Glossip

Oklahoma Governor Stays Execution of Man on Death Row for Murder He Didn't Commit

Over concerns about the process of lethal injection.

|

OK DOC

The state of Oklahoma won't execute Richard Glossip today. Glossip was sentenced to death after Justin Sneed, who beat motel manager Barry Van Treese, claimed to police Glossip ordered him to do it.

While figures ranging from Susan Sarandon to Sen. Tom Coburn (R-Okla.) to Pope Francis called on Oklahoma's governor, Republican Mary Fallin, to commute his sentence, Fallin relented until moments ago.

Now she is delaying the execution over concerns about the method of execution, lethal injection.

From the state government statement:

Last minute questions were raised today about Oklahoma's execution protocol and the chemicals used for lethal injection," said Fallin. "After consulting with the attorney general and the Department of Corrections, I have issued a 37 day stay of execution while the state addresses those questions and ensures it is complying fully with the protocols approved by federal courts."

"My sincerest sympathies go out to the Van Treese family, who has waited so long to see justice done," said Fallin.

The new execution date will be Friday, November 6.

 More on Glossip here and here.

NEXT: Teach Students About Consent, Don't Expel Them for Failing to Prove They Had It

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  1. It should go without saying, but a government not competent enough to order the right fucking execution drug isn’t competent enough to execute anyone.

    1. Exhibit #362,459,203.79

      The absolute incompetence of our government, I would like to put forth, has been established. Can the commentariat so stipulate?

  2. Killing someone when you have them in your complete control is flat out murder. Whether done by an individual or the state.

    1. Or ‘expedient’. I think they’re going for ‘expedient’.

      Some clerk working from 9-3, M-Th (all holidays off), making $57k per year, could accidentally spill some of their Chipotle bowl on some paperwork, and you too could become the next expedient misfortune on the road to utopia.

      1. I think it’s appropriate to “award” the Twenty Seven B Stroke Six reference to Hamster.

    2. Killing someone when you have them in your complete control is flat out murder. Whether done by an individual or the state.

      This is one of the most pithy sentences of Truth that I have ever read.

  3. The condemned was convicted twice for the murder. It’s quite a stretch to say it is one “he didn’t commit” unless you are playing games with the fact that it was murder-for-hire and no one alleged he actually beat the victim to death.

    1. That it was, in fact, a murder for hire is precisely the thing that is in dispute.

      1. Try reading the appellate rulings that affirmed his conviction. They detail the case against him.

        1. I have. The case against him is pretty shitty, even when being written by obviously pro-death penalty popularly elected appeals court judges.

          1. Glissop had the motive to benefit from the murder of his employer, his associate did the killing, Glissop admitted to trying to cover up the murder after the fact and lying about it to police. That’s a pretty good circumstantial case even before you add in the associate’s testimony.

            1. How would Mr. Glossip benefit from Mr. Van Treese’s death, SIV?

              Please exclude Mr. Sneed’s claims in your response and in their stead include claims made by persons who weren’t motivated by the self-interest of making a plea deal (Mr. Sneed is the man who admitted to murdering Mr. Van Treese, and who would have been given the death penalty).

              I think if we exclude Mr. Sneed’s claims, the motive you posted here (“to benefit from the murder of his employer”) is unsubstantiated.

              Additionally, what have you made of the private investigator’s (Cliff Everhart) activities?

              “My name is O’Ryan Justine Sneed I am the daughter of Mr. Justin Sneed. I am writing today in regards to Mr. Richard E. Glossip. I strongly believe he is an innocent man is sitting on death row.
              My father told me he said that he had to say to the police to stay in my life. He was backed into a corner, facing being charged with the Death Penalty. But he was offered a Plea Agreement, of Live without Parole, to testify against Mr. Glossip. I fear he is holding important facts about Mr. Glossip’s case in fear of losing his own Deal….

              I am sure that Mr. Glossip did not do what my father originally said, and that he did not hire my father to kill Mr. Van Treese, and his doesnt deserve to die over my father’s actions.

              One innocent life has already been taken by my father’s actions. A second one doesn’t deserve to be taken as well.”

              1. Please excuse my earlier inferior posting. Cliff Everhart is the private investigator who has since died and whose activities and possible commentaries I wanted SIV and others to ponder.

                O’Ryan Justine Sneed is the daughter of the man who claimed to have murdered Mr. Van Treese.

                I hope this helps clear things.

