[Deathpenalty] death penalty news----OHIO, ARK., MO., COLO., WYO.. NEV., CALIF., WASH., USA

[Rick Halperin]

May 9



OHIO:

Man ruled competent to stand trial in '15 murder



Not many murder defendants want a death-penalty specification added to their 
case.

Tuesday, James Jarrell asked why he couldn't have 1 in his aggravated-murder 
case.

After a hearing in Mahoning County Common Pleas Court before Judge Lou 
D???Apolito, where attorneys on both sides stipulated to an evaluation that 
said Jarrell was competent to stand trial, he asked why he could not have a 
death-penalty specification added to his case.

Jarrell, 35, is charged in the July 7, 2015, stabbing death of his stepmother, 
Tina Jarrell, 55, in the kitchen of her Wellington Avenue on the West Side.

Judge D'Apolito told Jarrell that because he was not indicted with a 
death-penalty specification, he cannot ask to have that added to his charges in 
a plea bargain or any other type of proceeding.

Jarrell did not say why he wants the death penalty added.

A trial date has not been set for Jarrell, who was to go to trial in November 
only to have it delayed because of a suicide attempt at the county jail.

Prosecutors at the time accused Jarrell of malingering and wanting to delay his 
trial by any means possible, so Judge D'Apolito ordered the evaluation to 
determine if Jarrell was competent to stand trial, understand the charges 
against him and be able to aid in his own defense.

The evaluation determined that Jarrell is competent to stand trial.

Jarrell also tried to fire one of his attorneys in November, and the judge 
would not allow him. He tried again Tuesday, and the judge would not allow it.

(source: Youngstown Vindicator)

******************

Defendant eligible for death penalty in shooting of Hampton Inn clerk



Michael D. McLendon, 25, could face the death penalty on charges handed up 
Monday afternoon by a Greene County grand jury in the March 7 shooting of a 
Hampton Inn hotel clerk at the hotel in Fairborn.

McLendon is accused of several felony charges in the death of clerk Andrew Day, 
29. Prosecutors have said McLendon has admitted to the shooting.

McLendon additionally is charged with aggravated robbery, felonious assault, 
firearm specifications, repeat violent offender specifications and aggravating 
circumstances that make the defendant eligible for the death penalty.

McLendon remaind jailed on a $1 million bond.

The case has been assigned to Common Pleas Judge Stephen A. Wolaver.

An arraignment will be scheduled by the court, according to county Prosecutor 
Stephen K. Haller's office.

(source: WHIO news)








ARKANSAS:

Anti-Execution Judge Says Arkansas High Court Retaliating



An Arkansas judge barred by the state Supreme Court from hearing death penalty 
cases says in a court filing that justices are retaliating against him for 
exercising his First Amendment rights to free speech and the free exercise of 
religion.

Pulaski County Circuit Judge Wendell Griffen, a Baptist minister, has sued the 
justices, saying they improperly took him off all execution-related cases. His 
lawyer asked a federal appeals court late Monday to reject the justices' 
request to halt depositions and discovery. The justices have said their 
deliberations should be off-limits.

Griffen last year took part in a death penalty protest the same day he ruled 
the state Department of Correction could not administer 1 of its 3 execution 
drugs. A drug distributor, McKesson Medical-Surgical, had questioned whether it 
had been obtained through proper channels. At the time, Arkansas was poised to 
execute 8 men in an 11-day period; it ultimately put 4 men to death over 8 
days.

Griffen said in papers filed at the 8th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in St. 
Louis that the state Supreme Court barred him from death penalty cases even 
though no one asked for such a ruling.

"There was no urgency to the Supreme Court's personnel decision because, by the 
time the Supreme Court issued its order, an Arkansas federal district court ... 
had already stayed the executions," Griffen's lawyer wrote. Baker's order was 
later overturned.

Last month, a federal judge said Griffen's lawsuit could proceed against the 
justices individually and that each side could gather facts from the other side 
in a process known as discovery. The justices have told the 8th Circuit they 
don't want to disclose their internal deliberations.

