Oklahoma Botched Execution - Clayton Lockett took 45 Minutes to Die

originally posted by: kimar
a reply to: InTheLight

I saw a news report where it was stated that he was injected in both sides, if this is wrong I apologize for my incorrect statement.

The point remains that the problem was with the cocktail. The first chemical was supposed to render the individual unconscious. The individual was said to be unconscious, but three minutes after this was declared he displayed signs that this was not the case. The fact that a (non-indepedent) investigation will take place and the other execution was stayed shows that there is doubt on the part of the officials that the problem was vein failure.

No, an investigation is standard to do when things go wrong, regardless the suspected cause.

The benzo used is a sedative/hypnotic that is commonly used to sedate and cause anesthesia. If a vein infiltrated, it would, as so intelligently explained by InTheLight, keep the medication from going directly into the blood stream and causing a delayed and incomplete effect.

Of course it is also possible that the medication was flawed but the more likely explanation is the IV infiltration which is actually quite common. An investigation and review of procedures will likely shed light on that. If there was an error in the medication, I would guess that it was a labeling error where they gave a dose that was less than they thought it was because, according to the article, he did have some of a sedative effect.

a reply to: InTheLight

www.npr.org...

In all likelihood, the executioner who inserted Lockett's IV — and, in Oklahoma, an IV is inserted into both arms...

We say, "life is precious" and then kill those who are too damaged and/or ignorant to know better... the death penalty is wrong.... and on the practical side, it costs far more than incarceration. Sanctioned killing by the state is scary evil and a slippery slope.

It's also very true that many, if not most, of the folks waiting to die by our collective hands are, in fact, innocent of the murder they're there for.

It is a conundrum that so many folks violently opposed to abortion are for the death penalty... I thought God was the ultimate judge in their view?

Now I know there are some scary, horrible people out there and my knee jerk reaction would be to put a bullet behind their ear and be done with it and sleep better... but it is not the right thing to do.

It's pretty darned final and these same folks who question the state and it's workings somehow trust it to figure out who is guilty and who is not... all the time?

If the bureaucracy of the state goofs up once, the death penalty is invalid. It has... and will.

To make it simple, imagine yourself or a loved one waiting to die as described in this article... and really, life in prison is pretty bad... maybe, arguably worse. Get your revenge and safety that way.

a reply to: NavyDoc

Because what that animal did to that girl deserves nothing but hatred and vitriol. Many of us find any sympathy for such an animal just as disgusting as you say you feel.

Well I feel sympathy for you. You're obviously consumed by anger, hatred and bitterness.

It's quite sad really...

"Capital punishment is the most premeditated of murders."


"I do not believe any civilized society should be at the service of death. I don't think it's human to become an Angel of Death."


"I have never heard a murderer say they thought about the death penalty as consequence of their actions prior to committing their crimes."


"To take a life when a life has been lost is revenge, not justice."


"What says the law? You will not kill. How does it say it? By killing!"


"The punishment of murder by death is contrary to reason, and to the order and happiness of society, and contrary to divine revelation."


"I've been haunted by the men I was asked to execute in the name of the state of Florida. This is premeditated, carefully thought out ceremonial killing."


You can't reconcile being pro-life on abortion and pro-death on the death penalty.


"You believe an eye for an eye until you are put in that situation. If they kill those guys, it really doesn't mean much to me. My father is gone."


"To top it off, for those of you who are interested in the economics, it costs more to pursue a capital case toward execution than it does to have full life imprisonment without parole."

"Oh no! A lifelong criminal that raped, beat, and murdered a girl suffered for a few minutes when he was executed! It's wrong! Its unconstitutional! His rights were violated!"

Cry me a freaking river.

He should have thought about that BEFORE doing what he did.

Oh, and the "unconstitutional" part? Others mentioned it. It was for minor crimes receiving harsh punishments, not whether a convicted murderer "suffers" when he pays for his crime.

