OK Releases Report on Botched Execution of Clayton Lockett

The Oklahoma Department of Public Safety has released its report into the botched execution of Clayton Lockett. It says the problem was in the placement of the IV lines, not with the drugs. It calls for increased training of execution personnel.

Department Chief Michael Thompson says "no single person was to blame for the foul-ups and no charges are being considered." Translation: No accountability.

The report is here.

< Jury Convicts VA Ex-Gov McDonnell and Wife | John Kerry at NATO: No Boots on Ground Against ISIS >
  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft

  • Display: Sort:
    Without a doubt (5.00 / 1) (#4)
    by NYShooter on Fri Sep 05, 2014 at 02:08:57 PM EST
    future generations will look back at these State sponsored murders, and, shake their heads in wonder just like we do today in recalling how the authorities. years ago, would place a suspect's hands in boiling water to determine if he really did steal something.

    The problem (none / 0) (#1)
    by lentinel on Fri Sep 05, 2014 at 03:26:00 AM EST
    was in the placement of the IV lines - but nobody in particular was responsible for placing the lines where they were supposed to go.

    Makes sense.

    I wonder how they are going to go about "increased training".

    Yes - since trained medical personnel aren't (none / 0) (#2)
    by ruffian on Fri Sep 05, 2014 at 09:24:53 AM EST
    going to participate in this barbarism. Guess it is hard to find people with the right combination of sensitivity to the human body to properly place an IV line and lack of conscience as to the purpose.

    Or is it/ I predict the next step will be to have death row inmates execute other inmates.


    I don't (none / 0) (#3)
    by lentinel on Fri Sep 05, 2014 at 09:33:53 AM EST
    suppose that many people they experiment on are going to come back to say that, for example, gee it was just like going to sleep!

    There's a rarely examined cultural aspect (none / 0) (#5)
    by jondee on Fri Sep 05, 2014 at 02:55:26 PM EST
    to the executions, imo.

    In the great Southern Strategy tradition, executions make the traditional values folks feel that much more vindicated about the decades of lynchings and torture and expedited kangaroo court trials and Old Testament Wrath-of-God justice meted out..

    Executions feed into the backward-looking, self-romanticizing image so many in flies-all-over country want to have of themselves. And of course it's often another way to get just a little more revenge on a certain race..



    I Have No problem With Executions (5.00 / 3) (#6)
    by ScottW714 on Fri Sep 05, 2014 at 05:31:41 PM EST
    There are people who commit such horrendous acts, the don't deserve to reside with human race.  Nothing to do with vengeance or the bible.

    Where the problem lies is that human beings are flawed creators with emotions and agendas.

    And IMO it is very unhealthy for a society to use the resources it takes to murder other human beings.  From executions to wars, it a cancer to any society and ripples through to every aspect.  From designers, manufactures, testers, user, judges, prosecutors, prison officials, and politicians.  All trying to figure out the best ways to kill human beings.

    If there was some fair method, that would end the lives of people who committed acts that prove they are not worthy of being human beings, I would have zero issues.

    But since that is impossible, no dice.

    Personally, I think life in prison is a far worse punishment than death.  Death is easy once you get past the 5 mins it takes to die.  Whereas a lifetime in a cell with little human contact would be a long a horrible way to die.

    If Christians believed their own hype, the 20 or 30 years it takes to die in a cell is a nano-second on the eternity scale.  And if that person is indeed going to hell for eternity, surely that fractional moment of time it takes their god to take the life 'naturally' isn't worth worrying about.

    Ditto for any death, if they truly believed in eternity and heaven, they should rejoice every time someone dies.  Like me rejoicing a loved one just won the lottery that I can't see for a fraction of time, but will be reunited with for all of eternity in place as grand as heaven.  

    Deep down they know we are all just worm food when we die, otherwise a person who basically sends people to heaven early(murderer) would be the equivalent of Ed McMahon showing up with a giant check.  Who would extract vengeance on the person who just made your loved ones dream's a reality ?


    Another great comment (none / 0) (#7)
    by CaptHowdy on Fri Sep 05, 2014 at 06:02:15 PM EST
    Take this guy.  Allegedly intentionally left his infant son in a hot car to die.  IMO if this is true and can be proven he probably deserves to die. They are considering seeking the death penalty but I don't think it's decided yet.  OTOH I'm happy to let him go to prison for life and experience what often happens to people who hurt children in the prison system.    
    If he's smart, he would choose death.  
    And the added benefit of his death not being on my hands or conscience.   He should pay for what he did.  In THIS world.  And on way or another, he will.

    I want to study these people in depth (none / 0) (#11)
    by jondee on Sat Sep 06, 2014 at 11:08:18 AM EST
    for years if necessary and with the help of drugs if necessary. Maybe something good will come out of it.