Lawyer Michael Laux wrote to the appeals court late Monday that had the 
justices simply removed Griffen from the McKesson case, there would have been 
no cause for Griffen to sue. However, he said, Griffen believes the justices 
acted improperly.

(source: Associated Press)








MISSOURI:

Pam Hupp's lawyers file motions to avoid death penalty



Attorneys representing murder suspect Pam Hupp have filed a series of motions 
in St. Charles Circuit Court. It is an attempt to take the death penalty off 
the table.

Hupp is accused of killing Louis Gumpenberger in 2016. Prosecutors say it was 
part of an elaborate scheme to make it look like he tried to kidnap her over 
insurance money which she received after the 2011 death of her friend, Betsy 
Faria.

Hupp's attorneys filed motions to seeking to have evidence from the Faria 
murder trial and circumstances surrounding her mother's death excluded from her 
murder trial of Gumpenberger.

(source: KPLR news)








COLORADO:

Faced with the death sentence



I was called to report for jury duty on March 15 at 1:30 p.m. This wasn't my 
1st time, but as I lined up outside the jury assembly room, something felt 
different. When I left the courthouse a few hours later, I knew why. I was part 
of the largest pool (around 2,800) ever assembled in El Paso County, and we 
were there for 1 case: People v. Glen Galloway. Galloway faces the death 
penalty, standing accused of killing 2 people, 1 of whom was his ex-girlfriend.

I figured I would be released immediately, as I'm part of the media, and wrote 
as much on my questionnaire. Perhaps even more surprising than landing in this 
jury pool: It took 6 weeks before I was released. I was never scheduled to come 
in for questioning by the defense and prosecution, but I wasn't released or 
able to talk about or read about the case.

It wasn't until April 26 that I finally found out I was let go, as the next 
stage of jury selection, group questioning, continued with about 140 left in 
the pool. But on March 15, as my head spun at the prospect of spending 2 months 
on the jury of a death penalty case, I wrote the following column:

Once, when I was trying to find a way to make sense of my career, I landed on 
the idea that I'm a storyteller. I write stories in this column. When I teach, 
I prefer to think of what I do as a form of storytelling. Even when I take 
pictures, there are stories.

When strange shit happens, I shrug it off and figure it all just makes a better 
story. Today, I was called for jury duty and I was told I cannot tell the 
story, yet.

My earlier brushes with performing my civic duty did not prepare me for today. 
About 150 of us lined the courthouse hallway as we filed into the juror staging 
room. Maybe I should have known something was up - since when does jury duty 
start in the afternoon?

As we took our seats, I saw the name of only one judge on the dry erase board. 
In the past, I recall waiting during morning hours while a board filled with 
many judges' names slowly got erased as trials were postponed or pleas reached. 
I guessed that we were there for a specific trial. Turns out I was right, but I 
couldn't have guessed the enormity of the case.

I sat down next to a 20-year-old. This was her 1st jury summons. She got it in 
the mail the day after her birthday, she told me. An older woman on my other 
side said she was no stranger to being summonsed.

The 4th Judicial District judge, Gregory Werner, was introduced and court was 
in session. He took a seat at a podium and started his introduction. After 
giving a bit of a civics lesson - "I think you should know that the United 
States conducts 90 % of the world's jury trials" - he told us to open our juror 
packets. Inside the packet was a 20-page copy of the instructions he would 
spend the next 30 minutes reading to us.

He began by explaining the case. It sounded familiar. I've often said, I love 
living in Colorado Springs (or in this case, El Paso County) because murders 
are still front-page news. I consume local media, on TV, via Twitter, in print, 
so the case was immediately familiar.

What I didn't know about it though: Prosecutors are seeking the death penalty. 
The judge urged us to remember that just because charges are being brought 
against this person, he was not guilty. He said if he asked us at that very 
moment, we would have to say that the defendant was not guilty because there 
was no evidence provided yet to prove otherwise.

After being read an oath, we raised our right hands and said, "I do." And then 
we had to fill out an 18-page questionnaire about the case, our media habits 
and our feelings about the death penalty.

