Texas execution - DNA evidence debunked 10 years on

[Rolfe]

A link I found about this.

It's not that I didn't know all that, but that paper puts everything together, and into perspective.

Barbaric is a massive understatement.

Rolfe.

 

[Dr. Keith]

This is not entirely accurate.

Capital punishment for someone of the periphery of a Felony Murder who never intended to kill was prohibited by Enmund v. Florida, 458 U.S. 782 (1982). It isn't completely that simple, as Tison v. Arizona, 481 U.S. 137 (1987) allows capital punishment for felony murder when the person is heavily involved in the underlying felony and exhibits severe recklessness as to human life.

If, as far as he knew, his accomplice was going to just commit a robbery rather than kill he is guilty of felony murder but giving him the death penalty would be illegal.

So the DNA issue is absolutely essential to life or death in this case.

Thanks for the clarification. It is not my area of law. The devil really is in the details and a new trial would have addressed these issues. As I mentioned, the error points to a fallible system whether this case is a failure or not.

Because this isn't an area of law I have a lot of comfort in, the portion of my post you quoted was mainly trying to point out how the person I was quoting was misrepresenting the other posters position. The position seemed clearly stated previously, yet was being remolded into a fairly obvious man of straw. That really doesn't help move the discussion into the issues that you so accurately raised. The actual issues that should have been addressed at a new trial.

 

[I Ratant]

That's very frightening. So in short, if you commit a robbery with other people, and one of them kills an innocent bystander without your knowledge or consent, you could be executed for that ? Sounds a bit weird.

.
Mother warned you about falling in with evil companions!

 

[Rolfe]

It's possible you've used these chemicals to kill things and said it was horrific. I thought I could find out why.

But forget it, apparently your horror has little to do with the chemicals themselves.

Thanks, I don't have time to read that now but I will try to.

I think you should read it because it sets out the position extremely well.

My horror has a great deal to do with the chemicals themselves. Vets are taught as students that the use of curare-type drugs in euthanasia is inexcusable, and why. And that potassium is only acceptable for use during surgery, on an already-anaesthetised animal (it's used if a vet finds something inoperable during exploratory surgery, and the decision is taken not to allow the animal to wake up - and even then, usually only in animals so big that simply administering a bit more anaesthetic isn't necessarily going to do the job).

The USA should be thoroughly ashamed of itself.

Rolfe.

 

[quadraginta]

And in more recent news, Jeffrey Landrigan was put to death in Arizona several weeks ago after a Federal Circuit Court stay of execution was lifted by the SCOTUS. The stay had been ordered because Arizona had run out of sodium thiopental, the first stage drug in the three step process, and could not find a FDA approved U.S. made replacement.

So they got it from the U.K.

Apparently the Circuit Court felt that using a non-FDA-approved source for the same drug might constitute cruel and unusual punishment. Third world countries can't be depended on for reliable drugs.

Shortly afterward a civil rights group in that same barbarian country started agitating to prevent the sale of drugs to the U.S. for the purpose of killing people. A British company would not have been able to sell it to a member nation of the E.U. for that purpose.

Savages. No concept of civilized justice.

 

[Rolfe]

I disagree with one statement (from the AVMA) in that article - that pentobarbitone is the best method for destroying large animals such as horses. It's not. The circulation isn't so quick, the larger body can twitch much more dangerously than a dog or cat, and I really, really don't like it. We deal with large animals here, and I won't use pentobarbitone on an adult cow, for both humanitarian and safety reasons.

The best method for very large animals is a shot to the head, either a captive bolt or a humane killer or a gun. When my pony became terminally ill, I allowed the local knacker-man to do it, under the supervision of a veterinary colleague, because I knew that was the best way for my beloved pet. (Not much "allowing" about it - the other vet made all the arrangements for me, each of us knowing that the other understood that was the best way.)

I've heard vets argue about this, oh dear it doesn't look so nice. Who the hell cares what it looks like. It's how it is experienced by the animal that matters, and instant unconsciousness with no pain or apprehension is the only criterion that matters. Shoot a horse the right way, and it's dead before it hits the ground. If you don't like a little blood, or a bang, be somewhere else.

Rolfe.

