The state within a nation that permits execution her refuses medical assistance in dying. That would be a cop-out; too soft a punishment.
They want her to die the way God intended, using a specific cocktail of drugs that knock her out, paralyze her, and then suffocate her in her sleep as a form of revenge. The state assumes this is the appropriate punishment, the words are on the paper; so it is written, so it shall be done.
The alleged rapists at many Ivy-league universities may be able to provide another source for a cocktail of effective drugs.
And, I think someone else mentioned that if the execution fails or is not complete on the same day, they need to provide care until the next attempted execution.
For the same reason enemy combatants move from hated enemy to protected prisoner the moment they surrender. The same reason cops must move from violence to first-aid the moment the situation goes safe (YMMV in America, though).
real answer: a death warrant expires at midnight, or after the execution protocol. after that, should the person still be alive, they return to prisoner status which the state is obligated to provide with medical care.
Because citizens (even criminal ones) have a right not to be subject to cruel and inhumane punishment; and pulling the plug medically is very likely at least one of those. There’s a question of if it is possible to reliably have humane executions, but clearly TN isn’t good at it.
Ok but she asked for different modes of execution and they denied it so a big part is probably bureaucracy.
Because the state fucked up and didn’t want to make sure the drugs they used were fresh.
Basically cause they wanted to save money. But the monkey never curls in your favor.
She also warned them that she had a medical condition that made them ineffective. Unfortunately, the pigs who sign up to administer those drugs are in it for the pain and misery.
I think the question OP means is “Why not just end treatment and let her die now?”
I doubt the medical staff would participate and the idea of an execution is that it’s supposed to be quick and painless.
The same question has crosses my mind too though. Seems super bizarre to decide to do something like this and then pivot to life saving critical care as soon as you fuck up. I read that the people they have to obtain IV access as not well trained so the IVs tend to infiltrate (leak into the subcutaneous tissue) leading to only a partial dose being delivered to the bloodstream.
Could also be that the prison literally cannot buy the drugs they need. A lot of these drugs come from “unknown sources” because medical companies don’t like to sell drugs they know are going to be used for lethal injection.
So, this is going to sound like something an idiot would say, but, I’m honestly curious.
Why don’t they just execute people with a slow overdose of heroin or fentanyl or something? I’ve heard that the actual cocktail isn’t all that comfortable for the victim anyway, so let them drift off to sleep and not wake up. I know there must be a reason, and I’d be really interested to hear it.
Those require a lot more dosage, and don’t kill quickly (which is what you want with an execution). Cops don’t want to give a valid use for these drugs either. Prisons do want to experiment with slowly replacing atmosphere in a sealed chamber with nitrogen, sorta like what they used to do with the gas chamber - but nobody’s tested this as an execution method and no state wants to be the one to fuck it up first.
I mean someone did test it.
The execution is supposed to be the ultimate form of punishment, it’s meant to suck.
No. It’s not. The punishment is ending the life. What you are describing is legally cruel and unusual.
Execution is cruel and unusual so checks out.
(Were this the case in the minds of these law&order judges, all would be struck down by 8th amendment. They are not, so at least one class of informed folk generally disagree.)
Because in those states and among those that support and are involved those executions, the suffering is the whole point, at least to some degree. Anything that makes it more humane lessens the punishment and nobody wants to be seen doing that, because in those minds that means you’re defending murderers and pedo’s and whatever
(I suspect this is largely untrue; this is clearly bad for the politicians and management over the executions, and afaict it has never been politically wise to botch an execution. No faster way to seem incompetent to your ‘law&order’ constituents. Note that inhumane execution methods have been rejected by the courts before, and are a real fast way to get yourself sued.)
