An argument that execution is cruel and unusual

But they might have set the stage for it. Late last year, Oklahoma horrifically botched its execution of Clayton Locketteffectively torturing him for 40 minutes before he died and blocking him from view from observers midway through. Its system for lethal injection relies on a three-drug cocktail, the formula invented entirely arbitrarily by the Sooner State itself in

An argument that execution is cruel and unusual

The Supreme Court ruled that a second attempt to execute Romell Broom by lethal injection would not violate the cruel and unusual punishment or the double jeopardy clauses of the federal and state constitutions. He was sentenced to death. The next day, two execution team members began to prepare Broom by attempting to insert a catheter into his left arm.

After three attempts on the left side, the team made three insertions into his right arm. The team waited and then made two more insertions, which caused Broom to scream aloud in pain.

Broom cried when they also attempted to reuse previous insertion sites in his arms, which were swollen and bruised after the multiple punctures.

Another execution team member unsuccessfully tried to start the IV in his ankle. After what was estimated to be two hours of attempts and breaks, the execution was halted. Physicians examining him afterward found 18 injection sites that led to considerable bruising and tissue damage.

Broom Seeks to Block Second Execution Attempt Broom initiated state and federal legal actions to bar his execution, arguing a second attempt would violate the U. State Sentencing Law Affects Double Jeopardy Claim Justice Lanzinger explained that part of a double jeopardy claim is the right not to be punished twice for the same offense, and noted both Article 1, Section 10 of the Ohio Constitution and the federal Fifth Amendment forbid it.

Broom argued that the attempt to execute him began with the reading of the death warrant or with the first insertion of a needle. Once the process began, Broom stated he had a reasonable expectation that his death would take place on the date of his execution, and that subjecting him to it again would be a forbidden second punishment.

Justice Lanzinger cited R. In this case, because the attempt did not proceed to the point of injection of a lethal drug into the IV line, jeopardy never attached. Because the state was not intentionally trying to cause unnecessary physical pain or psychological harm, the pain and emotional trauma Broom experienced do not rise to the level of torture prohibited by the Eighth Amendment.

Justice Lanzinger observed that the state has carried out 21 executions since the attempt to execute Broom. The Court stated that with the use of better technique by the execution team and following new protocols established by the state, the execution can proceed without causing an inappropriate amount of pain.

The Court also held that the Ohio Constitution will not be violated by a second execution attempt. Kennedy joined the decision. French contended the majority misapplied the law and contradicted itself by finding a trial court hearing was not necessary.

She suggested the majority concluded that because Broom cannot prove why the errors occurred, then he cannot prove they will recur, which is an unfair burden on Broom. Supreme Court recognized as cruel years ago in the In re Kemmler decision.Your recent blog, “death penalty, a cruel and unusual punishment”, brought to mind another cruel and unusual punishment, lynching.

What brought it to mind was a 60 Minute segment I recently watched dealing with the Alabama memorial dedicated to the victims of lynching here in the US. Broom initiated state and federal legal actions to bar his execution, arguing a second attempt would violate the U.S.

Constitution’s Eighth Amendment’s prohibition on cruel and unusual punishment and the Fifth Amendment’s right against double jeopardy. Premise 2: The death penalty is not degrading, inhumane, or too severe for the crime. Conclusion: The death penalty is not cruel or unusual.

Now, if any of these premises is false, then my main argument will collapse, whereas if both are true, then my conclusion is true. Time Essay: The Death Penalty: Cruel and Unusual? THE enormity of killing one's fellow man with premeditation is the principal reason for the existence of the death penalty; it is also the principal argument for abolishing it.

INTRODUCTION TO THE “MODERN ERA” OF THE DEATH PENALTY IN THE UNITED STATES. In , the Supreme Court declared that under then-existing laws "the imposition and carrying out of the death penalty constitutes cruel and unusual punishment in violation of the Eighth and Fourteenth Amendments."Furman v.

An argument that execution is cruel and unusual

And now, with the recent botched executions, people are starting to question, once again, if the death penalty violates the Eighth Amendment’s ban on cruel and unusual punishment.

Who’s For It? Currently the death penalty is legal in the federal government, the military, and 32 states.

Cruel and Unusual Punishment under the Eighth Amendment