If they needed 15 doses, the drugs weren't lethal.

I hope this miserable murderer suffered as much as his victims !

the family interviewed. No pity from me.

by spending 23 hours a day locked down in a cell for the rest of his life. Since it's Arizona, it couldn't be a dank cell, but what can you do?

nt

Something tells me that their stash in the prison was tampered with. Or the drug vials were tampered with before they got them.

Is that many states have put off executions because they can't get the correct drugs. But medieval states such as Texas and Arizona are going ahead anyway because they crave blood & pain. I could be wrong.

those drugs were removed and replaced.750mg. of Hydromorphone is enough to kill an Elephant dead! in about 1 minute.I thought there was tampering the first time I saw this story.I take Hydromorphone by the way.It is powerful.

It's what they gave me when I was in septic shock and it was the only thing that worked well after my appendix burst. I was getting it one milligram at a time and I'm not a lightweight when it comes to narcs.

50 mg. would have depressed my respiratory center so far that even if I lived through it, my brain would be turned into pea soup by prolonged anoxia.

In any case, midazolam is a wretchedly bad choice for sedation, its duration is far too short. There are better benzos out there if that's what they want.

Even in an "ordinary" drug overdose, the victim does not die instantly or all that peacefully. It takes awhile. All these drugs work basically by depressing the part of the brain that tells you when to breathe. If a person is sedated already the brain isn't as responsive. Part of the problem here is that the AZ law is *too* specific in stating the amounts of the drugs and what drugs can be used. Another part is, of course, the dubious quality of the drugs, depending on where they get them. They might do better with some decent street-grade heroin! I think, though, if they really want to be *efficient*, they need to return to the traditional firing squad.

Disclaimer: I am against the death penalty. These are only comments.

but these "drug cocktails" are wretchedly bad, like they were dreamed up by somebody getting kickbacks instead of somebody who wanted a quick, clean looking execution.

While licking her lips and adjusting her dentures.

I don't remember if someone once told me or I read that. It had to do with not being able to electrocute a prisoner a second time. If he were in the chair would it be lawful to throw the switch fifteen times?

Electric chair executions were also botched on a more or less regular basis. Most recently in Florida, before they abolished it, when the victims head caught on fire because they didn't get the fucking sponge right.

Mostly the people doing executions are sociopathic idiots.

Our society would like everyone to think that killing in the name of war is heroic, in the name of police protecting the public necessary, in self defense or fear of harm acceptable. The list can go on for a long time. To qualify for a job that allows you to kill someone should be a disqualifying trait. The irony is beyond me.

If you somehow survived hanging, you were free. Not that it happened often.

as it is possible he was not able to metabolize the opioid (hydromorphone), which renders it virtually ineffective.

It's a gene defect called MTHFR. aptly abbreviated.

but not due to MTHFR. I love that other folks read that abbreviation like I do.

What if the states are being sold watered down drugs after a drug addict has diluted them thirty or fifty times? I think the DEA needs to be called in. No one should be breathing or even alive after that kind of dose--if the medications were really what they claimed they were. If someone had that kind of response in an operating room, the very first thought would be "Uh oh! Someone has been stealing the narcotics!"

The only real question in my mind is did the theft happen before the meds were sold to the state or after.

I am against the death penalty. Having said that, if it took 15 DOSES of a "lethal drug" to kill someone, there is something very phony going on. That is an absurd situation which highlights just ONE of the reasons, this is a bad idea.

Generally, only the paralytic and narcotic agent is administered in front of the owners/family...that way your animal looks at peace. The actual agent that stops the heart and ceases life is administered in private 2-4 minutes later, after the family says their goodbyes and leaves, because these kinds of reactions are not uncommon, even in euthanized animals where the doses required are much smaller even while the doses used are approximately the same.

Nevertheless, this is why I cannot support capital punishment, even for the unquestionably guilty. Nobody deserves to die this badly.

Animals aren't given potassium chloride.

I've probably witnessed 30 animals euthanized from cats to dogs to goats to sheep to horses, I was never asked to leave the room or barn, I've assisted other owners when they couldn't be there themselves. I only saw one dog have a prolonged death and it was probably due to poor circulation due to congestive heart failure.

even kept a hand on the last dog until there was no detectable heartbeat, and it was about 30 seconds between unconscious and no detectable heartbeat.

It is only rarely used on animals anymore, so it shouldn't be used on humans, either.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1014&pid=861100

and it yet again reinforces why we shouldn't be doing this...and shouldn't be doing it in this way.

