ON DECEMBER 8, the state of Georgia carried out its fifth and final execution of the year, killing 47-year-old Brian Keith Terrell by lethal injection for a 1992 murder. It was a fight over money, the state said. Terrell forged checks belonging to an elderly family friend, then shot the man after he was found out. But for years Terrell and his lawyers insisted he was innocent — no physical evidence linked him to the crime, and, after three trials, the key witness against him recanted, telling a defense investigator that he had implicated Terrell in order to save himself.
In the end, however, this made no difference to the state of Georgia, nor to the U.S. Supreme Court, which denied Terrell’s final appeal around 11 p.m. on Tuesday. After a prolonged and painful search for a suitable vein — after an hour, the nurse finally stuck an IV into his hand, according to the Atlanta Journal-Constitution — Terrell died just before 1 a.m. He gave no last statement. But witnesses said he mouthed three words to a county sheriff in the front row: “Didn’t do it.”
Terrell was the 28th prisoner to be put to death in the United States since January, and the last of 2015. This made it a relatively slow year for executions. By contrast, 34 people died on the gurney in 2014 and 39 in 2013. The steady decline is part of a longer, well-documented trend: U.S. executions have fallen precipitously since peaking in the late ’90s, while new death sentences are down across the country and are handed out in a narrowing number of jurisdictions. Even in Texas, only three people were sentenced to death this year. Nationally, death row populations continued to shrink in 2015. As many experts have observed, in historical terms, the death penalty is dying.
Yet 2015 was still a wretched and messy year as far as the death penalty was concerned, one that did much to undermine our country’s vaunted claims to “evolving standards of decency.” Missouri executed a man missing one-fifth of his frontal lobe. Virginia killed a prisoner whose appeal for a stay of execution was still pending before the Supreme Court. Amid little public outcry, Texas executed a man named Lester Bower, who insisted he was innocent during his 30 years on death row — and whose case had quietly fallen apart.
States continued to cluelessly tinker with lethal injection, passing new secrecy laws to shield themselves from scrutiny — and relying on those laws to illegally obtain execution drugs from sketchy providers as far-flung as India. (As a backup for unavailable drugs, Utah went ahead and brought back the firing squad.) In Glossip v. Gross, the U.S. Supreme Court gave constitutional cover to the states’ lethal injection experiments, upholding the use of midazolam for executions, despite its short, ugly track record — and telling prisoners it’s their job to find a suitable alternative. (In Missouri, two men now find themselves arguing that they should die in the gas chamber instead of by lethal injection.) And in a particularly surreal display of incompetence and corruption, the state of Oklahoma, fresh off its Supreme Court win, came within moments of killing (the likely innocent) Richard Glossip using the wrong drug — and later revealed it had used the same drug to kill a man in January.
As a case study in death penalty dysfunction, 2015 would be as good a year as any.
THERE WAS SOME GOOD NEWS, of course. Moratoriums remained in place across the country. In Connecticut, which abolished the death penalty years back but kept 11 people on death row, a court ruled that those prisoners should be spared as well. In Nebraska, lawmakers made history by overriding a gubernatorial veto to abolish the death penalty — the first Republican-controlled legislature to do so in decades — prompting Gov. Pete Ricketts to desperately pour his own family money into a ballot initiative that would repeal the repeal.
There were rare instances of accountability for official misconduct: Texas prosecutor Charles Sebesta was disbarred for sending an innocent man to death row, while in California an entire DA’s office was removed from a major capital case after a defense attorney revealed vast and jaw-dropping misconduct in its use of jailhouse snitches.
Six death row prisoners were exonerated in 2015 — both a bright spot and a grim wake-up call — while others were officially pardoned and thus given a shot at compensation for their wrongful conviction. People facing execution were spared at the last minute — in Missouri, home to one of the country’s most active death chambers, Kimber Edwards had his sentence commuted by Gov. Jay Nixon just three days before he was set to die. And last month the Missouri Supreme Court threw out the conviction of Reggie Clemons, whose case became a rallying cry for Amnesty International. Both men faced execution despite grave doubts over their guilt.