If the conversations I overheard among potential jurors while we waited in the 
hallway were any indication, some people might have filled out that long form 
with the sole intent of being released from duty. I answered as honestly as 
possible. The judge directed us not to talk to the media about the case or 
about anything at all. I AM the media. I teach media. I write this column. And 
my professional and personal connections are littered with media professionals. 
Not talking about anything with the media would leave me sequestered, even 
though the jurors for this case will not be.

I didn't expect being called for jury duty on a Thursday afternoon to make me 
think in detail about capital punishment. But there I was sitting with a 
clipboard in hand, juror number 1910, trying to find the answer that most 
closely reflected my attitude on the death penalty. They ranged from "all 1st 
degree murder should be punished by the death penalty" to "the death penalty is 
just plain wrong."

I had to craft my own variation on the answer. In some cases the death penalty 
is the right answer, but I don't know if I should decide that. So yeah, I 
believe in the death penalty. I just don't want to have to make that decision. 
Much like I love to eat a good steak, but don't ask me to slaughter a cow.

Am I a hypocrite? Probably. And that's something I will wrestle with for 
awhile. Suddenly the burden our country puts on citizens to make these 
decisions felt very heavy.

The questionnaire asked for our reasoning and I scrawled something to the 
effect that "being a human being means I don't know that I have the right to 
decide this." I don't know if I could live the rest of my life knowing I was 
part of a group of 12 who decided someone else's life should end. Even though 
this defendant allegedly made that decision about 2 others himself.

Beside the 20-year-old next to me, I saw one of my older daughter's former 
classmates, another 20-year-old. Can we ask these young girls to make that sort 
of decision? Can we trust the 2 retired military gentlemen who were in line 
behind me discussing their disdain for school district taxes to decide? Should 
any of us whose names were randomly selected have to carry the burden of 
deciding someone's life should end?

As a storyteller, I process by speaking and sharing. Before going into jury 
duty I probably told everyone I came across that I was heading to do my civic 
duty. Walking out this afternoon, I felt restrained. I mean, come on, what a 
story. I get called for jury duty and instead of sitting on a small, 1-day 
jury, I land in a room where I'm being considered to serve on a death-penalty 
case. (I would write here about how unusual a death-penalty case is in El Paso 
County, but I???m also forced to repress my other instinct, to Google this.)

Instead, I will bookmark the website where they will post who needs to report 
for interviews and who will be released. Since it seems like a long shot that I 
will be selected, I will follow the trial, and I will do so with much greater 
empathy for the 12 members of that jury.

(source: Laura Eurich, Colorado Springs Independent)




WYOMING:

Man faces murder, sex abuse charges in toddler's death



An 18-year-old Mountain View man made an initial appearance in Circuit Court 
Monday morning, facing a 1st-degree murder charge, among other felonies.

Jesse Hartley, 18, appeared on charges stemming from the May 1 death of a 
2-year-old Bridger Valley child. Hartley was living with his girlfriend, the 
mother of the child, at the time of the child's death.

Hartley is charged with 3 counts in the case, including murder in the 1st 
degree, aggravated child abuse and 1st-degree sexual abuse of a minor. The 
charges allege that on or about May 1, Hartley killed the minor child while in 
the process of perpetrating child abuse, recklessly inflicted serious bodily 
injury and inflicted sexual intrusion upon the child.

The murder charge is a capital offense with a maximum penalty of life in prison 
without parole or the death penalty. The child abuse charge carries a maximum 
penalty of up to 25 years in prison, while the 1st-degree sexual abuse charge 
carries a maximum penalty of up to 50 years in prison.

Arguing in favor of a previously-set $100,000 cash-only bail, Uinta County 
Deputy Attorney Amanda Kirby said evidence is strong in the case and relies 
largely on a postmortem investigation.

A tearful Hartley spoke on his own behalf and said, "I'm currently suffering 
from a loss as well, and I really need my family right now."

He said he intends to attend all court dates and argued bail should be reduced.

"My family isn't rich and there's no way we can afford $100,000."

Circuit Court Judge Michael Greer recognized Hartley's comments but said the 
first count is a capital offense and the court does not have to provide any 
opportunity to post bail. Greer found it appropriate to keep the bail at the 
$100,000.