 

[TragicMonkey]

As charming as it is to hear foreigners tell Americans they are all horrific barbarians, I'd like to point out that not all the states have capital punishment. The United States is not a homogenous entity; our barbarism is well mixed with our enlightenment. But please, go back to your lovely generalizations. They engender much love here for you, and I'm sure nobody's going to start wondering why people with such a low opinion of Americans continually post to an American messageboard.

 

[Belz...]

.
Mother warned you about falling in with evil companions!

She didn't tell me I could get my hands chopped off because I hanged out with them while they stole something...

 

[dirtywick]

I think you should read it because it sets out the position extremely well.

My horror has a great deal to do with the chemicals themselves. Vets are taught as students that the use of curare-type drugs in euthanasia is inexcusable, and why. And that potassium is only acceptable for use during surgery, on an already-anaesthetised animal (it's used if a vet finds something inoperable during exploratory surgery, and the decision is taken not to allow the animal to wake up - and even then, usually only in animals so big that simply administering a bit more anaesthetic isn't necessarily going to do the job).

The USA should be thoroughly ashamed of itself.

Rolfe.

Thank you, I will read it later today. I don't know much about how those chemicals interact with living tissue so I took the opportunity to ask.

 

[LTC8K6]

I disagree with one statement (from the AVMA) in that article - that pentobarbitone is the best method for destroying large animals such as horses. It's not. The circulation isn't so quick, the larger body can twitch much more dangerously than a dog or cat, and I really, really don't like it. We deal with large animals here, and I won't use pentobarbitone on an adult cow, for both humanitarian and safety reasons.

The best method for very large animals is a shot to the head, either a captive bolt or a humane killer or a gun. When my pony became terminally ill, I allowed the local knacker-man to do it, under the supervision of a veterinary colleague, because I knew that was the best way for my beloved pet. (Not much "allowing" about it - the other vet made all the arrangements for me, each of us knowing that the other understood that was the best way.)

I've heard vets argue about this, oh dear it doesn't look so nice. Who the hell cares what it looks like. It's how it is experienced by the animal that matters, and instant unconsciousness with no pain or apprehension is the only criterion that matters. Shoot a horse the right way, and it's dead before it hits the ground. If you don't like a little blood, or a bang, be somewhere else.

Rolfe.

Can we go back to firing squads then?

We used one recently.

But we don't aim for the head, though...

 

[Suddenly]

Can we go back to firing squads then?

We used one recently.

But we don't aim for the head, though...

Don't laugh. There are studies out there that suggest a firing squad is probably the best way to go all things considered. Here is one that gives it high marks.

What it comes down to is that a being shot doesn't hurt all that much immediately and when the heart is exploded the person blacks out before he can feel any serious pain. It would be like getting punched in the chest. Also, this method is hard to screw up as someone is going to hit the heart.

Lethal injection isn't that hard to screw up, and when it does it is nightmarish torture. When done correctly, injection is almost totally painless, when done wrong it is like being paralyzed and set on fire from within.

 

[LTC8K6]

What about hanging? We used to do that, too. I suppose those can go very wrong, though.

I used to be for the death penalty without question until the Duke Lacrosse case..wherein I learned a little of what garbage can go on in the DA's office.

 

[Rolfe]

As charming as it is to hear foreigners tell Americans they are all horrific barbarians, I'd like to point out that not all the states have capital punishment. The United States is not a homogenous entity; our barbarism is well mixed with our enlightenment.

Well, if the cap doesn't fit, don't wear it. However, I think it's a tad unreasonable to expect every reference to the USA in this context to be qualified by "of course only those states this applies to, and only those of you who're in favour" and so on.

National generalisations occur a lot on the forum, and they're going to go on happening. We get quite used to "Brits" being painted with a pretty broad brush, and quite often even "Europeans". Get over it.

But please, go back to your lovely generalizations. They engender much love here for you,

Well, if Americans are so offended by generalisations, maybe they need to think about the generalisations they perpetrate about other nationalities.

and I'm sure nobody's going to start wondering why people with such a low opinion of Americans continually post to an American messageboard.

Ah, so now I understand. It's not that these barbaric methods of killing your fellow human beings worry you, you'd just rather not hear from people who despise any country that can do such a thing.

Well, perhaps some of us think it's a good thing you do hear these opinions.

And sometimes exposure to a wider range of opinion and experience actually has an effect.

Give it up, Rolfe. On the subject of health care, most people in the US seem about as open to reason as the Pope.