Personally, he deserved to suffer. He made that poor girl suffer. Feeling sorry for a murderer, especially an unrepentant one, is more cruel to those they have wronged.

Yes for a conspiracy site it's ironic how many are trusting the mainstream media sight unseen and jumping on the bandwagon yes, in a thirst for blood no less.

There is no way to tell how many of the over 1,000 people executed since 1976 may also have been innocent. Courts do not generally entertain claims of innocence when the defendant is dead. link

At least 4 percent of all people who receive the death penalty are innocent, if a new study is right. link

Not only do we have botched executions, but after that injection it's too late for the possibly innocent. That's why I'm against the death penalty. That's like destroying evidence.

What if your son, daughter, mother or father was wrongfully charged with a capital crime, found guilty, sentenced and executed, and then they botch the execution and they suffer even more?

I'm not proposing anyone's innocence or guilt, but it's horrific how things are done.

I don't care. No sympathy and if it took twenty four hours for him to slowly, painfully die...fine. You want to stop crime by these animals...these non-humans? Let them suffer and broadcast it on TV at prime time. Hell...make it a law that people have to watch it. You don't fight evil like this "man" with good will or sympathy. You fight evil with evil. Or even better...you fight evil with even more extreme evil. That doesn't make you evil...but it does solve the problem. You can't scare evil by throwing marshmallows. You scare evil with a darker evil. Then...they consider not acting.

Oops...almost forgot. In my humble opinion.

originally posted by: Indigent
a reply to: beezzer

Personally, a firing squad would be cheaper and more cost effective.

More humane too...

Why be humane to sub-human rapists and murderers, do their victims die in a humane manner?

2nd

a reply to: Ironclad2000

To prove you aint a sub-human?

originally posted by: WeAreAWAKE
I don't care. No sympathy and if it took twenty four hours for him to slowly, painfully die...fine. You want to stop crime by these animals...these non-humans? Let them suffer and broadcast it on TV at prime time. Hell...make it a law that people have to watch it. You don't fight evil like this "man" with good will or sympathy. You fight evil with evil. Or even better...you fight evil with even more extreme evil. That doesn't make you evil...but it does solve the problem. You can't scare evil by throwing marshmallows. You scare evil with a darker evil. Then...they consider not acting.

Oops...almost forgot. In my humble opinion.

I'm not sure I know where to start with this... dark and unpleasant comment. NO. Just... no. If you go down that insane route then you'll end up with executing people by public mutilation and torture. When carrying out executions the State should make sure of two things (if it has to descend to barbarity in having capital punishment in the first place). First - is that person guilty? This is important because I've lost count of the number of people who have been released from Death Row after DNA evidence cleared them of the crimes they were in there for. Second - can they be executed in as fast and humane way as possible? Why fast and humane? Well - if you're going to kill someone then kill them. Don't prolong it - the State should not torture. No cruel and inhuman methods of execution - it's in the US Constitution.
You do not descend into insane cruelty to fight evil. That's worse than cruel - it's moronic and cruel.

I like to look at the full story. So let's see what we have here...

A boy who is abadoned by his mother and left with an abusive father who forced drugs on him from the age of 3, taught him to steal, punishing him when he got caught, exposed him to sexual behaviour and porn throughout his childhood and who was probably sexually abused by his brother. Not so surprisingly he is incarcerated at the age of 16 where he is raped by 3 men.

He goes onto commit a truly heinous crime and is sentenced to death and there are people who seem pleased that he had to suffer a botched execution and are even condoning a more torturous execution as the way forward? Seriously who is this going to help, people wired like this aren't thinking about the punishment when they commit these crimes, surely execution would be enough to deter someone if they are going to be deterred?

All I see here is tragedy for everyone involved. There seems way too much focus on vengeance and not on trying to figure out why people get to be the way they are. Of course, if they are a danger to society they have to be kept away, that I agree with, but I am against the death penalty.

originally posted by: formality

Oh, and the "unconstitutional" part? Others mentioned it. It was for minor crimes receiving harsh punishments, not whether a convicted murderer "suffers" when he pays for his crime.
.

Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted.

To me that's pretty clear cut.

I don't see any exceptions or buts?

Yes you can Imprison

You can Execute

But you can not torture and you can not inflict slow painful deaths;

originally posted by: Kram09
a reply to: NavyDoc

Because what that animal did to that girl deserves nothing but hatred and vitriol. Many of us find any sympathy for such an animal just as disgusting as you say you feel.

Well I feel sympathy for you. You're obviously consumed by anger, hatred and bitterness.

It's quite sad really...

No, it's a demand for justice. I feel sympathy for people who cannot stand up for what is right and who seem to care more about the criminal than the victim.

originally posted by: crazyewok

originally posted by: formality

Oh, and the "unconstitutional" part? Others mentioned it. It was for minor crimes receiving harsh punishments, not whether a convicted murderer "suffers" when he pays for his crime.
.

Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted.

To me that's pretty clear cut.

I don't see any exceptions or buts?

Yes you can Imprison

You can Execute

But you can not torture and you can not inflict slow painful deaths;

I have to agree with your points.

However, I'd humbly point out that lack of sympathy for this man does not imply an endorsement of state sponsored torture. I'd say the comments in the thread are more hyperbole because of just how evil this man was and what he did.

Also, I'd like to suggest that a systemic error is not a violation of the Constitution. It does need to be evaluated and corrected though.

I didn't read through all 10 pages, but I'm sure the same setiments as mine has already been expressed. I feel so bad the four time felon died in agony like the 19 year od girl he shot then was buried alive. Karma's a bitch. I just hope they botch a few other executions to those who deserve such a fate for their actions,

originally posted by: NavyDoc

However, I'd humbly point out that lack of sympathy for this man does not imply an endorsement of state sponsored torture.

Quite to the contrary, many of the comments in this thread give me the uncomfortable feeling that the persons making them wish that they were the ones doing the torturing, and that perhaps if they were the ones in charge of the execution they would allow the torture to continue rather than put an immediate stop to it the moment it was realised something was wrong.

originally posted by: Kryties

originally posted by: NavyDoc

However, I'd humbly point out that lack of sympathy for this man does not imply an endorsement of state sponsored torture.

Quite to the contrary, many of the comments in this thread give me the uncomfortable feeling that the persons making them wish that they were the ones doing the torturing, and that perhaps if they were the ones in charge of the execution they would allow the torture to continue rather than put an immediate stop to it the moment it was realised something was wrong.

Well, in my experience, most people say things but when faced with a real, live human being, tend not to follow through. As I mentioned, I think that most of those comments are hyperbole cased by sheer disgust and anger at the horrible act that this man did. I don't feel sorry for him at all, but I must agree with Ewok that we really do not want state sanctioned torture. We should take out the trash efficiently and not make a mess of it.

In addition, they couldn't have put a stop to it. Once the IV line infiltrated, the medication was delivered and it was a lethal dose, it just took longer to have it's effect because it was not directly injected into the bloodstream. There is really nothing one can do apart from intubation and putting him in the ICU on a ventilator and supported his cardiac function with pressors and anti-dysrythmics until the medications wore off the next day. What would have been the point of that exercise?

originally posted by: NavyDoc
What would have been the point of that exercise?

At the very least it would be a symbolic gesture to the world that the US doesn't sanction torture. Instead they allowed the torture to continue well past the point where they should have requested urgent medical attention to prevent the torture continuing.

originally posted by: Kryties

originally posted by: NavyDoc
What would have been the point of that exercise?

At the very least it would be a symbolic gesture to the world that the US doesn't sanction torture. Instead they allowed the torture to continue well past the point where they should have requested urgent medical attention to prevent the torture continuing.

One could argue that intubation and a day on the ICU on a vent would have prolonged his misery even more.