Should Hartley post bail, he was ordered to have no contact with the child???s 
mother or any child under the age of 18.

Hartley's preliminary hearing was set for 3 p.m. on Wednesday, May 16, in 
Circuit Court.

(source: Uinta County Herald)








NEVADA:

State Supreme Court Hears Death Penalty Case



State and county lawyers are urging Nevada's Supreme Court to overturn a Las 
Vegas judge's ruling blocking the 1st execution of an inmate on Nevada's death 
row in 12 years.

Attorneys for Clark County and the Nevada Department of Corrections told the 
justices in Carson City Tuesday the federal public defenders trying to stop the 
execution of a twice-convicted killer are really just advancing generic 
arguments in opposition to the death penalty.

Public defenders and the American Civil Liberties Union counter that Nevada's 
plan would subject Scott Raymond Dozier to an unacceptable risk of pain and 
suffering using a combination of 3 drugs never tried before in the United 
States.

Dozier says he wants to be put to death as soon as possible regardless of which 
drugs are used in the lethal injection the lower court blocked in November.

The ACLU says the experimental mixture of drugs includes a paralytic that's 
illegal to use when euthanizing pets in Nevada.

A ruling in the case isn't expected for weeks.

(source: KDWN news)

********************

Nevada death row inmate case is how, not whether, he'll die



The Supreme Court is now debating a death penalty case in which the issue 
doesn't involve whether Scott Raymond Dozier should be executed.

Dozier, 47, was sentenced to die for the murder of Jeremiah Miller whose 
mutilated body was found in a Las Vegas dumpster. He has been telling officials 
for a year he wants to die.

But the execution was stopped just days before by the judge who wanted more 
information about the 3-drug cocktail the Department of Corrections planned to 
use.

The federal public defender's office argued one of those drugs carries a 
"substantial risk" of a cruel and unusual death.

Dozier has said he wants to be executed whether that mix of drugs is used or 
just 2 drugs are administered.

"You're in our court making an argument for a client that doesn't want that 
argument made on their behalf," Justice Kris Pickering told David Anthony.

Anthony, representing the ACLU and federal Public Defender's office, said his 
client does support their efforts because, although he wants to be executed, he 
wants that death to be painless and humane.

The proposed drug protocol was rejected by Clark County District Judge Jennifer 
Togliotti, who agreed it carries a "substantial risk" of a horrible death by 
suffocation while still conscious.

The issue centers on the third drug in the execution cocktail, a paralytic that 
stops breathing. Anthony said Dozier could be partially awake and aware at the 
time he was suffocating to death.

He said simply omitting that third drug would work because a sedative followed 
by the opioid fentanol would kill the inmate humanely.

Justice Ron Parraguirre charged Anthony wasn't representing Dozier but instead, 
"looking to the future to set protocol for future clients."

Deputy Solicitor General Jordan Smith said if the high court adopted 
Togliotti's definition of substantial risk, "it would halt any and all forms of 
execution."

He argued the bar set by the judge was wrong because it basically says if 
there's a chance of human error in the execution process, it can't go forward.

"There will always be a chance of human error," said Smith.

He said every death case would then be judged against that standard.

That same issue was raised by Jonathan VanBoskerck of the Clark County DA's 
office who said that claim would be raised "in every petition from here out."

To further complicate the issue, Justice Jim Hardesty pointed out the case has 
dragged on too long, "and the result is we are now here and 1 of the drugs has 
expired."

"So, in the absence of a replacement being found, he isn't going to die at 
all," he said.

The court took the case under submission after 2 hours of debate.

(source: Nevada Appeal)








CALIFORNIA:

Former Gov. George Deukmejian dies at 89



Former California Gov. George Deukmejian, known as the "Iron Duke" for his 
tough-on-crime approach to governing, died Tuesday. He was 89.

His family said the former Republican governor passed away at his home in Long 
Beach of natural causes. They plan to hold a public memorial at a later date.

