| Submit your comments on this article |
| Home Front: Culture Wars |
| Supreme Court sides with Alabama death inmate |
| 2004-05-24 |
| Prisoner said lethal injection is cruel and unusual punishment What in hell are we supposed to do, tickle them to death? The Supreme Court ruled unanimously Monday that a convicted Alabama killer can pursue an appeal claiming lethal injection is cruel and unusual punishment in his case. Justices said that lower courts were wrong to block appeals by death row inmate David Larry Nelson, who was less than three hours from execution last fall when the Supreme Court gave him a temporary reprieve. Nelson’s case had given justices a stark look at how inmates are put to death. Nelson maintained that his veins -- damaged by drug use -- make it impossible to insert an intravenous line without cutting deep into flesh and muscle. The court was using Nelson’s case to decide a technical question of whether last-minute appeals from death row inmates should be allowed in federal courts. Use his femoral artery. Him damaging his veins through self abuse in no way makes his legally adjudged execution "cruel" or "unusual." Justice Sandra Day O’Connor, writing for the court, said that Nelson should be allowed to argue that his punishment would be unconstitutionally cruel unless special precautions were taken. Justices had been told in filings by physicians that if done improperly, the procedure could cause Nelson to badly hemorrhage and suffer heart problems before the deadly drugs kill him. Stop, stop, you’re ripping my heart out! Alabama attorneys maintained it was too late for Nelson to try to stop his execution, arguing that his case was a prime example of a sluggish justice system and the need for limits on appeals. He has been on death row more than 20 years. O’Connor said the court was not going to "open the floodgates to all manner of method-of-execution challenges," as Alabama feared. Nelson’s appeal had prompted legal challenges to the types of drug cocktails used in lethal injections in other states. Fine, then just use an air bubble. Justices have clashed 5-4 in a string of emergency appeals this year from inmates seeking temporary reprieves, on grounds that their own lethal injections would be unconstitutional. Injection is available to inmates in 37 states. Alabama lawyers had said that Nelson should not have been allowed to challenge a procedural part of its death penalty system. O’Connor disagreed. "Merely labeling something as part of an execution procedure is insufficient to insulate it from a (legal) attack," she wrote. The case is Nelson v. Campbell, 03-6821. Yeah, but what about frivolous legal wrangling? Also Monday, the Supreme Court agreed to decide whether a convicted California killer’s religious conversion should have been considered by a jury that sentenced him to death. A sharply divided federal appeals court set aside William Payton’s death sentence in the 1980 rape and stabbing death of a woman, a decision that California officials said "jeopardizes the validity of numerous death penalty cases in California." In trying to sway jurors to spare Payton’s life, defense attorneys told jurors he had made a sincere commitment to God and was a model inmate who could help others through a prison ministry. But jurors were told to disregard the so-called "mitigating" circumstances. Justices will decide if the San Francisco-based 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals set a wrong standard for jury instructions. The case is Woodford v. Payton, 03-1039. Let’s eliminate this whole issue and execute these maggots in a way that has never been "cruel" or "unusual." Just hand these sh!ts over to their victim’s families. I’m sure they’ll come up with something innovative. [/sarcasm] |
| Posted by:Zenster |
| #4 Isn't it ironic that "cruel and unusual" seems to apply as much to the witnesses as the condemned? That is, in addition to it "not hurting" overmuch, it has to "look good." Which is why we no longer hang, electrocute or gas. There are times when they just "aren't pretty to look at." This is actually a serious problem when seen in the system as a whole. For example, if you just kill someone, you might get 10 years; but if you kill someone, and *then* mutilate or otherwise abuse their dead body, you could get life or death. But, if you go into a mortuary and mutilate a dead body, you might just get six months for bad taste. I was horrified by the statement of a juror in a CA capital murder case: "I was willing to give him (the defendant) the benefit of the doubt, UNTIL HE FLIPPED US (the jury) OFF; but that convinced me he was guilty." eek. Personally, I prefer hanging, but electrocution *can't* hurt, because electricity fries the brain faster than pain signals can be xmitted--it's not like getting a house current shock. |
| Posted by: Anonymoose 2004-05-24 5:56:26 PM |
| #3 Wait, it would be cruel and unusual . . . why? His veins? Hell's bells, he ain't gonna be around to worry about it! And what's one more needle? Maybe we should hang him, or put him in front of a firing squad? |
| Posted by: The Doctor 2004-05-24 2:20:33 PM |
| #2 You noticed that too? |
| Posted by: tu3031 2004-05-24 2:17:10 PM |
| #1 Odd. There doesn't seem to be any mention of what the maggot did to get the death penalty. |
| Posted by: Robert Crawford 2004-05-24 1:41:18 PM |