As 2015 comes to a close, the number of death row exonerations now stands at 156, though many more people have been released without formally being cleared. Innocence continued to haunt the death penalty this year: “Serious unreliability” was one of the “three fundamental constitutional defects” cited by Supreme Court Justice Stephen Breyer in his remarkable, sweeping dissent in Glossip, which made the case for abolishing the death penalty completely.
Indeed, this year proved a bleak illustration of much of what Breyer argued in his 41-page dissent. One stark example: what Breyer describes as “unconscionably long delays that undermine the death penalty’s penological purpose.” Across the country, prisoners spend so many years on death row they are more likely to die of natural causes than be executed. It’s a slow torture (many on death row live in total isolation), not to mention a betrayal of the promise of “closure” offered to victims.
Among those who died before reaching the gurney in 2015 were Florida prisoners Jerry Wickham (after 27 years on death row) and Clarence Jones (after 26). Another Florida man, Gregory David Larkin, committed suicide on death row. He was the fourth prisoner to do so in the state since 2000. Prisoners died in Nebraska and Tennessee, and, in California, where the execution chamber has been dormant for almost 10 years, at least six death row prisoners died, the oldest at age 70. Most recently, on the night before Thanksgiving, 67-year-old Donnis Musgrove died on Alabama’s death row after fighting for almost 30 years to prove that he was innocent.
For others who lived to see the world outside in 2015, the death penalty demonstrated its cruel reach. After a futile fight for compensation, Louisiana exoneree Glenn Ford succumbed to lung cancer in June, just one year after his release from Angola Prison, where he spent 30 years on death row. In Indiana, a woman named Paula Cooper, who was once the youngest death row prisoner in the country, committed suicide after struggling to survive in a world that still generally saw her only for the crime she committed at 15.
SO WHAT ABOUT the 28 who were actually executed? There’s no denying they represented some brutal and vicious crimes. But they were also emblematic of the lie that we reserve death sentences for the “worst of the worst.” Among those killed in 2015 were prisoners with severe mental problems, people with strong innocence claims, and individuals who were clearly rehabilitated and deserving of clemency.
Take Georgia alone, the state that carried out the first and last executions of 2015. On January 13, Georgia killed 66-year-old Andrew Brannan, a decorated Vietnam veteran who survived extensive combat only to unravel upon returning home from war. He developed PTSD and was diagnosed as bipolar; by the time he shot a police deputy during a traffic stop in 1998, Brannan “was living a marginal, fearful life, living in a primitive homemade shack reminiscent of a bunker in Vietnam,” according to a doctor who examined him. The jury who sentenced Brannan never heard about his trauma or mental illness — persistent problems among those on death row, 10 percent of whom are veterans.
On the night Brannan was executed, The Intercept reported, law enforcement outside the Georgia Diagnostic and Classification Prison in Jackson expressed misgivings over the fact that Brannan had served in Vietnam. Other fellow veterans tried to save his life. “What does putting a man like Andrew Brannan to death say to my generation of veterans?” a man who served in Iraq and Afghanistan wrote to the Georgia Board of Pardons and Parole. “To me, it says that this country can exploit our youth to its gain and then, when it comes time … will discard you like yesterday’s forgotten garbage.”
Brannan was not alone in being executed despite his severe mental problems. Just two weeks later, Georgia killed Warren Hill, a man whose developmental history and low IQ had led him to be diagnosed as intellectually disabled by seven different doctors. In theory, such executions are forbidden. Atkins v. Virginia prohibited the execution of the “mentally retarded” in 2002, while in 2014, Hall v. Florida reined in states’ wildly disparate standards for deciding who qualifies. Georgia’s own standard of proof is the strictest and most absurd among the states: Georgia law dictates that prisoners like Hill must show intellectual disability “beyond a reasonable doubt,” a gross misapplication of a blunt legal concept for the purpose of diagnosing developmental disabilities.
Georgia also reiterated this year its willingness to execute in the face of lingering doubts. Marcus Ray Johnson was denied a new trial and executed in November despite questionable forensic evidence. But in some ways, the execution of a clearly guilty person — Kelly Gissendaner — was perhaps the most disturbing. When I asked one death row prisoner what he considered the low point of 2015, he pointed to her death.
Gissendaner was sent to death row for convincing a boyfriend to kill her husband in 1997. (The boyfriend was given a life sentence.) While on death row, Gissendaner came to embody the ideals of rehabilitation and redemption. She became a “model inmate,” a theologian, and a mentor and counselor to other women in prison. Her supporters ranged from prison officials to the Pope. When Gissendaner’s execution was halted in March due to concerns over “cloudy” execution drugs, it seemed briefly conceivable that Georgia might let her live. But a few months later, the state denied Gissendaner clemency for a second time. She died on the gurney on September 30, singing “Amazing Grace.”
Gissendaner’s death sent a grim message to prisoners across the country. It said that no matter how much you change behind bars, the state will reduce you to your worst mistake. For those facing execution, the death row prisoner told me, it robbed them of hope. “I’m sure it made a lot of men with worse cases feel like they don’t stand a chance with mercy alone.”
“To sum it up,” he said, “her case exemplified the lack of mercy in the American justice system at this time.”
Top photo: Crosses mark the graves of inmates in Huntsville, Texas, April 23, 1997. About 1,300 people from the Texas prison system are buried here, among them 200 who died on death row.
Stories like this one makes my feel Bipolar. I go from having hope to NOT having hope for humanity……
Our incarceration industry is the asshole of our country and all those benefiting should be held in constipation.
Excellent indictment of the death penalty. My friend, Brian Terrell, was executed last week, as described in your article. He was innocent!
I think the execution of Karla Faye Tucker in 1998 said it all. ‘Who cares if they’ve reformed; all we want is your vote. Execute now!’
Only about 20 countries still execute people on a regular basis. It’s seen as a backward practice by much of the world. The top executioners are:
– China
– Iran
– Saudi Arabia
– Iraq
– USA
Notably, in the Americas, the US is the only country that still has the death penalty. But that’s obviously not the only human rights concern that makes the US unique in the Americas.
Since the stupidity of capital punishment can’t be eliminated by common sense, perhaps jurors who vote to execute someone who is posthumously cleared of the accusation should be tried for murder and executed themselves.
The lawyers, judges and cops should be tried not the juries. The juries only get to hear what the first group tells them, and it’s often outright lies.
Executions just let the guilty out of jail before they can serve time for their crime.
Death will come for all of us, it’s not a punishment.
Like mama always said, ” two wrongs dont make a right.” It makes no sense! Its illegal for a person to kill someone but its o.k. to turn right around and do the same thing to that person. What kind of double standard, fucked up message is that?!!! Murder is still murder no matter the reason why its done and as a Christian, NO ONE on this earth has any right to decide and plan the fatal fate of anothe person. ” Thou shall not kill”! The ten commandments.”
Tanya: I’m not religious, but I appreciate your sentiments. The arguments pro and con have seemingly been going on forever. My college minor was Sociology, and I recall a spirited debate about this topic one day in one of my classes around 1968 or so. At one time, I thought we would see a day with the total abolisment of the death penalty, but sadly, no longer have that optimism.
It would be very difficult for the US to rid itself of capital punishment out of principle. The principle would be that the state should have no right to kill people. This conflicts with one of the key ways in which the American empire exercises power: killing people around the world in order to advance its interests.
It is said you are known by the company you keep.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Capital_punishment_by_country
That photo is archetypal, unforgettable. Funerals are not conducted for the dead, but for the living, and this … it makes Wahhabism look like a humanistic reform by comparison.
If this makes Wahhabism “look like – humanistic reform by comparison” to you, you’re either a paid shill for the Saudis or need to get your head checked.