"He was a fine, decent man of integrity and character who was tremendously 
proud of his Armenian heritage," their statement said. "He loved his family and 
his friends and was forever grateful to the many loyal people who believed in 
him and served in his administrations. We miss him deeply."

When he turned his office over to Gov. Pete Wilson in January 1991 after 2 
terms as governor, Deukmejian left a legacy as a frugal guardian of the public 
purse who did his best to put thousands of convicted felons behind bars.

He prided himself on the use of his veto authority, saying he had used it to 
save California taxpayers more than $7 billion during his tenure. He insisted 
that that tax increases would serve only to slow a job-producing economy, 
clashing repeatedly with Democrats who warned that California would incur 
long-term costs for his refusal to acknowledge that the money produced by the 
existing tax structure might not be enough.

"They opposed us from the minute right after I got sworn into office," 
Deukmejian said as he prepared to leave office in 1990. "We were constantly 
confronted with that kind of strong, hostile opposition."

He wrote the state's major death penalty law and said he ran for governor 
because he wanted the ability to appoint judges. One of his principal 
satisfactions was the appointment of a new state Supreme Court majority.

He campaigned with vigor against California Supreme Court Justice Rose Bird, a 
controversial figure appointed by Gov. Jerry Brown in his 1st stint in the job. 
The court dominated by Brown appointees compiled a record of reversing death 
penalty cases, and voters in 1986 ousted Bird and 2 other justices.

Deukmejian elevated Malcolm Lucas, his former Long Beach law partner, to 
replace Bird.

"I might have fantasized that the Rose Bird court would go away some time, but 
I never imagined that it was going to happen the way it did," Deukmejian told 
The Sacramento Bee.

Wilson remembered him Tuesday as a quiet, unassuming man and "determined and 
effective" leader who was among those who first encouraged Wilson to run for 
office. They served together in the Legislature.

"He was determined that the 1st duty of government was to provide for the 
public's safety," Wilson said. "He felt there hadn't been adequate attention to 
the rights of victims. He was determined to change that and he did so - he 
changed the direction of the Supreme Court by 180 degrees. It was a critical 
change and one that was long overdue."

Born Courken George Deukmejian Jr. in Menands, New York, in 1928, his parents 
were Armenian immigrants whose families had fled to the United States 2 decades 
earlier during the genocide carried out by the Ottoman Empire.

He studied sociology at Siena College and then received his law degree from St. 
John's University in New York. After serving for 3 years in the U.S. Army's 
Judge Advocate Corps, based out of Paris, he moved to Los Angeles, where he 
worked for the Texaco Company and then as deputy counsel for the county.

He began a steady political rise in 1962, with his election to an open Assembly 
seat. After 16 years in the Legislature, where he authored more than 180 laws, 
including one that required prison time for the use of a gun during any crime, 
he won the office of attorney general in 1978.

Then, by the closest margin ever in a California gubernatorial race, Deukmejian 
was elected governor in 1982.

"He wasn't a media star like Jerry Brown," said Sacramento political consultant 
Sal Russo, who? ran Deukmejian's 1st campaign for governor in 1982, when he 
narrowly defeated Los Angeles Mayor Tom Bradley. "He was kind of dull."

"We put him in front of a black screen and had him talk directly into the 
camera, and I think that came through - the fact that he was a good and decent 
man," Russo said. "After 8 years of Jerry Brown, people wanted stability."

Steve Merksamer, who served as chief of staff to Deukmejian during his stints 
as attorney general and governor, said Deukmejian was deeply influenced by his 
family's experience during the Armenian Genocide. The memory of those deaths 
drove his tough-on-crime policies.

"He believed government's essential function was to protect the public from 
harm," Merksamer said.

But he added that it also instilled a profound sense of morality in Deukmejian, 
who governed by what he believed was just and not what was popular.

Among Deukmejian's proudest accomplishments as governor, Merksamer said, were 
taking early action on the AIDS crisis of the 1980s, when many viewed with 
contempt and disgust the disease that was mainly killing gay men; leading the 
fight in 1986 to divest California of doing business with South Africa's 
apartheid regime; and signing a 1989 assault weapons ban, the toughest in the 
country, after a school shooting in Stockton.

