.

It'd be interesting to know what the breakdown was on the votes from the USA and votes from Europe. I'm against the death penalty for a number of reasons.

1. If what I read is true it's not cost effective.
2. It is a complete finality. The person is dead, thus removing any punitive action against the criminal
3. There's the chance of innocent people being killed.
4. It's open to abuse. Perhaps not in the US but if you look at the other countries with the death penalty it's mostly corrupt governments ala North Korea or developing countries with antiquated views. Some countries have the death penalty for homosexuality.
5. From a sociological perspective, a Criminal Justice System should be based on reperations and paying for crimes (I don't mean in a monetary way) not on the idea of gaining revenge.
6. It doesn't adequately work as a deterrent.

As for the method, just make it quick. These people have families and the families are not to blame. If you dragged an execution out, even if they were a monster, you're effectively punishing a bunch of innocent people by making someone watch their son/daughter/father/mother/husband/wife die a slow, agonising death.

 

[LSN80]

I've read that it's cheaper to incarcerate somebody for life without chance of parole than it is to execute somebody. The execution is cheap but the trial process is that much more expensive in capital cases.

You read correctly, but the expense isn't in the trial, it's in the appeals. Did you read how long both men had/have been on death row for? Over 20 years, both. That's not expedient justice, that's an affront to the system, in my eyes. If they've proved beyond a shadow of a doubt with concrete, DNA evidence that rules out anyone else, or there's a confession, and it's determined they're worthy of death, do it.

As for the method, just make it quick. These people have families and the families are not to blame. If you dragged an execution out, even if they were a monster, you're effectively punishing a bunch of innocent people by making someone watch their son/daughter/father/mother/husband/wife die a slow, agonising death.

If I didn't make it clear in my opening post, I will here. This wasn't supposed to be a long, agonizing process. The injection of a heavy opiate such as Dilaudid and a strong benzodiazapine like Versed, in theory, should end a life quickly, and, as I said, an addict's dream. In other words, in theory, they should go to their final rest in ecstacy. However, the inherent danger involved is that it was a first-time usage of a new mixture, because the drug normally used in executions in Ohio was banned by the European manufacturer that produces it for usage in executions in the United States. No matter what testing is done by experts, there's truly no way to tell how things will go until used on a live person. Here, it appears, it didn't go well.

To repeat, I only included the part about the death penalty because it always becomes an issue in situations such as these when discussed, but here, the lawyer for the man to be executed isn't even contesting the execution.

Instead, he's contesting the means with which it's to be done, because of the problem with the drugs causing suffering for the man executed in Ohio. But Louisiana's criminal justice system has determined it to be viable, and after they've tolerated appeals for so long, it's hard to put much value in such an argument. The man is going to die of lethal injection either way, and if he suffers a little bit, forgive me if he doesn't receive my sympathies.

 

[The Butcher]

"Many that live deserve death. Some that die deserve life. Can you give it to them, Frodo? Do not be too eager to deal out death in judgment. Even the very wise cannot see all ends." -Gandalf the Grey

The better man in me agrees with that quote wholeheartedly. I know that I am in no way qualified to mete out death, even to those who seemingly do not deserve to live. My baser instincts, however, compel me to feel that murderers, rapists, pedophiles and the sort not only deserve to die but deserve to die in such a way that returns every evil act they've committed back on them tenfold. Having witnessed death firsthand and having a spiritual side make capital punishment a complex issue for me, and my higher and lower selves may never completely reconcile on the issue. I won't be applying for any executioner positions anytime soon, I'm sure of that.

That part of the conversation out of the way, I was not appalled by how McGuire died. Frankly I was more appalled by the state in which I reside executing a foreign national without the least concern for precedent or diplomatic fallout, but that's a different discussion. For McGuire, the death penalty was decided upon, and that's what he got. Injection, electric chair, hanging, firing squad- the endgame is all the same. I don't think that death row inmates should suffer when put to death, but I can't honestly say that I care if they do. Again, I'm of two minds about it, but 99.9% of the time they both have more pressing concerns. So, if Louisiana wants to use the controversial concoction, so be it. I'm just glad such things aren't my call.