In order to get to the heart of the matter, sometimes you have to cut out the unneeded parts to get at the good stuff...

Saturday, February 25, 2006

Death of the Capital Punishment

Attorney David Senior, lead counsel for Michael Morales, has succeeded in a manner that no other death penalty lawyer has. He put forth the argument to a sympathetic judge (the Honoroable Jeremy Fogel, Clinton appointee) of the US 9th Circuit Court of Appeals. Senior's argument, in a nutshell, is that lethal injection using a 3 drug "cocktail" might possibly cause the person under sentence pain during the process. The pain, as the person's breathing / heart are stopped and the brain dies from oxygen deprivation might occur if the first drug is not sufficient enough to completely sedate the prisoner. This pain becomes "cruel and unusual punishment" and thus violating the prisoner's constitutional rights.

Judge Fogel method to resolve the impass forced the medical establishment into the capital case with modifications to Protocol 770 and thus, with one fell stroke of a pen, has put capital punishment on hold for the entire United States. 770 is a well thought out and oft reviewed and affirmed. It is the pattern for most states using lethal injection as a method of execution. I guess that Starrie Decisis is only an appropriate judicial philosophy for laws that liberals view as legal and just.

What everyone needs to consider is the following: when a human is going through natural death, they go through similar experiences as a prisoner who is being executed. If you are modestly aware of your surroundings (not fully sedated), you would be aware of and possibly feel pain as your brain goes through oxygen deprivation and dies.

As such, I postulate that:
1. Either natural death is in violation of the constitution as it is cruel and unusual "punishment" (price you pay for living) and should not be allowed.
2. Since the manner of suffering between natural death and execution by lethal injection are visited upon all without discrimination, then the suffering is not unusual and not cruel, so therefore is not unconstitutional.

The other point to consider is did Michael Morales ensure that his victim, 17 year old Terri Winchell, did not suffer as he raped, strangled (unsuccessfully), bludgeoned (repeatedly), and stabbed (repeatedly)? If he made sure that she was fully sedated and could not feel anything, then he should be given clemency and a life sentence. Since he did not, his right to a punishment free of cruel and unusual punishment is forfeited, along with his miserable right to existence.

Michael, may you feel as much, if not more pain that what you have caused the victims (including the surviving members of the Winchell family) ... may God grant you pardon, but put you in a place where you can ponder your many sins...and that place, in my heart I know, is not heavenly.