"George had very strong views, but he cared ultimately to do what was right," 
Merksamer said. "And even if what was right was hard or it was against the 
constituency that supported him, he would do what was right."

Deukmejian is survived by his wife of 61 years, Gloria; their children, Leslie, 
George and Andrea; and 6 grandchildren.

(source: Sacramento Bee)








WASHINGTON:

Rational thinking lost on death penalty



It is hard to believe that Washington state still has the death penalty as part 
of the legal system There was increasing support for Senate Bill 6052, but it 
failed to go beyond the House Rules Committee. The practice continues despite 
not accomplishing its purpose.

The death penalty's resilience seems to be rooted in the idea that someone has 
to be sacrificed when crime is committed. At the political level this manifests 
as politicians not wanting to be soft on crime and prosecutors trying to get a 
conviction despite questionable evidence.

The determination to execute exists despite confusion over the lethal chemicals 
involved and a desire to kill terminally ill and aged inmates. This testifies 
to the involvement of our lower human instincts - the capacity for rational 
thinking has gone to sleep on this is issue. Why we execute should be seen 
within the broader context of a society that seeks an outlet for aggression. 
The need to build more nuclear weapons, cutting funding to the most vulnerable 
of our citizens and living in a social/ political climate of fear and distrust 
are all connected.

We kill people on death row despite the emotional and financial cost because 
the culture demands a scapegoat. The unequal application of the death sentence 
to the less fortunate of society in a long drawn out process demands stopping 
this practice. We need justice but with an alternative to executing/ killing 
someone that involves restoration and not blatant retribution. Please contact 
your legislator!

Bob Delastrada, Olympia

(source: Letter to the Editor, The Olympian)








USA:

The number of prisoners with death sentences continues to decline



Before and since taking office, President Trump has frequently called for 
greater use of the death penalty, including for drug dealers, murderers and 
terrorists. But a new Bureau of Justice Statistics report suggests that the 
country does not share his enthusiasm for capital punishment.

In 2016, the number of prisoners under a death penalty sentence dropped for the 
16th year in a row. In absolute terms, the number of prisoners facing capital 
punishment at the end of 2016 (2,814) was as low as it has been since 1993 
(2,727). Adjusted for population growth, death row hasn't been so sparsely 
populated since 1988.

20 prisoners were executed in 2016, the lowest total since 1991. As in prior 
years, the death penalty remained in existence because of a handful of states. 
In 2016, Texas and Georgia accounted for 80 % of executions, whereas 45 states 
did not impose the death penalty.

The national turn away from the death penalty is not the only factor that will 
constrain Trump's ability to bring back capital punishment. The federal 
government is a small presence in criminal justice, housing 1 in 8 prisoners. 
Because states - rather than the federal government - are the main drivers of 
law enforcement in the country, a president's opinions on criminal justice make 
a lot less difference than many Americans realize.

(source: Keith Humphreys is a Professor of Psychiatry at Stanford University 
and is an affiliated faculty member at Stanford Law School and the Stanford 
Neurosciences Institute----Washington Post)

************

US Judge Sets Jury Selection Date in Death Penalty Retrial



A federal judge has set a preliminary date for the death penalty retrial of a 
man charged with abducting and killing a Vermont woman nearly 2 decades ago.

In a scheduling order issued Tuesday in the case of Donald Fell, U.S. District 
Court Judge Geoffrey Crawford ruled potential jurors would be called to 
complete written questionnaires beginning on July 23, if a pending appeal is 
settled by that date. Jury selection would begin Sept. 4.

The 38-year-old Fell was convicted and sentenced to death under federal law in 
2005, but the conviction was thrown out in 2014 because of juror misconduct.

Fell is charged with killing Terry King as he was trying to flee Rutland after 
he and another man had allegedly killed Fell's mother and her boyfriend.

(source: Associated Press)

*************

States Turn to an Unproven Method of Execution: Nitrogen Gas



Hamstrung by troubles with lethal injection - gruesomely botched attempts, 
legal battles and growing difficulty obtaining the drugs - states are looking 
for alternative ways to carry out the death penalty. High on the list for some 
is a method that has never been used before: inhaling nitrogen gas.