    On a not-unrelated note, I saw a program the other night about the Bircher wing of the Joint Chiefs in the early Sixties who would have preferred a nuclear war with Russia rather than have Cuba "go communist" (as if that were any of our business to begin with.) And their argument almost won out. Some of those men are still looked up to as heroes in some quarters here. And people wonder why this country breeds monsters like some giant petrie dish.    


    I saw (5.00 / 1) (#20)
    by lentinel on Sun Sep 07, 2014 at 08:58:13 AM EST
    a documentary about Kennedy - at the moment he is fully accepting of and committed to the destruction of the entire planet - including his own children - with respect to the removal of nukes from Cuba.

    His face kinda gave me the creeps.

    And I still get a lump in my throat when I see a photo of him or think about what might have been... maybe... allegedly...

    But that reality... that he had come to terms with the annihilation of all human and animal life on the planet earth - at this command...
    the way his face looked...

    Too much power invested in these folks. Presidents, advisors, Joint Chiefs...

    Too many nukes.
    Tol many pols.
    Too many buttons.
    Too little compassion and too few brains.


    I was wondering out loud (none / 0) (#12)
    by CaptHowdy on Sat Sep 06, 2014 at 11:13:58 AM EST
    The other day what might have happened in the missile crisis if there had 27/7 cable news so those people could have been constantly beating the war drums like johnsey McGraham

    You do know, don't you, (none / 0) (#15)
    by NYShooter on Sat Sep 06, 2014 at 11:29:42 AM EST
    that in Kennedy's "situation room" the Joint Chiefs were unanimous in their argument of, immediately, going to war?

    Kind of makes you stop and think, what if Mitt Romney, or, John McCain were President? Would either one of them have had the 'nads to stand up to the Admirals & Generals?


    Yes (none / 0) (#16)
    by CaptHowdy on Sat Sep 06, 2014 at 11:43:37 AM EST
    Exactly.  For that matter its worth, for any who cling to the "no difference" agprgument, considering where we would be right NOW if McCain was president.

    The sane, rational, leader Lemnitzer (none / 0) (#19)
    by jondee on Sat Sep 06, 2014 at 12:17:21 PM EST
    signed off on a plan to stage "attacks" within the U.S to get the citizenry behind a Cuban invasion and the start of WWIII..

    And people wonder why some speculate that Castro-symp Oswald may have been manipulated into shooting Kennedy. Possibly.


    Sameness... (none / 0) (#21)
    by lentinel on Sun Sep 07, 2014 at 09:20:27 AM EST
    I can't honestly say how the policies in place would differ had McCain been elected.

    People say things when they are not in a position of power, on the left like Barack (redistribution of wealth / close Gitmo) Obama on the left, and nuts like John (BombIran) McCain on the right.

    Ralph Nader has been tagged as the reason that Al Gore (the hawk who disassociated himself from a popular president and ran with a rightwing slug) lost.

    It seems that many if not most people on the left have bought that.


    Nader put together a video during the campaign of 2008 in which McCain and Obama are both seen parroting the exact same lines. With respect to Iran, Afghanistan, dissing of single payer health plans, pro-oil drilling, etc.

    Same lines. Same agendas. Same brain.

    It is worth seeing. Even if we on the left have been exhorted to despise Nader, the message in that video is resonant - in my opinion.

    Here is a link to the video.


    Aside from Naders (none / 0) (#22)
    by CaptHowdy on Sun Sep 07, 2014 at 03:22:18 PM EST
    Responsibility for Bushes presidency - Gore was very possibly the worst candidate in my lifetime - I don't think most people believe we would have had the nightmare of the Iraq war if he had been elected instead of W.  Including myself.

    And personally I think if you believe we would be in the same place in or relationship to the world and the numbers of dead by the art if war right now if McCain was president, you are simply misguided.  And spare me the collateral drone damage.  McCain would have covered that his first week in office.  It would have been considered target practice.


    We just (5.00 / 1) (#23)
    by lentinel on Sun Sep 07, 2014 at 05:25:28 PM EST
    can't know anything in my opinion.

    You don't seem to have reacted to it at all, but to hear Obama matching McCain - word for word - in that video... It is awesome to me how little choice we really had.

    I do feel that we should have been out of Iraq and Afghanistan by now. In his first year - we should have been out.

    What a waste.

    I respect your opinion, but saying that I am misguided for thinking that McCain might not have been worse is ... misguided.


