Post by marion on Jun 17, 2006 3:58:19 GMT -5
Missouri Corrections Department to clarify execution protocol
By Cheryl Wittenauer
ASSOCIATED PRESS
06/15/2006
ST. LOUIS (AP) -- The Missouri Department of Corrections will clarify its protocol on executions, but some death penalty opponents and lethal injection experts say that isn't enough to ensure against cruelty to inmates.
Larry Crawford, the state's Corrections Department director, said this week he should have been notified when a physician who assists in state executions prepared a lower-than-expected dose of anesthesia for the last several inmates who were put to death.
The smaller amount also was prepared for convicted murderer Michael Taylor, whose scheduled execution in February was halted in an 11th-hour court delay.
Crawford made the announcement while testifying this week in a hearing to decide whether Missouri's method of execution is cruel and unusual.
A surgeon who assists in Missouri executions testified in a deposition that he prepared 2.5 grams of thiopental, an anesthesia, instead of 5 grams because he believed it was enough, and packaging made the larger amount unwieldy.
Thiopental, the first of three drugs administered to a prisoner about to be executed, is supposed to render him unconscious so he doesn't feel the third drug which can cause a burning pain. A state witness at the hearing, Massachusetts anesthesiologist Mark Dershwitz, testified that some states use as little as 1.5 grams.
Crawford said in a telephone interview that administering a lower dosage "should not be left up to an individual's discretion.
"I should have been notified," he said. "I want to be consulted."
He plans to formalize the injection procedures and limit an individual doctor's discretion.
The doctor, whose name was not made public in the court file, testified that he is dyslexic and that "it's not unusual for me to make mistakes."
The doctor testified he was not aware of any rules that required him to notify the corrections director about changes to the execution procedure -- which he said he believes is not written or recorded.
He said he was asked to assist Missouri executions after a problematic attempt in which the inmate took a long time to die. He recommended to a previous corrections director that infusing three drugs through a femoral (groin) intravenous catheter would be more effective, and that's what Missouri's used ever since. With it, he testified, there is "no risk, all benefit."
But Tom Goldstein, an expert in lethal injection litigation who recently argued the exact same issue before the U.S. Supreme Court for a Tennessee inmate, said it "shocks the conscience that Missouri has allowed executions which so clearly risk unnecessary pain and suffering."
Thomas Henthorn, a Colorado anesthesiologist, testified for Taylor that Missouri's practice of rapidly injecting each chemical one after the other doesn't leave enough time for the anesthesia to take effect, creating a "substantial risk of inflicting excruciating pain."
He also testified it isn't necessary to infuse the drugs through a femoral intravenous catheter when an IV in the arm would do. The femoral line causes significant pain and "risks excruciating complications," he said. Dershwitz said the femoral vein is more reliable.
U.S. District Judge Fernando Gaitan Jr. has until the end of the month to rule in the Taylor case. The matter is being debated nationally, and the U.S. Supreme Court this week made it easier for death row inmates across the country to contest lethal injections.
Rita Linhardt of the Missouri Catholic Conference said Thursday that the dosage issue doesn't change her group's opposition to executions.
"Nobody wants anybody to suffer, but the issue is much broader," she said. "The question is should we have executions at all. Capital punishment is not a good public policy."
By Cheryl Wittenauer
ASSOCIATED PRESS
06/15/2006
ST. LOUIS (AP) -- The Missouri Department of Corrections will clarify its protocol on executions, but some death penalty opponents and lethal injection experts say that isn't enough to ensure against cruelty to inmates.
Larry Crawford, the state's Corrections Department director, said this week he should have been notified when a physician who assists in state executions prepared a lower-than-expected dose of anesthesia for the last several inmates who were put to death.
The smaller amount also was prepared for convicted murderer Michael Taylor, whose scheduled execution in February was halted in an 11th-hour court delay.
Crawford made the announcement while testifying this week in a hearing to decide whether Missouri's method of execution is cruel and unusual.
A surgeon who assists in Missouri executions testified in a deposition that he prepared 2.5 grams of thiopental, an anesthesia, instead of 5 grams because he believed it was enough, and packaging made the larger amount unwieldy.
Thiopental, the first of three drugs administered to a prisoner about to be executed, is supposed to render him unconscious so he doesn't feel the third drug which can cause a burning pain. A state witness at the hearing, Massachusetts anesthesiologist Mark Dershwitz, testified that some states use as little as 1.5 grams.
Crawford said in a telephone interview that administering a lower dosage "should not be left up to an individual's discretion.
"I should have been notified," he said. "I want to be consulted."
He plans to formalize the injection procedures and limit an individual doctor's discretion.
The doctor, whose name was not made public in the court file, testified that he is dyslexic and that "it's not unusual for me to make mistakes."
The doctor testified he was not aware of any rules that required him to notify the corrections director about changes to the execution procedure -- which he said he believes is not written or recorded.
He said he was asked to assist Missouri executions after a problematic attempt in which the inmate took a long time to die. He recommended to a previous corrections director that infusing three drugs through a femoral (groin) intravenous catheter would be more effective, and that's what Missouri's used ever since. With it, he testified, there is "no risk, all benefit."
But Tom Goldstein, an expert in lethal injection litigation who recently argued the exact same issue before the U.S. Supreme Court for a Tennessee inmate, said it "shocks the conscience that Missouri has allowed executions which so clearly risk unnecessary pain and suffering."
Thomas Henthorn, a Colorado anesthesiologist, testified for Taylor that Missouri's practice of rapidly injecting each chemical one after the other doesn't leave enough time for the anesthesia to take effect, creating a "substantial risk of inflicting excruciating pain."
He also testified it isn't necessary to infuse the drugs through a femoral intravenous catheter when an IV in the arm would do. The femoral line causes significant pain and "risks excruciating complications," he said. Dershwitz said the femoral vein is more reliable.
U.S. District Judge Fernando Gaitan Jr. has until the end of the month to rule in the Taylor case. The matter is being debated nationally, and the U.S. Supreme Court this week made it easier for death row inmates across the country to contest lethal injections.
Rita Linhardt of the Missouri Catholic Conference said Thursday that the dosage issue doesn't change her group's opposition to executions.
"Nobody wants anybody to suffer, but the issue is much broader," she said. "The question is should we have executions at all. Capital punishment is not a good public policy."