183
submitted 1 year ago by MicroWave@lemmy.world to c/news@lemmy.world

A federal judge who is weighing whether to allow the nation’s first execution by nitrogen hypoxia to go forward next month, urged Alabama on Thursday to change procedures so the inmate can pray and say his final words before the gas mask is placed on his face.

U.S. District Judge R. Austin Huffaker made the suggestion in a court order setting a Dec. 29 deadline to submit information before he rules on the inmate’s request to block the execution. The judge made similar comments the day prior at the conclusion of a court hearing.

Alabama is scheduled to execute Kenneth Eugene Smith on Jan. 25 in what would be the nation’s first execution using nitrogen gas. Nitrogen hypoxia is authorized as an execution method in Alabama, Mississippi and Oklahoma but has never been used to put an inmate to death.

The proposed execution method would use a gas mask, placed over Smith’s nose and mouth, to replace breathable air with nitrogen, causing Smith to die from lack of oxygen.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] iBaz@lemmy.world 7 points 1 year ago

Did he allow his victim to pray and say final words?

[-] Serinus@lemmy.world 61 points 1 year ago

It doesn't matter. We don't do eye for an eye here.

[-] EdibleFriend@lemmy.world 21 points 1 year ago

Literally what the death penalty is. If what you said was true we would be working on rehabilitation.

[-] Dirk_Darkly@sh.itjust.works 9 points 1 year ago

How dare you undercut their platitude with reasoning.

[-] JayDee@lemmy.ml 4 points 1 year ago

The death penalty is not an ultimate punishment for a crime, in it's most logical sense. It is based on a conclusion that an individual is 'beyond saving', evidenced by the actions they commit. Eliminating them from existence is the only guarantee they never do a similar action in the future.

There's plenty of reasons why this reasoning falls apart , though - namely that quite often you can't be 100% sure you have the actual culprit, or that they are actually 'beyond saving'.

[-] EdibleFriend@lemmy.world 5 points 1 year ago

A person beyond saving could still be left in prison for life and at least treated humanly. We kill them because what they did is so bad we want them dead. People try to pretend otherwise but thats what it is. Simple as that.

And honestly I get it. I fully think some people should die for what they did. But, like you said, we run into the problem of how often our shitty legal system gets the wrong person which is why I don't believe in the death penalty despite the fact I think some people should just die.

[-] JayDee@lemmy.ml 4 points 1 year ago

I agree with the first part, though not the second. I doubt most judges view the death penalty as a pointless act of spite, and view it more as a logical removable of an irredeemable agent.

My rationale on it is different. I think that if someone commits a heinous action, they either did it for a logical reason or an illogical reason. If it was logical to commit the act, then that is a failure of the system for creating perverse incentives, and change must occur to remove such incentives. If the person committed the act for illogical reasons, then there is something wrong with them, and the should be treated as someone suffering from something. If the individual is deemed truly "beyond saving" then they are suffering a mental handicap and should be sheltered such that they aren't a danger to themselves or others.

By this logic, there is never justification for a death penalty.

[-] frazw@lemmy.world 16 points 1 year ago

Murderer put to death. Don't do eye for an eye. Hmm OK America.

[-] FaceDeer@kbin.social 22 points 1 year ago

I fundamentally oppose the death penalty, but if a state is going to insist on doing it I want them to do it as humanely as possible. It should never be done as "revenge."

[-] SendMePhotos@lemmy.world 11 points 1 year ago

In one of the articles about this case it was said, "we do not teach those not to rape by raping them."

[-] GrammatonCleric@lemmy.world 10 points 1 year ago

This isn't the Old Testament, fool

[-] EdibleFriend@lemmy.world 17 points 1 year ago

No you're right. America would absolutely never try to base legal decisions on religion. We are so far beyond that.

[-] GrammatonCleric@lemmy.world 6 points 1 year ago
[-] EdibleFriend@lemmy.world 6 points 1 year ago

You are saying that we wouldn't act like that because this isn't the Old testament and I am pointing out that we are trying very fucking hard to treat our legal system that way. That is literally what is happening right this second.

[-] GrammatonCleric@lemmy.world 4 points 1 year ago

No, I made a shallow joke that you read waaaaay too far into. Get a hobby or something.

[-] SendMePhotos@lemmy.world 10 points 1 year ago

Actually, yes. this is Kenneth Eugene Smith, who was convicted in a 1988 murder-for-hire slaying of a preacher's wife. Elizabeth Sennett, 45, was found dead on March 18, 1988, in her home in Alabama's Colbert County. She had been stabbed eight times in the chest and once on each side of neck.

In all actuality, there is no information saying that he did or did not allow this, but I did learn a lot about this case. Turns out two guys were hired to kill this pastors wife because the pastor had an affair (doesn't make sense but it is what happened). These two guys, one of them stole things to stage a burglary. He was put to death in 2010 and his last words were to her sons, "I'm sorry. I don't ever expect you to forgive me. I really am sorry."

The other, currently on death row, agreed to beat her, but apparently did not intend to kill her.

After the pastor became a suspect, he drove to the gathering, told his sons what part he had played (hiring a crew to kill his wife and himself having an affair), then got into his truck and shot himself.

It's a waste of life. Terrible decisions from three people that ultimately led to a severely somber outcome for everyone involved.

Probably not. But remember that ~4% of all death row inmates are innocent, so it may be that he didn't kill anyone.

Also, shouldn't the state be better than a murderer? Shouldn't the mere fact that we believe we, as a society, are civilized mandate allowing a death row inmate respect before they die?

I'm not religious, so I don't think praying and final words will do anything. But it won't harm anyone, and if it makes him more comfortable as he goes out, especially in light of the likelihood he didn't that to his victim, I'm not against it.

[-] jmcs@discuss.tchncs.de 2 points 1 year ago

Should the state have the same low moral bar as criminals? (It's a rhetorical question that was answered when the state decided to murder someone that's not a threat anymore in cold blood)

this post was submitted on 22 Dec 2023
183 points (100.0% liked)

News

28416 readers
4002 users here now

Welcome to the News community!

Rules:

1. Be civil


Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.


2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.


Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.


3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.


Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.


4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.


Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.


5. Only recent news is allowed.


Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.


6. All posts must be news articles.


No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.


7. No duplicate posts.


If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.


8. Misinformation is prohibited.


Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.


9. No link shorteners.


The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.


10. Don't copy entire article in your post body


For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS