• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

Death row inmate claims allergy to lethal injection

Page 2 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
There is nobody who wouldn't have an allergic reaction to those drugs. I think its the general idea that you have a really really bad reaction to them.
 
Hang him ... or use a guillotine ... nice and quick

654px-Guillotinemodels.jpg
 
What's excellent about this is that it proves that this man wants to live. He is doing everything he can to stay alive, even if that means he will live the rest of his life in prison. That makes executing him much, much more satisfying. Killing a man who has lost the will to live is so...boring. But this man, he wants to live. He wants to live, and that means that when he is strapped down to that table, he will be in complete terror, just like the person he killed all those years ago. Death need not be painful as long as the person dying is afraid of death. Everyone knows this.
 
Binarycow said:
IMHO, the guillotine is the quickest, surest, most preferable way to carry out an execution. Until the blade hits your neck, there is no pain, not from the needle, noose, uncomfortable chair and its strapping,....death comes as sudden as one can imagine. What is the reason governments around the world stop using it? the messy clean up afterwards? I can't imagine the executed would give a rat's ass about that problems.
Click to expand...

well, there is the theory (no one can say either way obv) that you are still alive due to the quick and clean nature of the cut. alive long enough to witness your own body.

there was a story about an executioner slapping a womans (Charlotte Corday?) face after picking up her head and witnesses claimed she looked at him with indignation.

not nice if you're still conscious for even a short time after. although, if you've killed someone, i say just strap you to a life support system in which you cant move, in a liquid your own body temp in the dark and silence for the rest of your life.

costly, but these people deserve it
 
I do not support capital punishment nor do I believe capital punishment is a deterrent to the most heinous crimes that tempt a society to to use capital punishment. But my viewpoint is my own opinion, and in a democracy, majority rules.

But still, I view the Durr defense as absolute bullshit and hypothetical to boot. Just because he MAY develop an allergy to one of the ingredients in the the lethal cocktail does not prove he will. And the overall points becomes moot because he will shortly become dead.

But we can somewhat blame the Ohio legislature for adapting a too rigid one size fits all
cocktail, if the guy has an allergy to one tranquilizer in the mixture, a well thought out law should allow the State to substitute some other tranquilizer the fellow is not allergic to.

Besides, allergies are a well studied question, there are many ways to test for allergies in individuals, these allergies are unique to the individual, and since minute quantities are used in testing, the tests are not painful. So test Durr, and if he is not allergic, there goes his defense.
 
I don't know why they don't use propofol(Diprivan--the Michael Jackson drug of choice) for it. Right to sleep no problems.
 
I disagree with gassing, electric chair, and hanging (only because they are a cruel spectacle that often times fail.. for a while). But every other one of these pieces of shit should be shot in the face by the victim's family (if they so choose).

And I say if he has an allergic reaction, then that's just dandy.
 
http://www.wfmj.com/Global/story.asp?S=12320196
Judge dismisses Ohio inmate's drug law claim

COLUMBUS, Ohio (AP) - A federal judge has tossed out an inmate's claim that Ohio's lethal injection chemicals violate federal prescription drug laws.
Darryl Durr, who is scheduled to be executed Tuesday, argued that the law requires doctors to prescribe and administer such drugs, neither of which happens in Ohio.
U.S. District Court Judge Gregory Frost on Thursday dismissed the case. The U.S. Supreme Court rejected a similar argument brought by death row inmates 25 years ago.
Durr has several other lawsuits pending, including one in which he argues that he could be violently allergic to the anesthetic Ohio uses to put inmates to death.
Durr was sentenced to die for raping and strangling a 16-year-old Elyria (eh-LEER'-ee-uh) girl in 1988.


One step closer. Somebody shoot his lawyer.
 
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100416/ap_on_re_us/us_death_penalty_allergy

: No allergy risk proven for Ohio execution

  • By ANDREW WELSH-HUGGINS, Associated Press Writer Andrew Welsh-huggins, Associated Press Writer – 1 min ago
COLUMBUS, Ohio – An inmate scheduled to die next week for raping and strangling a 16-year-old girl has failed to present enough evidence of an allergy to anesthesia that could affect the execution, a federal judge ruled Friday.
Condemned killer Darryl Durr waited too long to raise the issue of an allergy and then relied mainly on speculation to ask for time to investigate, said U.S. District Judge Gregory Frost.
"Durr presents this court with an unproven allergy that might have an unknown effect on his execution and asks for time to fill in details that may or may not rise to the level of demonstrating a likelihood of success," Frost wrote in the afternoon ruling.
"Speculation is not evidence, however," Frost said.
Durr's attorneys immediately appealed the judge's ruling and a second ruling rejecting Durr's request for more DNA testing.
In an unusual legal maneuver, Durr is arguing that no one knows how his body will react if state officials are allowed next week to inject him with the one lethal drug they now use. But the state, quoting a medical expert, also said there is no proof that an allergic reaction would occur before Durr was already deeply unconscious from the drug.
The worst type of allergic reaction to anesthesia results in death from low blood pressure and impaired breathing, the state added.
"Such effects are irrelevant in the context of an execution because they would occur after the inmate loses consciousness and because the intent is to bring about a rapid death," according to Mark Dershwitz, a University of Massachusetts professor and physician, told the state in an e-mail submitted as part of the state's filing.
Durr had dental surgery in 2004 and a hernia operation in 2007. Durr could have known about the allergy as long ago as 2004 and appeared to know in 2007, Frost said in describing why Durr waited too long to raise the issue.
Durr's lawyers on Friday defended their reliance on information that came mainly from Durr's own recollections of what medical personnel had told him.
"It seems unlikely that a person about to have a surgery would make up information," Durr's attorneys wrote in a court motion Friday.
They argue they need time to collect more information about Durr's medical history.
The state used two separate examinations of Durr's medical records to make its argument opposing the request.
The first was a one-page form referring to an apparent medical procedure in April 2007 that was not part of the records Durr submitted to the court.
That form indicates Durr has no allergies, and that he received hydromorphone, the painkiller prescribed for Ohio's backup execution method.
The state also says medical records submitted by Durr show he received hydromorphone in June 2004 with no problems.
Durr submitted the records Thursday and they were filed under seal Friday by order of Frost to prevent the viewing of personal information.

Also Friday, a federal judge refused to stop the execution based on Durr's request for more DNA testing but referred the issue to a federal appeals court.
U.S. District Court Judge George Smith rejected Durr's claim that the state is violating his constitutional rights by refusing to test for DNA on a necklace found on the victim that Durr says could implicate another suspect.
Experts have testified there would be no DNA on the necklace that Angel Vincent was wearing when her decomposed body was found.
Officials also couldn't guarantee the necklace had been preserved properly as evidence, ruining the chance of obtaining any results that could be used in court. DNA testing of other biological evidence preserved from Vincent's body that was done last year at Durr's request found no DNA other than Vincent's.

Correction: Somebody shoot the lawyers
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top