    I watched the video (none / 0) (#24)
    by CaptHowdy on Sun Sep 07, 2014 at 06:14:31 PM EST
    It's 8 years old.  How about what they are saying right now.  In response to real world events.  
    Obama has been, in my opinion, remarkably restrained and thoughtful in his response to recent events.  In the face of incredible pressure to bomb someone.  From all sides.

    I honestly don't think an honest reasonable person would think McCain would have done anything in this or a dozen other recents world events but go in guns blazing.  He has agitated for war at every possible opportunity.

    I respect your opinion as well but I think you have a blind spot.


    I simply (none / 0) (#25)
    by lentinel on Sun Sep 07, 2014 at 06:37:35 PM EST
    think that we cannot know.

    Maybe McCain would have met some opposition from Democrats that Obama doesn't.

    I just think we cannot know.


    Honestly (none / 0) (#26)
    by CaptHowdy on Sun Sep 07, 2014 at 06:45:57 PM EST
    What role has either house of congress played in any of this?  They can't run away from the issue and leave it to the president fast enough.  Obama is practically begging them to take some kind of vote in the, like, one week they are supposed to work before the election.   No one expects them to do it.

    But behind the scenes, there's no clear plan for Congress to exert its will or even make its wishes known. Lawmakers, staffers, and officials told The Daily Beast that the administration's refusal to tell anyone their strategy and work with Congress on a bill to authorize military action means the task of passing such a bill is a Sisyphean effort likely to fail. The Hill may not even be able to muster a vote, they say.

    The way (5.00 / 1) (#28)
    by lentinel on Sun Sep 07, 2014 at 07:22:43 PM EST
    I see it is that both parties and the "leaders" thereof are completely stuck in the GW Bush way of viewing and approaching the world.

    No one thinks to ask what grievances "folks" like ISIS are responding to. Could some of it be the fact that we, the Westerners, have felt free to bomb and bomb and drone their peoples and their lands? Maybe a wee bit of anger- even frenzy - might have bloomed as a result of the continuing attempts by the West to dominate the lives and politics of the people in the region by means of destructive force and puppet governments.

    Maybe people are fed up with it.

    I know I am.

    We good.
    They bad.

    Evil Empires.
    The Free World.

    All a load imo.


    Should add (none / 0) (#27)
    by CaptHowdy on Sun Sep 07, 2014 at 06:47:48 PM EST
    DiFi and others have been talking tough.  We will see if they can get their sh!t together.  Color me skeptical.

    I disagree (none / 0) (#29)
    by sj on Mon Sep 08, 2014 at 02:36:52 PM EST
    Gore was very possibly the worst candidate in my lifetime.
    Kerry was a much worse candidate. Gore looked like a worse candidate because the sleaze machine had completed gestation and attacked on so many more fronts than had been historically that his campaign's inability to refocus is [kind of] understandable.

    If he hadn't been eminently electable there would have been no need for the sewer wash that was the press.


    More registered Dems (none / 0) (#30)
    by jondee on Mon Sep 08, 2014 at 05:32:53 PM EST
    voted for Bush than voted for Nader.

    How did that happen?

    It's not Nader's fault - at all - that this country is basically brain dead. Or at least it was in 2000.

    Folks had ta vote fer Bush cuz it was the year 2000 and that meant the Rapture was comin'. That's what about two thirds of the people bought up Tim Lahaye's books back then were thinking.

    That level and prevalency of lunacy had exactly nothing to do with anything Nader did.


    I have a definate effing "problem" (none / 0) (#13)
    by jondee on Sat Sep 06, 2014 at 11:16:08 AM EST
    with executions when a country, against it's won better judgment, doesn't marshal anywhere near the available resources to curb violence and hatred and despair that it does to medievally punish malefactors after the fact.

    Christ, in some states murder is practically a logical extension of the prevailing culture.


    Sure (none / 0) (#14)
    by CaptHowdy on Sat Sep 06, 2014 at 11:19:31 AM EST
    If that wasn't clear I completely agree.  Honestly i would have a problem with it even it's implementation was fool proof.  I don't believe the state has the right to kill.  Period.

    Lock the up for life.  No problem.


    It ain't the "implementation" (none / 0) (#17)
    by Mr Natural on Sat Sep 06, 2014 at 11:53:55 AM EST
    that troubles me as much as the legal process preceding the "implementation."

    It's way too human.  Less a search of truth than a search for cage space.


    That too (none / 0) (#18)
    by CaptHowdy on Sat Sep 06, 2014 at 11:56:18 AM EST
    The cultural (none / 0) (#9)
    by lentinel on Sat Sep 06, 2014 at 07:08:37 AM EST
    aspect lights up when they do it.  
    Then it's "revolting".

    SITE VIOLATOR (none / 0) (#10)
    by Angel on Sat Sep 06, 2014 at 07:15:35 AM EST