The US is a brutal, violent country no doubt. But if it makes you sympathetic to Wahhabism, you have serious issues. Maybe you’re just ignorant and don’t know what Wahhabism is and the depths of its brutality (which the US has fully supported for their fat, oil-rich Saudi goon friends), but you should do your research before making ignorant, absurd comments like that.
Sorry – I was speaking in reference to funerals only here. I realize that in other ways Wahhabism is a very, very bad thing (indeed, it was so obvious the misinterpretation didn’t come to mind). But if people tore down those numbered crosses out of a belief that the dead simply shouldn’t be memorialized at all, it would be more respectful than this bizarre tableau.
WRT Terrell: Similar to the content that Liliana links to, ATL, but an clearer and simpler summary, IMHO:
Georgia Just Executed A Man For Murder With Shoddy Evidence
I think a mention of two exonerations in 2015 would be in order : Debra Milke and Anthony Ray Hinton. Both cases I took a close interest in.
quote”Georgia law dictates that prisoners like Hill must show intellectual disability “beyond a reasonable doubt,” a gross misapplication of a blunt legal concept for the purpose of diagnosing developmental disabilities.”unquote
note to self.. file under
Great Moments in Living Proof Georgia’s Lawmakers are Descended from 200 Years of Inbred Imbeciles and Morons who would pass scrutiny with an intellectual disability “beyond a reasonable doubt,” notwithstanding their mothers pinching their umbilical cords after failing to let the entire pond scum of their lovers come run down their legs.
ps.. Georgia .. the last retreat of chromasomally aberrant pond scum.
I agree 100% that it is immoral for the state to take a life via capital punishment. Where there is life there is the potential for change and redemptive behavior.
However, I am equally appalled by the horrific waste of human potential that results from abortions each year. Since 1980, roughly 1,580,000, 000 potential human lives have been aborted world wide. Since Roe vs Wade, 58,500,000 million potential human lives been aborted in the United States. Since the passage of Roe vs. Wade in 1973, the presumptive age of fetal viability has moved steadily downward from 28 to 22 weeks (a 22% reduction in just forty years). I can clearly remember the heated debates on both sides of the issue of fetal viability in the run-up to the passage of Roe vs Wade. Pro-abortion advocates categorically denied that the 28 week standard of fetal viability could possibly move downward. Yet here they are, just forty years later, having to admit that the adoption of a 22 week standard may be necessary.
https://www.lifesitenews.com/news/new-standard-of-viability-many-babies-born-at-22-weeks-can-survive-with-tre
In response to the downward trend in fetal viability, pro-abortion activists are attempting to jettison the viability standard altogether. Instead, they are proposing a new standard that only takes into account the moment at which a fetus can “perceive” pain. In advancing this new standard, they are claiming that “fetal perception of pain is unlikely before the third trimester. The third trimester begins at 27 to 28 weeks from conception.”
http://www.factcheck.org/2015/05/does-a-fetus-feel-pain-at-20-weeks/
Given that proposed standard of fetal pain perception becomes law, I am left wondering if the same standard should also be applied to death row inmates. After all, there are drugs that can completely negate the consciousness of pain in any person regardless of age. Thus, a series of injections can result in a painless death for those who have been sentenced to die.
Why should speculative arguments concerning the wasted potential of redemptive inmates be given any more consideration when applied to convicted felons than to unborn babies? After all, the potential for socially redemptive behavior is far greater in those who are best positioned to live much longer lives.
Okay, sounds like we are both old-timers, so let’s discuss this. Are you saying you want Roe overturned and want to go back to criminalizing abortion? You would imprison the doctors and patients? I graduated HS in 1961, and vividly remember one of our more prominent female classmates who came from a wealthy family mysteriously disappearing for an unscheduled “vacation” during the final semester of our senior year. Women in Texas are already butchering their bodies due to the closure of clinics. You okay with that? BTW I think there is a legitimate distinction between called pro-choice vs ,”pro-abortion”. I have escorted two ladies to abortion clinics, but it sure as hell doesn’t mean I relish participating in an abortion procedure. I will, however, support their decision over their bodies and lives to the end.
