PDA

View Full Version : Neb. Supreme Court: Electric Chair Is Cruel & Unusual Punishment


DaJudge
February 8th, 2008, 04:28 PM
Feb 8, 2:51 PM EST


Court: Neb. electric chair not legal
By NATE JENKINS
Associated Press Writer


LINCOLN, Neb. (AP) -- The Nebraska Supreme Court ruled Friday that
electrocution is cruel and unusual punishment, outlawing the electric chair
in the only state that still used it as its sole means of execution.

The state's death penalty remains on the books, but the court said the
Legislature must approve another method to use it. The evidence shows
that electrocution inflicts "intense pain and agonizing suffering," the court
said.

"Condemned prisoners must not be tortured to death, regardless of their
crimes," Judge William Connolly wrote in the 6-1 opinion.

"Contrary to the State's argument, there is abundant evidence that
prisoners sometimes will retain enough brain functioning to consciously
suffer the torture high voltage electric current inflicts on a human body,"
Connolly wrote.

Gov. Dave Heineman's spokeswoman, Jen Rae Hein, said he is considering
different options, including introducing a bill this legislative session to
replace electrocution with lethal injection. The session ends in April, but the
governor also could ask for a special legislative session later.

"I am appalled by the Nebraska Supreme Court's decision," Heineman said in
a statement. "Once again, this activist court has ignored its own precedent
and the precedent set by the U.S. Supreme Court to continue its assault on
the Nebraska death penalty."

The high court made the ruling in the case of Raymond Mata Jr., convicted
for the 1999 killing and dismemberment of 3-year-old Adam Gomez of
Scottsbluff, the son of his former girlfriend.

Investigators testified that parts of the toddler's body were found at Mata's
home in a freezer, a dog bowl and dog-food bag. Human bone fragments
also were recovered from the stomach of Mata's dog.

Nebraska Solicitor General J. Kirk Brown had argued for the state that the
legal standard a method of execution must meet is to minimize the risk of
unnecessary pain, violence and mutilation, not eliminate it. He said
electrocution meets that test.

But the high court said electrocution "has proven itself to be a dinosaur
more befitting the laboratory of Baron Frankenstein" than a state prison.

Jerry Soucie, Mata's attorney, said he was "really surprised the lengths they
went to lay out in detail what's wrong with electrocution."

Nebraska's last execution was in 1997. Ten inmates are on the state's
death row; one of them, Carey Dean Moore, was to have been electrocuted
in May but the state Supreme Court stopped it less than a week before his
scheduled date because of the case it ruled on Friday.

The court stressed that its ruling Friday did not strike down the death
penalty - just electrocution as the method. In fact, Mata's death sentence
was affirmed by the high court.

Making no mention of an appeal, Attorney General Jon Bruning issued a
statement saying "we'll now move to the legislative process to get a new
method of execution."

The Legislature's most staunch opponent of capital punishment, Sen. Ernie
Chambers of Omaha, has blocked attempts to strengthen the state's death
penalty laws. Opponents of the death penalty have hoped for years
electrocution would be deemed cruel and unusual, effectively leaving the
state without a death penalty.

Last year, a Nebraska bill to repeal the death penalty failed after first-round
debate by just one vote. Bills must go through three rounds before they get
final approval.

The use of the electric chair began to decline when Oklahoma adopted
lethal injection in 1977, said Richard Dieter, executive director of the Death
Penalty Information Center. As more states followed suit, it became more
difficult to justify the electric chair, he said.

While Nebraska is the only state with electrocution as its sole method of
execution, it is still an option or a backup method in nine other states:
Alabama, Arkansas, Florida, Illinois, Kentucky, Oklahoma, South Carolina,
Tennessee and Virginia.

All normally use lethal injection but have electrocution as an option if an
inmate chooses it or in case state courts rule lethal injection
unconstitutional, Dieter said.

Tennessee performed the country's most recent execution by electrocution
in September. Daryl Holton, who murdered four children, chose that method
over lethal injection.

Nebraska's high court said electrocution violated the Nebraska Constitution
rather than the U.S. Constitution, a move Dieter said appeared to shield its
decision from federal review.

"That should end it. Appeals can always be filed, but I think this will stand
and will not be reviewed by the U.S. Supreme Court because they don't
want to get into state courts interpreting their own constitution," Dieter
said.

