By Ian Wallach
 |
| Ian Wallach Partner, Feldman & Wallach www.wallechlegal.com Criminal Justice Reform Blog |
Last month’s problematic execution in Oklahoma made it clear
that we must come up with a more humane way to kill people. I propose the guillotine.
Hear me out.
Clayton D. Lockett had to be tasered when he resisted
shackling for his pre-execution X-rays.
He had slashed his arm, but sutures weren’t provided. Hours later, he was fastened to a gurney in
an execution chamber where it took the doctor over 50 minutes to find a
suitable vein for the lethal injection before deeming the groin area the best
option. A sheet was draped over Mr.
Lockett's groin for privacy, but the execution continued to go poorly. Instead of simply dying, Mr. Lockett spent 43
minutes breathing heavily, writhing, clenching teeth, straining to lift his
head, and screaming “My body is burning.”
The execution was finally halted, but Mr. Lockett still died shortly
afterwards.[i]
Monday, Harvard Medical School doctors published an article
in JAMA recommending that doctors who perform executions lose their licenses.[ii] The American Medical Association already has
a policy barring doctors from participating in inmate executions, and doing so
is grounds for the American Board of Anesthesiology to revoke
certification. To protect the jobs of
doctors who perform executions, states have passed laws concealing their
identities.[iii]
Evidently, there is a substantial conflict between the need
for doctors to perform executions, and the qualms that other doctors have with
any doctors performing them. So why not remove the doctors from the procedure,
and bring back that quick, swift, almost-romantic relic -- the guillotine. Its benefits over lethal injection are
obvious.
No Doctors. Forget the medical degree. One doesn’t even need a high-school diploma
to know how to pull a lever. And there
is not an “American Guillotine-Operators Association” that is going to get all
up-in-arms and threaten that the operator will lose his or her day-job every
time a decapitation occurs. Guillotine
operators, by definition, are supposed to kill people, as opposed to doctors
and anesthesiologists, who are supposed to try to keep them alive.
It’s Efficient. Lethal injections are difficult. A recent study by professors at Amherst
College found that at least 3% are mishandled and don’t go as planned.[iv]
But while the number of deaths by
guillotine during the French Revolution alone is estimated to be between 15,000
and 40,000[v],
I could only find a few recorded incidences of botched beheadings[vi],
and those seemed to be rectified by quick, subsequent (successful) attempts.
It’s Simpler. And Smarter.
The process of execution by lethal injection usually
involves the use of three medicines – one to render the inmate unconscious,
another to paralyze, and a third to stop the heart. Most problems arise with the difficulty in
finding a sufficient vein[vii],
but the medications themselves are expensive and dangerous. Hospira, which was effective, is no longer
available due to a European Union ban on its export, so states like Oklahoma
have been forced to come up with their own execution cocktail, which, for
reasons that should be clear, are often untested. On the other hand, a guillotine’s design is
flawless. A subject’s head is locked
between two boards, in a “lunette” (meaning “telescope”, but sounding like “nightlight”
– both sound nicer than “injection”).
The machine has a blade mounted to a weight on tracked rollers. One lifts the “declic”, or release handle,
and the head falls cleanly into a basket.
It’s over. In less than a second.
It’s Less Expensive. The cost of materials for one lethal
injection is around $1300[viii]
(this doesn’t include the cost of medical examinations, staff, etc.). But a half-decent guillotine could probably
be made for a few hundred bucks by eager kids in an woodshop class.* And it is reusable. Melons and other testing products are widely
available for under $10. *Disclaimer -- author assumes no
liability arising out of negligent guillotine-building projects.
It’s Profitable. Our prison system is a tremendous drain
our economy, the annual cost likely being in excess of 50 billion dollars of
state taxpayer money alone.[ix]
But the use of the guillotine could actually generate income for the prison system. It has been argued that the general public
doesn’t really want to see -- or even think about -- the fact that we are
killing people, even people who are criminals.
But perhaps the issue is not one of conscience, but boredom. No one would pay much to watch someone die
quietly underneath a sheet after receiving a powerful sedative or
paralysis-inducing agent, but if we allow at-home viewership of a
guillotine-execution on pay-per-view for $40 a pop, people will gather by the
thousands. Millions, perhaps. Bars might even hold special viewings and
name drinks after the machine or inmate (perhaps a beer with the head removed?).
It’s European. Several NGOs, including the UN General
Assembly and the European Union, have condemned the use of lethal injections in
executions, leaving only the USA, alongside China, Saudi Arabia, and Iran, to
account for the large majority of its use (94% in 2005).[x] Amnesty International has condemned the USA’s
continued use of the practice.[xi]
But if we switch from lethal injection
to the Guillotine, we could actually be viewed as open-minded (I mean, what is
more French than the Guillotine?).
Inmates Are Likely
On-Board. I am not aware of any studies on how death-row inmates would
prefer to die (but encourage it). But if
given the choice between, (a) being strapped to a gurney, injected with a
needle or catheter, covered, numbed, paralyzed, and then killed (possibly
experiencing the symptoms of drowning, burning, or a heart-attack), or (b)
getting your head instantly lopped off, you’d go French.
[i] Erik Eckholm and John Schwartz, “Timeline
Describes Frantic Scene at Oklahoma Execution”. NY Times, May 1, 2014 (http://www.nytimes.com/2014/05/02/us/oklahoma-official-calls-for-outside-review-of-botched-execution.html?_r=0).
[iii]
Molly Hennessy-Fiske, Seth Klamann, “Doctors Assist In Executions Despite
Ethics Rules”, LA Times, May 21, 2014, (http://www.latimes.com/nation/nationnow/la-na-missouri-execution-20140520-story.html
- page=1. )
[viii]
Khadeeja Safdar,“Legally Killing People Has Gotten A Lot More Expensive”,
Huffington Post, May 20, 2012 (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/03/30/lethal-injection_n_1391408.html).
[x]
The PLoS Medicine Editors (2007) Lethal Injection Is Not
Humane. PLoS Med 4(4): e171.
[xi] See http://www.amnestyusa.org/our-work/issues/death-penalty/lethal-injection
(stating “The search for a
"humane" way of killing people should be seen for what it is -- a
search to make executions more palatable to those carrying out and witnessing
the killing. This includes the governments that wish to appear humane and the
public in whose name the killing is carried out. Lethal injection can cause excruciating pain.
… Some executions have lasted between 20
minutes to over an hour and prisoners have been seen gasping for air, grimacing
and convulsing during executions. Autopsies have shown severe, foot long
chemical burns to the skin and needles have been found in soft tissue”).
No comments:
Post a Comment