“I will, however, support their decision over their bodies and lives to the end.”
I do not understand what you mean by this.
I mean I will always support a woman’s choice to abort or not, as it not only affects them physically, but also mentally, obviously, for the rest of their life. I forgot to say that I do concur with your anti-death penalty stance. For me, it is a no brainer. The studies I have seen show it is not a deterrent and I shudder to think how many have been executed and were truly innocent.
Okay then,I now understand your position.
So, you agree then that the potential for a socially redemptive actions lifestyle is not reason enough to fend off state sanctioned death of inmates or unborn human beings?
Sorry –
So, you agree then that the potential for socially redemptive actions is not reason enough to fend off state sanctioned death of inmates or unborn human beings?
I have taken women to the clinic for an abortion in the past and would do it again. I get it that you are anti- abortion, which is evident by not only your words but by your citing stats from a pro-life group, rather than independent research. As others have pointed out, this thread is about the tragedy of the death penalty in this country. I haven’t noticed any domestic terrorists associated with the anti-death penalty camp. Unfortunately, the same can’t be said about yours.
“I have taken women to the clinic for an abortion in the past and would do it again.”
So, you agree then that the potential for socially redemptive actions is not reason enough to fend off state sanctioned death of inmates or unborn human beings?
Karl,
Okay, so you’re really, really against abortion. That is your choice. No one is going to force you to have one. A couple of questions though:
1. How many unwanted children have you adopted?
2. Can I assume that you support the morning after pill, which merely evacuates a clump of cells, not a “baby”?
3. Do you support sex education in schools?
4. Do you support low cost/no cost birth control on demand?
5. Do you support research into male birth control?
If your answer to 1 is Zero and to any of the others is No, then you do NOT oppose abortion, you are just another man with a sick need to control women’s bodies and lives.
Everyone of these questions has nothing to do with the question that I asked. Again, Why should speculative arguments concerning the wasted potential of redemptive inmates be given any more consideration when applied to convicted felons than to unborn babies?
If you’re not doing anything to eliminate the need for abortion, you just don’t care that much. If you really cared about abortion, you would be crusading for better, cheaper birth control, male birth control (you do agree that both parties should take responsibility, right?) and more and better sex education.
We have an easy alternative for the death penalty–long prison sentences.
What is the alternative for abortion other than forcing a woman to bare a child that she does not feel emotionally, economically, or sometimes even physically prepared to have?
Again, Why should speculative arguments concerning the wasted potential of redemptive inmates be given any more consideration when applied to convicted felons than to unborn babies?
Karl : I hope you get something out of hijacking the comment section for your own good. The state ordering the murder of a person and abortion however are as different topics as organic farming and mushroom picking. Free the whales!!
In both instances, it is the state that decides what value it places on human life. In taking exception to the death penalty, one is challenging the assumed right of the state to take the life of a citizen at its discretion. Death sentences are not issued for the purpose rehabilitation; they are intended to punish felons to the maximum degree allowed by law while simultaneously ridding society of any future responsibility for their continued existence. In short, a death row inmate has no natural right to life in the eyes of the law.
The states assumed right to take life is not restricted to convicted felons however. In case of abortion, the state has gone to great lengths in the effort to devise a “viability” standard whereby the interests of the “fetus” outweigh those of the mother. Thus on one day, the state could determine that it is perfectly legal to take the life of an unborn child, but illegal just 24 hours later. The “right” of woman to control her own body is an illusion. She has no more right of self determination then the death row inmate or the men who were inducted into military service; in each instance, the STATE has presumed the right to determine what value IT places on the lives of those who fall under its jurisdiction.
Unless society can uniformly agree that all human life has an inviolable natural right to exist independent of the circumstances that envelope it, the state will always presume the right make a legal determination as to the value it places on human life in a context that best facilitates its own “compelling” interests.
@Karl-because our government is by form and function one that is to secure our rights not eliminate them. Killing innocent/guilty prisoners is not securing our rights.