Oklahoma, Alabama and Mississippi have authorized nitrogen for executions and 
are developing protocols to use it, which represents a leap into the unknown. 
There is no scientific data on executing people with nitrogen, leading some 
experts to question whether states, in trying to solve old problems, may create 
new ones.

"If and when states begin carrying out executions with nitrogen, it will amount 
to the same type of experimentation we see in the different variations of 
lethal injection," said Jen Moreno, a lawyer who is an expert on lethal 
injection at the Berkeley Law Death Penalty Clinic.

With some 2,750 inmates on death row in 31 states and in federal and military 
prisons, any jurisdiction that tries something new will be scrutinized as a 
test lab.

The push for change comes because lethal injection, introduced 40 years ago as 
more efficient and humane than the electric chair or gas chamber, has not met 
that promise. Indeed, it has sometimes resulted in spectacles that rival the 
ones it was meant to avert.

One pitfall is that execution teams must find a vein to infuse, a process that 
can be excruciating. In February, an Alabama execution team gave up after 
trying for more than 2 hours on an inmate whose blood vessels had been damaged 
by chemotherapy and drug abuse. His lawyer accused the team of opening an 
artery and puncturing the prisoner's bladder. The state later said it would not 
try again to execute him.

Lethal injection also involves drugs that, if given incorrectly, can result in 
suffering. One is a paralyzing agent, and the other stops the heart. The 
paralyzing drug was included in the original plan for lethal injection partly 
to make the process look peaceful and less disturbing to witnesses, by 
preventing the prisoner from thrashing around. Both it and the heart-stopping 
drug are supposed to be given after a powerful sedative has rendered the person 
unconscious, but if the sedative does not work properly, the other 2 drugs can 
cause significant pain.

Barbiturates were originally used for sedation, but manufacturers began 
refusing to sell them for executions. So states tried substituting other drugs. 
Some were ineffective and left prisoners moaning in what appeared to be 
prolonged agony.

Nebraska and Nevada hope to soon start using the opioid fentanyl as a sedative. 
Illegal use has made it a scourge of national death statistics, but medically 
it is an important painkiller and anesthetic. Defense lawyers in Nebraska have 
argued that fentanyl comes under a federal law that limits its distribution to 
lifesaving purposes, and that it is therefore illegal for a prison clinic to 
distribute it for an execution. A trial seeking information about the source of 
the fentanyl is scheduled for May 14.

In March, Oklahoma's attorney general, Mike Hunter, said that using nitrogen 
was "the safest, the best and the most effective method available."

There is scant scientific data to back up that statement. What little is known 
about human death by nitrogen comes from industrial and medical accidents and 
its use in suicide. In accidents, when people have been exposed to high levels 
of nitrogen and little air in an enclosed space, they have died quickly. In 
some cases co-workers who rushed in to rescue them also collapsed and died.

Nitrogen itself is not poisonous, but someone who inhales it, with no air, will 
pass out quickly, probably in less than a minute, and die soon after - from 
lack of oxygen. The same is true of other physiologically inert gases, 
including helium and argon, which kill only by replacing oxygen.

A report from the United States Chemical Safety and Hazard Investigation Board 
said that breathing "an oxygen-deficient atmosphere" can knock a person 
unconscious after just 1 or 2 breaths, and that "the exposed person has no 
warning and cannot sense that the oxygen level is too low."

(Although nitrogen itself would be novel, gas chambers have existed as an 
American execution method since the 1920s. The last case was in 1999, when 
Arizona used clouds of hydrogen cyanide to execute an inmate. Coughing and 
hacking, he took 18 minutes to die.)

Death from nitrogen is thought to be painless. It should prevent the condition 
that causes feelings of suffocation: the buildup of carbon dioxide from not 
being able to exhale. Humans are highly sensitive to carbon dioxide - too much 
brings on the panicky feeling of not being able to breathe. Somewhat 
surprisingly, the lack of oxygen doesn't trigger that same reflex. Someone 
breathing pure nitrogen can still exhale carbon dioxide and therefore should 
not have the sensation of smothering.

