Posted on 02/21/2006 6:10:14 PM PST by NormsRevenge
Edited on 02/21/2006 6:29:21 PM PST by Admin Moderator. [history]
SAN FRANCISCO - The state on Tuesday postponed indefinitely the execution of a condemned killer amid a court battle over the state's method of lethal injection and the role doctors may play in the death chamber.
State officials notified the federal courts they would be unable to comply with a judge's order to have a medical profesional administer a lethal dose of barbiturate to Michael Morales in the execution chamber, a court spokeswoman told The Associated Press.
It was unclear when the execution would be carried out. Prison officials were not immediately available for comment.
Morales, 46, was supposed to die by lethal injection at 12:01 a.m. But the execution was put off until at least Tuesday night after the anesthesiologists objected that they might have to advise the executioner if the inmate woke up or appeared to suffer pain.
"Any such intervention would clearly be medically unethical," the doctors, whose identities were not released, said in a statement. "As a result, we have withdrawn from participation in this current process."
The doctors had been brought in by a federal judge after Morales' attorneys argued that the three-part lethal injection process violates the Eighth Amendment prohibition against cruel and unusual punishment. The attorneys said a prisoner could feel excruciating pain from the last two chemicals if he were not fully sedated.
U.S. District Judge Jeremy Fogel gave prison officials a choice last week: bring in doctors to ensure Morales was properly anesthetized, or skip the usual paralyzing and heart-stopping drugs and execute him with an overdose of a sedative.
Prison officials had planned to press forward with the execution Tuesday night using the second option. The judge approved that decision, but said the sedative must be administered in the execution chamber by a person who is licensed by the state to inject medications intravenously. That group would include doctors, nurses and other medical technicians.
Morales' lawyers planned to appeal to the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, but the state notified the court late Tuesday afternoon that it did not intend to go forward with the execution.
The judge's ruling renewed an ethical debate that has persisted for many years about the proper role of doctors in executions and the suitability of the lethal injection method used in California and 35 other states.
The American Medical Association, the American Society of Anesthesiologists and the California Medical Association all opposed the anesthesiologists' participation as unethical and unprofessional.
The anesthesiologists ultimately withdrew after the judge wrote that they might have to demand that the executioner administer more sedatives through a separate intravenous line to make sure the prisoner is unconscious.
The anesthesiologists would have joined another doctor who is on duty at all California executions to declare the prisoner dead and ensure proper medical procedures are followed. The doctor does not insert any of the intravenous lines and is not in the room during the execution itself; typically the doctor watches the inmate's vital signs on electronic monitors outside the death chamber.
Deborah Denno, a Fordham University law professor and expert on lethal injection, said Fogel's order seemed "like a desperate measure."
"These are not circumstances by which somebody ought to be executed," she said. "It's never been done before like this."
The U.S. Supreme Court has never directly addressed the constitutionality of lethal injection or whether it causes inmates excessive pain.
Morales was condemned in 1983 for killing 17-year-old Terri Winchell, who was attacked with a hammer, stabbed and left to die half-naked in a vineyard.
Morales had plotted the killing with a gay cousin who was jealous of Winchell's relationship with another man. The cousin was sentenced to life in prison without parole.
another update
Feb 21, 11:05 PM EST
Calif. execution postponed indefinitely
By DAVID KRAVETS
AP Legal Affairs Writer
SAN FRANCISCO (AP) -- State officials on Tuesday postponed indefinitely the execution of a condemned killer, saying they could not comply with a judge's order that a medical professional administer the lethal injection.
Prison authorities called off the execution after failing to find a doctor, nurse, or other person licensed to inject medications to give a fatal dose of barbiturate, said Vernell Crittendon, a spokesman for San Quentin State Prison.
"We are unable to have a licensed medical professional come forward to inject the medication intravenously, causing the life to end," he said.
It was unclear when the execution would be carried out, but the delay could last for months because of legal questions surrounding California's method of lethal injection.
The 24-hour death warrant for Michael Morales was to expire at 11:59 p.m. Tuesday. After that, state officials have to go back to the trial judge who imposed the death sentence in 1983 for another warrant.
Morales, 46, was supposed to die by lethal injection at 12:01 a.m. But the execution was put off until at least Tuesday night after two anesthesiologists backed out because of ethical concerns that they might have to advise the executioner if the inmate woke up or appeared to suffer pain.
"Any such intervention would clearly be medically unethical," the doctors, whose identities were not released, said in a statement. "As a result, we have withdrawn from participation in this current process."
The doctors had been brought in by a federal judge after Morales' attorneys argued that the three-part lethal injection process violates the Eighth Amendment prohibition against cruel and unusual punishment. The attorneys said a prisoner could feel excruciating pain from the last two chemicals if he were not fully sedated.
U.S. District Judge Jeremy Fogel gave prison officials a choice last week: bring in doctors to ensure Morales was properly anesthetized, or skip the usual paralyzing and heart-stopping drugs and execute him with an overdose of a sedative. The latter method is not used any other state.