A woman has a right to remove from her person a parasite, yes? Its my opinion that women are more smarter than men, they are meaner than men, they are nastier than men, they are more devious than men and they are better than men at deciding what they will allow with-in or on their own bodies.
Go to the Philippines and ride public transportation in Manilla. There are kids 6-9 yrs old who walk on and behave as if they own the ride while clearly appearing homeless. Well, they do own the ride because if anyone shows any disrespect to them as they push their way onto a seat or down the walk way, life over. Especially if the person is American. The American thats gurgling on the floor trying to not die from his throat wound is getting all valuables stripped off because thats what Americans are good for there. All others are just left gurgling.
Our country was never meant to be sanitized from the ills of life, gun duels were (in the beginning) the preferred method of settling disagreements. This is where every person makes their own decisions for what ever reason because nobody knows themselves better than themselves. A woman making a decision about her own body is not for you to be a part of.
Well, well, well… this says it all, doesn’t it? Human life reduced to that of a parasite. Your parents must have done a real job on you. The ability to equate human life with that of a parasite was the mean by which eugenicists imposed forced sterilization upon inferior races:
GROSSU: Margaret Sanger, racist eugenicist extraordinaire
The founder of Planned Parenthood would have considered many Americans unworthy of life
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2014/may/5/grossu-margaret-sanger-eugenicist/
Yet that is what an abortion is in your mind, sanitizing the body of a parasite. Last I heard, voluntary sex is the mean by which 99.999 percent of all woman get pregnant. An ounce of prevention…
@Karl-as reprehensible as the abortion procedure is, that fact doesn’t eliminate the woman’s right to DECIDE what is best for her. I don’t know how a woman or a doctor could do anything close to an abortion, it’s beyond my ability to understand the human condition. I love kids and the innocent things they do that are belly aching funny and heart warming. That doesn’t mean that I’m going to allow the implanting of one in me to term because a woman couldn’t or wouldn’t or what ever reason used to force it upon me. That is a side of the reality coin people like you fail to understand and/or accept. Forcing women to do things with their bodies they don’t want would force men to do things with their bodies that they don’t want. If that doesn’t bother you than go for it! You don’t need anyone to tell you what to do or not. If so there are a lot of cults out there looking for suckers like you, people who don’t/can’t think for themselves……
99.999 % of aborted babies are the result of unprotected consensual sex. The time to choose responsibly is before engaging in sex. Approximately 50% of unwanted pregnancies result from consensual, unprotected sex. The very act of making abortion legal caused the number of unwanted pregnancies to skyrocket. Again, the legal right to control ones body is not absolute; one cannot legally commit suicide or take illegal drugs for example. Choice is largely illusion; the genie is out of the bottle. The state has assumed the right to dictate that which one can legally do with their body. Why is it that you believe that women are incapable of making the right choice prior to engaging in sex? Is it that you believe that women are actually incapable of controlling their bodies in a responsible manner?
I completely reject everything you stated in your last comment, completely. Are you an American? In America the right to control ones body is absolute. Your numbers are wrong about pregnancies and abortions and etc, by the way and they are irrelevant. There is not one person that knows if my choices are correct other than me. How the hell would I know if women or you are making correct choices? Is your life so perfect that you believe you can make life perfect for others by making decisions for them?
A daughter of mine went through a Chinese phase in the 2nd grade. We are not Chinese. I was called to school to talk to the teacher and principal about my daughters continued misbehavior. Her class work was perfection but her Chinese was terrible and it was distracting the students. I told them I was aware of it but what could I do? She did everything as a Chinese girl. Then one day she stopped? Was it wrong? I don’t know but she knows.
“In America the right to control ones body is absolute.”
I have given you a number of scenarios where this is not true. It is illegal to commit suicide. The law prohibits third trimester abortions. A woman cannot consume illegal drugs at anytime. Intentionally putting a late stage, unborn child in harm’s way is punishable by law. The stats concerning “pregnancies and abortions” were the result of women polled after having had abortions.