And then took her with us when we left. Her only pain
was her 200+ heart rate and stroke that was the reason
we took her in that morning.

And I don't know where or when or from what veterinary practice you got your information. I have been with all my animals when they were put down, start to finish, and never been asked to "leave the room" at ANY point. When each of them was pronounced dead, we wrapped them up and put them in the back of our car and took them home to bury them. Every single one. And that was a couple of different vets.

THAT vet. Most vets don't do that, per my experience. And mine stretches over 40 years, most recently about 8 years ago.

I learned the hard way not all vets sedate an animal before the final injection.
In my case it was potassium chloride to stop the heartbeat.
It was an experience that haunted me for many months and the pet definitely suffered.
I would never do it again without confirming the animal was sedated before putting down.
Turns out my experience is not that uncommon.

They no longer do it to animals, so they shouldn't do it to people.

Horses are much larger than people.

http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/all-dogs-go-heaven/201112/animal-euthanasia-and-capital-punishment-some-uncomfortable-compariso

Though lethal injection of prisoners has obvious parallels to EBI, the protocol is different. And this is no coincidence. As states were considering the adoption of lethal injection during the 1970s, they consulted with veterinarians. Ultimately, though, legislators ignored the advice of vets, who recommended the use of a single anesthetic drug, sodium pentobarbital. Instead, states uniformly adopted a three-drug protocol. Three drugs are administered, one immediately after the other: sodium thiopental (an anesthetic), pancuronium bromide (a paralytic), and potassium chloride (which stops the heart). According to an analysis by Ty Alper in the Fordham Urban Law Journal, the reason the three-drug protocol was adopted had much to do with animals: legislators were afraid that the public would object to "treating people the same way we're treating animals." Ironically, though, the three-drug protocol turns out to be far less reliable, and far less humane than the single-drug method. As a matter of fact, Alper notes that roughly 98% of all lethal injection executions in the U.S. occur in states that have banned the use of the same combination of drugs for euthanasia of animals.

The controversy over lethal injection revolves around the second of the three drugs, pancuronium. Pancuronium is a neuromuscular blocking agent: it paralyzes the inmate, but does nothing to blunt the sensations of pain. The third drug, potassium chloride, causes "excruciating pain that has been likened to the feeling of having one's veins set on fire." If the first drug, the anesthetic, happened to fail, the inmate would, with the second drug, be rendered "unable to cry out or even blink an eyelid to let anyone know" that he was fully aware and awake when the potassium chloride was shot into his veins.

SNIP

Once it was understood that curare paralyzed but did not anesthetize, its use in animals grew increasingly controversial, and the use of paralytics has become less and less acceptable. You can still find scattered accounts of veterinarians or researchers using the paralytic drug succinylcholine chloride, either as a form of so-called chemical restraint during surgery or experimentation (sometimes without the accompanying use of an anesthetic), or as a lethal injection. And you find an occasional use of a euthanasia solution called T-61, which is very much like the three-drug combination used in human executions. Yet almost without exception, the use of neuromuscular blocking agents in animal euthanasia is considered unethical. The vast majority of animal euthanasia is carried out by means of sodium pentobarbital, and there is strong consensus among humane organizations and veterinary groups that this is the single most humane euthanasia method.

they're having so much trouble with people?

Why can't they use whatever they use on dogs to execute people?

I have read before from people working in vets and shelters that the drugs can cause convulsions and painful reactions. The doctor does not give the lethal drug in front of the family, only the paralytic. Some of the stories I have read have been horrifying. For large animals such as horses it's very difficult and that is why some vets still carry a pistol just in case. Just awful.

Horses are much larger than people.

http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/all-dogs-go-heaven/201112/animal-euthanasia-and-capital-punishment-some-uncomfortable-compariso

Though lethal injection of prisoners has obvious parallels to EBI, the protocol is different. And this is no coincidence. As states were considering the adoption of lethal injection during the 1970s, they consulted with veterinarians. Ultimately, though, legislators ignored the advice of vets, who recommended the use of a single anesthetic drug, sodium pentobarbital. Instead, states uniformly adopted a three-drug protocol. Three drugs are administered, one immediately after the other: sodium thiopental (an anesthetic), pancuronium bromide (a paralytic), and potassium chloride (which stops the heart). According to an analysis by Ty Alper in the Fordham Urban Law Journal, the reason the three-drug protocol was adopted had much to do with animals: legislators were afraid that the public would object to "treating people the same way we're treating animals." Ironically, though, the three-drug protocol turns out to be far less reliable, and far less humane than the single-drug method. As a matter of fact, Alper notes that roughly 98% of all lethal injection executions in the U.S. occur in states that have banned the use of the same combination of drugs for euthanasia of animals.