Prison officials had planned to press forward with the execution Tuesday night using the second option. The judge approved that decision, but said the sedative must be administered in the execution chamber by a person who is licensed by the state to inject medications intravenously. That group would include doctors, nurses and other medical technicians.
The state notified the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals late Tuesday afternoon that it did not intend to go forward with the execution, said Cathy Catterson, a court clerk.
Morales, who had spent the day in the prison's "death watch" cell, was relieved to learn of the postponement.
"He smiled," Crittendon said. "He nodded. He thanked me."
One of Morales' attorneys, Ben Weston, said the decision "goes a long way toward demonstrating the state doesn't have its ducks in a row for humanely killing a human being. They haven't figured out how to do it."
The judge's ruling renewed an ethical debate that has persisted for many years about the proper role of doctors in executions and the suitability of the lethal injection method used in California and 35 other states.
The American Medical Association, the American Society of Anesthesiologists and the California Medical Association all opposed the anesthesiologists' participation as unethical and unprofessional.
The anesthesiologists would have joined another doctor who is on duty at all California executions to declare the prisoner dead and ensure proper medical procedures are followed. The doctor does not insert any of the intravenous lines and is not in the room during the execution itself; typically the doctor watches the inmate's vital signs on electronic monitors outside the death chamber.
Deborah Denno, a Fordham University law professor and expert on lethal injection, said Fogel's order seemed "like a desperate measure."
"These are not circumstances by which somebody ought to be executed," she said. "It's never been done before like this."
The U.S. Supreme Court has never directly addressed the constitutionality of lethal injection or whether it causes inmates excessive pain.
Morales was condemned in 1983 for killing 17-year-old Terri Winchell, who was attacked with a hammer, stabbed and left to die half-naked in a vineyard.
Morales had plotted the killing with a gay cousin who was jealous of Winchell's relationship with another man. The cousin was sentenced to life in prison without parole.
The victim's mother, Barbara Christian, was outraged by the repeated delays.
"I'm totally disillusioned with the justice system. We've been waiting 25 years with the expectancy that he is gonna pay for his crimes," she said. "It feels like we just got punched in the stomach."
The trial judge, Charles McGrath, joined Morales this month in asking Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger for clemency. McGrath said he no longer believed a jailhouse informant whose testimony helped land Morales on death row.
Schwarzenegger, who twice denied Morales' bid for clemency, criticized the federal courts for becoming entwined in "the details of the state's execution process."
"I am confident that the convictions and sentence were appropriate in this case," he said.
Fogel is expected to hold hearings in the spring on whether the three-drug method of lethal injection, as performed without anesthesiologists, amounts to cruel and unusual punishment. His ruling last week promised the hearings as an alternative if the state could not abide by either of the two options for putting Morales to death.
---
Associated Press writers Lisa Leff, Paul Elias and Michelle Locke contributed to this story.
Nightline with Terry Moron is addressing Morales situation right now.
I am watching.
As part of the judicial confirmation process, EVERY judge should be required to push a button that is necessary to execute a condemned prisoner. Yes, these events are few and far between. But EVERY judge should be required to show his/her willingness to implement the capital punishment law, to the point of personally pushing a button necessary to carry out an execution.
I envision a table with a bunch of buttons, each "staffed" by one judge-waiting-confirmation. At the time of execution, all must push a button for the process to continue.
May? Of this year?
Yes, May 2nd or 3rd is what I just heard reported on Fox.
I initially heard the May timeframe mentioned on KNTV 6 pm news right after the stay was announced but no specific date.
GOOD idea.
You bring the rope, I'll bring the hammer. If one doesn't get him, the other will!
And just to be sure, a large knife would be handy.
Painless executions? We don't NEED no stinking painless executions!
Repeat after me:
Injection of lethal doses of potassium chloride after administration of anaesthesia is cruel and unusual
but
Partial Birth Abortion is a womyn's "right"...
Alamo, where's the pro-life ping list? I know opinions differ on capital punishment, but the distinction here still should be made...
Prayers for all!
I don't keep the pro-life ping list, but cgk can help you.
Cheers!
cgk, is this a possible pro-life ping?
Repeat after me:
Injection of lethal doses of potassium chloride after administration of anaesthesia is cruel and unusual
but
Partial Birth Abortion is a womyn's "right"...
I know opinions differ on capital punishment, but the distinction here still should be made...
Prayers for all!
That sounds like something straight out of the movie "Saw"
The whole thing is ridiculous. What about the pain the girl had to go through, who he tortured and raped before murdering her?
Next they will tell us that the pain associated with putting in an IV to administer the drugs is cruel and unusual because there is a small amount of pain associated with it.
What else should we expect out of the land of fruits and nuts.
The victim was raped after being strangled with a belt and beaten with a hammer. Then, after she was raped, she was stabbed to death.
Just bring back the gas chamber!!
Liberals were not concerned over the pain endured by Terry Schiavo. They squash debate over the pain felt by an unborn baby when it is killed. Then they do this!
Being liberal means that you can hold contradictory views at the same time.
Liberalism is a mental illness.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.