Here is a little thought experiment for you. Picture your daughter in the womb just a day from her birth and then ask yourself if it would have been okay for her mother to unilaterally decide to terminate the birth. Once you have answered that question, picture your daughter two days before and so forth. At what point would you agree that it would have been okay for her mother to terminate the pregnancy. No public answer is required. the question was just asked for the sake of making you reflect.
Your daughter sounds like a real character. You are a lucky man.
Yeah imagen the Chinese girl at the dinner table? It made for some interesting dinners.
The scheduling of drugs took place during Nixons illegal presidency and the drug wars are a complete distraction. People are aware of that now and are demanding change.
My wife’s pregnancies lead to talks. The talks were her telling me what was going to happen. I had no choice. I had no choice. I had no choice.
Your daughter’s imaginings make me laugh. She must be a real joy.
In regard to your wife “telling you” what would happen, one can only hope that she reveres the life that dwells within herself, you, and her daughter enough to avoid having to make such a decision – as she will have to burden the responsibility for that decision alone. Sometimes it takes decades before the full weight of such decisions lead to a deeper understanding of their morally erosive effect.
Sorry, but forcing someone to do labour for someone else, at risk of their lives, without pay, is known as slavery.
The woman will choose, either to stay pregnant or not, it’s not something that the law should get involved with. Except of course, to make sure that the conditions are medically sound. No, that’s not a support for using the law to try to ban abortion by restricting access either.
I find it very interesting that of the five people who have chosen to respond to my question, none had the courage to answer the one question that I asked.
Your have argued that the state should not be allowed to dictate to a woman when it is appropriate to terminate a pregnancy because it interferes with a woman’s (natural?) right to choose for herself what value she places on the human life in her womb. But apparently you are okay with the state making a legal determination as to the value it places human life in the case of convicted felons.
You have not answered the questions and arguments that we have proposed to you. Are you a member of Operation Rescue or similar groups?
No, but I am a conscience driven member of the human race who believes that all natural rights originate from the natural right to life itself. By embracing abortion as a mean of avoiding responsibility for our own actions, we are allowing the state to create or endorse an arbitrary standard by which evolving, womb-dependent human beings are defined as discrete sentient beings that, by such a definition, are entitled to a certain set of legal rights and protections. In order to sustain the claim that all human beings are entitled to a certain set of inviolable natural rights, we must be willing as a society to abandon those natural proclivities that, when unwisely indulged, result in the creation of circumstances that invite state intervention.
Now are you ready to answer the question that I asked? Or, are you going to continue to avoid answering the question that was first put to you?
I answered that question; no.
You totally ignored other questions that I and others posed. My actions speak louder than my words. I want to apologize to Liliana for taking the troll bait, as her column deserves better.
Again, I initially asked one simple question that you and others have refused to address. An honest exchange of opinion relies on mutual reciprocity. Answering a question with a question is nothing more than evasion. Using the issue of abortion in an attempt to gain a better understanding of the standard by which the author (and her readers) oppose state mandated death of convicted felons is central to the discussion. However, it is telling that you have further chosen the cowards route of invoking invective to avoid addressing the double standard at which my question was aimed.
Liliana, ATL:
After a prolonged and painful search for a suitable vein — after an hour, the nurse finally stuck an IV into his hand . . .
The nurse? THE NURSE?!?!
ANA Position Statement Nurses’ Role in Capital Punishment
Much more at the linked source.
Make no mistake. This system is anything but democratic. Totalitarian in that the biggest violators when properly connected are never even charged and no quarter provided ,no matter how obvious the mistake. The justice system serves itself and protects itself. Remove prosecutorial and judicial immunity and this shit stops PDQ.
There are not enough articles like this. The United States penal system as a whole is one of the most corrupt and barbaric institutions that exist in the country today. We need more articles like this to remind us that just because people are in jail that does not make them any less and we should not reduce them to animals because of their worst mistake. Thanks for the great article.
It’s as if every single person involved in a death penalty decision is a lunatic … which, come to think of it, makes perfect sense.
BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!!
perfect. Give this man a prize.