The controversy over lethal injection revolves around the second of the three drugs, pancuronium. Pancuronium is a neuromuscular blocking agent: it paralyzes the inmate, but does nothing to blunt the sensations of pain. The third drug, potassium chloride, causes "excruciating pain that has been likened to the feeling of having one's veins set on fire." If the first drug, the anesthetic, happened to fail, the inmate would, with the second drug, be rendered "unable to cry out or even blink an eyelid to let anyone know" that he was fully aware and awake when the potassium chloride was shot into his veins.

SNIP

Once it was understood that curare paralyzed but did not anesthetize, its use in animals grew increasingly controversial, and the use of paralytics has become less and less acceptable. You can still find scattered accounts of veterinarians or researchers using the paralytic drug succinylcholine chloride, either as a form of so-called chemical restraint during surgery or experimentation (sometimes without the accompanying use of an anesthetic), or as a lethal injection. And you find an occasional use of a euthanasia solution called T-61, which is very much like the three-drug combination used in human executions. Yet almost without exception, the use of neuromuscular blocking agents in animal euthanasia is considered unethical. The vast majority of animal euthanasia is carried out by means of sodium pentobarbital, and there is strong consensus among humane organizations and veterinary groups that this is the single most humane euthanasia method.

We are considered barbarians to many countries because of our death penalty. Many countries will not allow extradition to the US because of it. Just stop it now...

When I was younger, I used to be on the fence about the death penalty, because of crimes that are so unimaginable, it seemed as though there was no other answer. But the state cannot be just as barbaric. I can no longer justify the death penalty.

And the other issue is that we will always have some number of wrongful convictions. To take the risk of putting the wrong person to death is unconscionable.

It's genetic, but you have to be a carrier from both parents.
My BIL didn't know when he went to have his wisdom teeth out
and ended up in a paralyzed state (coma) for a week.

never seen it happen that way. I've never had a vet even ask me to leave until the animal was dead.

They think the "Good Old Days" was when mom was in the kitchen baking cookies and people were frying in the electric chair.

No more death penalty.

Back when they arrested him. Would have save a helluva lot of time, money and pain


http://crime.about.com/od/deathrow/ig/Arizona-Death-Row-Inmates/az_wood_j.htm

Can Arizona's Department of Corrections be sued for Cruel and Unusual Punishment by Wood's Family?

sue the Woods Family?

The victim's family have had their justice....the execution has been carried out. The murderer of their family member is not longer of this Earth. They have nothing to sue for.

Meanwhile, we do have a clause against CRUEL AND UNUSUAL Punishment in the U.S. Constitution. Using lethal drugs 15 times to carry out the execution does IMHO fits CRUEL and UNUSUAL. The execution should have been stopped when the first set of drugs failed and definitely by the second occurrence, then rescheduled to another day.

The fact they continued to shoot lethal drugs that was not working as intended is CRUEL and UNUSUAL and it appears the Wood's Family, if they so choose, have a case against the Arizona Department of Corrections and Governor Brewer.

Life imprisonment costs millions.

Deathlusting pro-gun idiots are setting this priority.

And not just from a single source or multiple sources quoting the same source either.

The execution protocol in Arizona is to inject the prisoner with sublethal doses of two different drugs then hope he starves to death before he wakes up...is that what I'm seeing? The intravenous LD50 of midazolam is 75 mg/kg and that of hydromorphone is 52 mg/kg, both according to the package inserts.

Come on guys, if you HAVE to kill prisoners just get about a pound of heroin, dissolve it in whatever you dissolve smack in, and pump it into the guy until his heart seizes. When you OD on street smack you die with the needle in your arm - it is that quick. And the drug companies couldn't object to us using it.

Or do they just hear rumors that they might work and figure that's good enough?

I'm opposed to the current death penalty regimen on issues dealing with racial prejudice, but if you're going to have a death penalty at all, shouldn't it be quick and relatively painless? You know, Eighth Amendment provisions and all that?

that instead of using hydrogen cyanide that you use nitrogen gas to replace the air in the gas chamber. The person being executed would fall asleep and then it would be over in a matter of minutes.

Hydrogen cyanide causes massive convulsions where as with nitrogen you pass out and don't wake up. That seems pretty humane to me.