Ok, I support the death penalty in the most extreme of cases, like killing a 17 year old girl. I don't get this. They are stopping his execution indefinitely because "they couldn't find a doctor" to administer the injection? Something stinks to high heaven here. The man killed someone, and deserves death. Can someone explain this to me? SAN FRANCISCO - 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. ADVERTISEMENT 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 "As a result, we have withdrawn from participation in this current process."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.
I think that Arnie wishes that case away. There seem to be a lot of supporters for that guy on death row, believe it or not.
There were about 2000 supporters waiting outside the prison when Stanley "Tookie" Williams was executed to. They didn't postpone his execution. This whole thing stinks to me. I don't particularly like Arnold, but this guy should be executed. He deserves it. I don't like the fact that he is being spared. I thought Arnold blocked his clemency? Who overturned Arnold's decision?
I read the story yesterday and must say that the doctors did the right step into the right direction.
It should have. An unfair (biased, racist legal system) death penalty stinks to me. He wasn't "spared" ... the court ruled they had to have a designated doctor administer the injections so it's not "cruel and unusual" punishment, when both the doctors refused they had to cancel it (for now). Nobody overturned the decision...
The situtation is different right now and pretty much depending on what next step The Governator will take in his career. I'm sure there is a strong reason behind what they're doing. No, it's probably not about what is right and what is wrong, but more of a fear that this case could hurt their agenda.
I think our alien overlords realized this person better suited their needs alive, rather than dead. They planted brainsuckers on the doctors who had to perform the deed so that they would back out. That's my story and I'm stickin to it.
It seems he was spared, even if for the time being. He should have been executed on the day he was supposed to be...........Besides, the article specifically said the execution has been postponed indefinitely. I take that to mean they aren't going to execute him, but perhaps I'm wrong? I wonder what the agenda could be. The family is pissed because they didn't get the justice they deserve, and I agree with them. This cruel and unusual punishment thing sounds like BS to me. They didn't have a designated doctor, so they just halted the excution?
Do you know how executions work? I don't know all the specifics but I'm sure there are a lot of things that hold it up (that's why people spend 26 years on death row). There was a death warrant that had to be approved by the judge in the case (it was in the 1980s) and when it expired or whatever (on the night we was to be executed) they have to get it "renewed".. it's not like they just changed his sentence...
I honestly don't know the details of how executions and death row work, but I think we can both agree that this guy deserves it. He killed a young girl in cold blood, and it makes me angry to see how our corrupt justice system work. They had no problem executing Williams, but now there is a problem with this guy. I honestly don't know what to make of the situation.
I don't know the circumstances of the case, but unless has confessed to the murder - I don't agree he should be executed. Without admitted guilt there is far to much risk of executing an innocent person. I also know that executing a prisoner costs much much more tax dollars than locking them up for life, and that being imprisoned for life has 2 advantages: 1. Theres chance an innocent person can be proven innocent. 2. They serve their life in a hell hole instead of getting off easy with death.
Why kill people when you can send them to label camps and actually make some use of the traitors? The gulags managed Soviet to generate a growth of 20% per year which ended when Stalin died and the gulags were abandoned.
The issue here is death penalty in general and the question how popular it is these days. However guilty the guy is, I believe that Arnie does not want to be associated with any executions. Not now, he probably has his eye on the presidency (you never know) and a case like that is a no-win situation for any politician.
George Bush was governor of Texas when they repeatedly set the record for most executions in a year. I don't think that the death penalty is a political problem - at least it doesn't affect whether or not people get elected these days. You would think they would have seen this coming. On the other hand, if you got a call and were told that you had to be an executioner, could you follow through with it?
I believe that times have changed a lot since Bush was governor of Texas. I think that people are no longer as supportive of the death penalty. I also think that Arnold has more of a "liberal" personality and many of those who would consider voting for him, would be turned off by anything having to do with capital punishment. I don't think I could, but I'm sure there are quite a few people who wouldn't have a problem with it.
I live here in CA and I honestly can't say I know too many people who give a care one way or the other as far as capital punishment. Those who do are for it. I've lived all over the state - northern, central, southern, inland and coastal. Another point to be made is - if you were a doctor, and the AMA the California Medical Association, and the American Society of Anesthesiologists were citing ethical problems with your participation... would you be willing to move forward? There isn't a doctor that's been around for a decade that hasn't had a malpractice suit filed, and a clear violation of three medical society's ethical recommendations is serious fodder for any lawsuits. Could be that the liability insurance companies would have a problem covering someone with that track record.
I see your point, there is also that Hippocratic Oath, and everything that doctors stand for is being violated by putting someone to death. But out of all of the doctors, I can't see no one being available within the whole state regardless. Put an ad in the paper for crying out loud About Arnold: There are tons of potential voters that he has, which Bush didn't, such as people in high crime areas, the ones who like his movies. No shit. They would vote for the "cool guy" - you can't underestimate the power of celebrity status prior to political career. Those are often people who are completely against the death penalty, a lot of anger towards the law etc. So, if I was Arnie's advisor, my advice would be not to put anyone to death, period. And Bush was in Texas, very different, not a lib state like ours.
i think...death penalty is not a godly action... only god can take away our lives not us.... life sentence is good for those animals.....