Before passing out, a person may feel lightheaded, dizzy or maybe even a bit 
euphoric, and vision may dim.

Dr. Charles D. Blanke, who has studied data on physician-assisted dying, said 
it was not at all clear that nitrogen inhalation would bring a peaceful death. 
Dr. Blanke, a medical oncologist and professor at Oregon Health and Science 
University, said he had consulted colleagues in pulmonary medicine and 
anesthesiology, and they had concerns that carbon dioxide actually could build 
up and cause feelings of suffocation.

Nitrogen is not used in states where medically assisted dying is legal; those 
patients, who are terminally ill, usually drink a huge dose of barbiturates.

Veterinary experts generally do not recommend nitrogen or other inert gases for 
euthanizing mammals. Responses to the gas vary according to species, and in its 
2013 guidelines, the American Veterinary Medical Association said, "Current 
evidence indicates this method is unacceptable because animals may experience 
distressing side effects before loss of consciousness."

Unlike lethal injection, the use of nitrogen would not require that the 
execution team dig around for a vein. An anesthesiologist, who requested 
anonymity because medical societies bar members from participating in 
executions or providing information to encourage them, said that nitrogen 
inhalation was less cruel than lethal injection. And since it presumably would 
involve no paralytic agent, witnesses would be able to see whether the person 
seemed to be suffering, he said.

Seizures might occur from inhaling nitrogen, he said. But if the technique 
appears to go smoothly, he predicted that other states would quickly adopt it.

In fact, according to state documents, in May of 2016, an Arizona company sent 
a sales-pitch letter for nitrogen gas executions to Nebraska corrections 
officials. Among the standout features of its Euthypoxia Chamber: It "produces 
calm and sedation followed by inebriation and euphoria;" it "requires no 
medical expertise;" and it guarantees "the demise of any mammalian life in 4 
minutes."

In passing along the letter to another official, a state corrections department 
executive hand-wrote: "I'm not intending to respond - just thought it was an 
odd correspondence."

Ms. Moreno, of the Berkeley Law Death Penalty Clinic, said that implementing 
nitrogen gas is not as simple as states suggest. There are different grades of 
nitrogen, including medical and industrial, she said, with commensurate 
purities and regulations. Observers of the execution would need protection. 
Officials would have to figure out how to safely clear nitrogen from the room 
before a physician could declare death and the staff could remove the body.

The Final Exit Network, a volunteer organization that supports the rights of 
people with terminal illness or intractable suffering to end their lives, 
considers nitrogen inhalation a reasonable method, and directs people to 
information about it. The technique involves putting a plastic bag over one's 
head and pumping in nitrogen.

Janis Landis, president of the network, said: "The science behind inert gases 
is quite well settled. Any inert gas, one can breathe it in, in place of 
oxygen. You don't have air hunger. You can keep breathing. You pass out and you 
die."

She said that in the past, many people had used helium to end their lives, from 
tanks they purchased at party-supply stores that stock them to inflate 
balloons.

But some suppliers, realizing their product was being used for suicide, began 
mixing in air, making the helium less effective, so nitrogen became the 
preferred choice.

Ms. Landis said, "People opposed to the death penalty, scratching their heads 
about how this could work, I think they're mixing up their views about whether 
this should be done versus whether it can be done."

Experts on state-sanctioned execution methods suggest that the search for a 
palatable means of carrying out death sentences is itself uniquely American. 
Aside from the United States, the relatively few countries who execute 
prisoners typically do so by hanging, beheading or firing squad - methods which 
most Americans find repugnant. Robert Dunham, executive director of the Death 
Penalty Information Center, said that such a reaction exemplifies the collision 
between 2 contradictory traits that streak through the national identity.

"One is a tradition of tenderness, with us being the safeguard of human dignity 
and decency," he said. "The other is a culture of violence. And when you're 
concerned about human rights and dignity, that carries an aversion to gruesome 
killings by the state. But the death penalty is inherently violent - so those 
traditions now are really at loggerheads."

(source: Denise Grady & Jan Hoffman, New York Times)