Chief Justice Mike Heavican wrote in dissent that he did not think
electrocution was cruel and unusual, and that he believed federal courts
could take the case. He argued that the majority's stated reliance on
Nebraska's constitution is misleading because the court based its decision
entirely on federal precedent.
---
Associated Press Writer Oskar Garcia in Omaha, Neb., contributed to this
report
---

ni0h
February 8th, 2008, 05:14 PM
Firing squads work fine.

CapnCrunch
February 8th, 2008, 08:31 PM
They don't want something that causes pain or discomfort? Fine.

What I don't get is why they don't just do the same thing that is done when patients are prepped for OR surgery and just put then to sleep...for good. It's my understanding that going under like that brings a person within inches of dying anyway, and an intentional killing of someone using that means would be very easy to do. I've had a couple surgeries before which had me under general anesthesia and I don't remember any discomfort whatsoever. What little I can remember of it, it was actually quite pleasant. So what gives?

But that's neither here nor there. IMHO, if somebody has done something so heinous as to warrant them a death penalty, I'd prefer they go through a long bout of agony.

My http://www.fivethirty.com/images/2cents.gif

supremebeholder
February 8th, 2008, 08:47 PM
The way I see it, they use a short acting anesthetic first, then they give ?em a paralyzing agent, then comes the potassium to kill the heart, so the argument is that if the potassium doesn?t stop the heart completely, the person dies a slow death and is unable to move or tell anyone that it didn?t work because of the paralysis.

I believe that most arguments against lethal injection are not based on substance, but more on idealism from people who don?t think there is any humane way to kill a person.

I think that any method of execution is okay as long as it is more humane than they way they killed their victims.

Budman
February 8th, 2008, 08:49 PM
You know, I have to say... "The Chair" can not be called cruel AND unusual. Up until recently, it has been pretty common therefore making it usual.

supremebeholder
February 8th, 2008, 08:52 PM
You know, I have to say... "The Chair" can not be called cruel AND unusual. Up until recently, it has been pretty common therefore making it usual.

So with that in mind how can we possibly implement new techniques? Guess it's back to firing squads and beheadings... :D

CapnCrunch
February 8th, 2008, 08:55 PM
I think that any method of execution is okay as long as it is just as agonizing as the way they killed their victims.

Fixed it for you. ;)

supremebeholder
February 8th, 2008, 08:57 PM
I'm just a little bit idealistic. :D

TheCopperCowboy
February 8th, 2008, 09:02 PM
Just strench a rope. Cheap, reusable, efficient and works worldwide, (just ask Saddam). :cool:

Budman
February 8th, 2008, 10:20 PM
So with that in mind how can we possibly implement new techniques? Guess it's back to firing squads and beheadings... :D

I'm just saying that you can not call it cruel and unusual if it is commonplace. You can call it cruel, but not unusual. I am all for finding new and interesting ways to make these scumbags to pay for thier crimes.

jredmond
February 9th, 2008, 09:21 AM
Firing squads work fine.

Dont the Bayliffs carry hand guns? Seems like overkill to use a whole squad to kill one person

4-rocks
February 9th, 2008, 11:59 AM
There are chemicals that when injected into the patient they are awake but can't remember anything when the chemical wears off. Sooooooo, give these guys the chemical and then after they are electrocuted they won't remember it.

CapnCrunch
February 9th, 2008, 03:01 PM
Sooooooo, give these guys the chemical and then after they are electrocuted they won't remember it.

Um...after they are elec...never mind.

DaJudge
February 9th, 2008, 04:18 PM
There are chemicals that when injected into the patient they are awake but can't remember anything when the chemical wears off. Sooooooo, give these guys the chemical and then after they are electrocuted they won't remember it.
Sooooo, put 'em to sleep and let them wake up dead?

4-rocks
February 9th, 2008, 04:45 PM
Yep, won't remember a thing!!!!!!!!!

Yucca-Man
February 10th, 2008, 03:02 AM
I've always wondered why they used sterile needles for lethal injection anyway.

Fawkers don't deserve a nice, peaceful, comfortable ending - odds are most of their victims didn't die peacefully. Never forget that Death Row is reserved for those who have killed at least one other...and usually not in a clean and peaceful way.