Now, now. I'm heavily in favor of UHC, but was strongly opposed when I first joined this forum. My change of opinion was due, almost entirely, to what I've learned in discussions here.

I'm not holding my breath on the death penalty onr though.

Rolfe.

 

[TragicMonkey]

Well, if the cap doesn't fit, don't wear it. However, I think it's a tad unreasonable to expect every reference to the USA in this context to be qualified by "of course only those states this applies to, and only those of you who're in favour" and so on.

National generalisations occur a lot on the forum, and they're going to go on happening. We get quite used to "Brits" being painted with a pretty broad brush, and quite often even "Europeans". Get over it.




Well, if Americans are so offended by generalisations, maybe they need to think about the generalisations they perpetrate about other nationalities.




Ah, so now I understand. It's not that these barbaric methods of killing your fellow human beings worry you, you'd just rather not hear from people who despise any country that can do such a thing.

Well, perhaps some of us think it's a good thing you do hear these opinions.

And sometimes exposure to a wider range of opinion and experience actually has an effect.




I'm not holding my breath on the death penalty onr though.

Rolfe.

Yes, yes. Americans are evil for executing people convicted of murder after trials and appeals, and Brits are enlightened and just for putting--sorry, I forget, how many bullets it was it?--into the heads of innocent subway passengers. Was it twelve? I seem to recall reading twelve, though of course not all of those were likely in the head. I'm so fuzzy on details, you know how us barbarians are.

 

[ZirconBlue]

I'm not holding my breath on the death penalty onr though.

I don't think "holding your breath" would be an acceptable way to administer the death penalty, either.

(Seriously, I've also shifted from pro- to anti-death-penalty in my time here.)

 

[brenn]

What about hanging? We used to do that, too. I suppose those can go very wrong, though.

I used to be for the death penalty without question until the Duke Lacrosse case..wherein I learned a little of what garbage can go on in the DA's office.

Really? But isn't that a prime example of the adversarial system working, in spite of lies, political ambitions, etc.? I think the Duke case is a pretty good reason to have faith in our system, but we can find many, many more by people who had court-appointed lawyers or no lawyer at all.

 

[Rolfe]

What it comes down to is that a being shot doesn't hurt all that much immediately and when the heart is exploded the person blacks out before he can feel any serious pain. It would be like getting punched in the chest. Also, this method is hard to screw up as someone is going to hit the heart.

More squeamishness. A single shot to the head is the way to go. See the decapitation thread for an interesting perspective on how long intact heads might be conscious for.

Even vets baulk at shooting small animals, but it really is just squeamishness. I see the AVMA disapproves of shooting, but it's hard to see exactly why beyond the ick factor.

Rolfe.

 

[Suddenly]

It's not that I didn't know all that, but that paper puts everything together, and into perspective.

Barbaric is a massive understatement.

Rolfe.

You want barbaric? The original link for this is dead, but here's a heartwarming snippet from Tennessee (I posted about this over at SC in 2007):

Before a lethal injection, the 100-page "Manual of Execution" instructs prison officials to begin by shaving the condemned prisoner's head -- as if preparing him for electrocution. They would also need a fire extinguisher nearby, it says.

....just in case anyone was wandering about how much thought goes into these protocols.

 

[Rolfe]

Yes, yes. Americans are evil for executing people convicted of murder after trials and appeals, and Brits are enlightened and just for putting--sorry, I forget, how many bullets it was it?--into the heads of innocent subway passengers. Was it twelve? I seem to recall reading twelve, though of course not all of those were likely in the head. I'm so fuzzy on details, you know how us barbarians are.

It was seven. I think they were all in the head, actually. The back of his head was blown clean away. It was utterly, completely and totally appalling, unjustified and inexcusable. People should at the very least have lost their jobs for that, I'd have liked to see someone in jail. It was an atrocity of the highest order.

But at least it wasn't deliberate and premeditated.

Rolfe.

 

[TragicMonkey]

It was seven. I think they were all in the head, actually. The back of his head was blown clean away. It was utterly, completely and totally appalling, unjustified and inexcusable. People should at the very least have lost their jobs for that, I'd have liked to see someone in jail. It was an atrocity of the highest order.

But at least it wasn't deliberate and premeditated.

Rolfe.

Like a murder?