    2. He might be guilty as sin. I have no clue. It doesn’t matter. The state has no business executing its own citizens.

  4. Hey, it’s okay. If he didn’t actually order the murder, he will go to Heaven for eternity. That ought to be a HUGE comfort to him and his family. (/sarc if not obvious)

    As for the agents of the state (the prosecuting attorney up through SCOTUS) who are allowing him to be killed even while knowing there may have been problems with the evidence that led to his conviction…

    1. Oh for fuck’s sake. Read the OK appellate opinion already. Then come back and talk about evidentiary problems.

      The guy was telling people he’d talked with the victim (while the victim was already lying dead on the floor in another motel room) and that the reason the victim was gone was that he was out buying renovation supplies at the local equivalent of Home Depot. (Paragraph 48) He tried to sell his stuff and get out of town. (Paragraph 51)

      OK is having issues with killing Glossip primarily because they can’t get the execution drugs they wanted (Pancuronium/KCl/Sodium Thiopental), so they had to ask the SCOTUS for permission to use Midazolam instead, and because evidently they screwed up their order getting alternate execution drugs. (Seriously? How do you order potassium acetate when you want potassium chloride?! I wonder if it’d even make a difference in the administration?)

      Not because the only evidence OK has tying Glossip to the murder is a methbilly with every incentive to lie. It’s true, that’s a big part of the evidence against Glossip, but it’s not the only evidence. There have been innocent people on Death Row—see Illinois’s shining examples. This guy ain’t one of them.

      1. Seriously, you think THAT is a good case for a DEATH PENALTY, along with testimony from the actual killer that was, at best, coached? You are freaking crazy.

      2. yes, selling a couch is a smoking gun. And there were two witnesses – the methbilly who actually carried out the murder and the other knuckledragger who worked at the hotel who had a beef with Mr Guilty over a workmans comp complaint. No physical evidence or motive or witnesses to the crime that didnt literally bludgeon the victim to death, but who needs that shit when you have hearsay. right?

        1. Motive? Glossip was ripping off the guy he had the methbilly kill. He also was doing a shitty job renovating the victim’s motel. What physical evidence would you like to prove that Glossip asked Sneed to kill Van Treese? How many witnesses to most murders do you think there are, besides the guy doing the killing? You’re asking for an impossibility.

          As far as hearsay goes, I don’t have a problem with admitting it, provided the jury gets advised about who heard it and whether they had a motive to lie. That isn’t the case, but here it doesn’t matter, given that the hearsay exclusions don’t apply when they concern statements the party opponent (the defendant) made.

          Look, you’re asking whether the guy did it or not. When you read the appellate opinion (and probably the trial record they relied upon—still waiting for trial courts to make that stuff easily searchable online) it is pretty clear that Glossip solicited this murder. Would I sentence him to death? No. I’d reserve that for cases like the one Gilmore talked about in, I think, the PM links—the 5 stabbing death robbery in CO. T-ball failure Sneed? Sure, give him the needle instead of Glossip. But he got to the cops first. And, like it or not, giving deals to the first guy to get to the cops—even if he’s a thorough shitbag—-is how cases get cracked.

          1. My beef is with assholes and DP opponents like Sister Prejean going on and on about how this guy is innocent of murder. Reading the judicial opinions should convince you that he’s no such thing. IMHO, it hampers the cause of either those who are anti-DP, or people like me, who feel that the damned thing is too random, to trumpet guilty fucks like Glossip as “innocent.”

            There are plenty of innocent people in the U.S. who’ve been under sentence of death, or, damn the system who put them there, have been executed. Again, go look at all of the people IL let go, who were put there because they, or other witnesses, were coerced, tortured to give the testimony that put them on Death Row. Or Cameron Willingham, if we want to stay in Texas (though I’m not entirely convinced he was factually innocent, yet I would not have voted to kill him, were I on the jury). They are people who are realistically innocent of the crimes that landed them on Death Row. Not this guy, and it cheapens what is a worthwhile cause when the Innocence Project starts blathering about murderers like this. Similar to what happens here when people start spouting off about how unjust it was that guys like Michael Brown got shot.

  5. 37 days? What’s with the fake precision?

    1. Wanted to get past Hallowe’en. Stimulus, ya know, new masks and costumes.

  6. The one thing I have never seen explained is what exactly is this guy’s part in the murder. The headlines all over make it seem like a complete travesty of justice, that he had nothing at all to do with anything, might as well have been picked at random.

    I don’t think the State has any business executing anyone for anything, but in pragmatic terms, I can’t tell if this guy was involved in any way or not.

    1. The guy who admitted to the killing claimed that Mr. Glossip ordered the hit during an interrogation (and at trial).

      But the transcript from the interrogation pretty clearly shows that he was manipulated/coached into saying somebody else was involved by the detective. Why? Well the killer avoided the death penalty altogether by “outing” Mr. Glossip.

      I’m pretty sure the detective sleeps extremely soundly every night.

      1. I knew about that bit. What I still don’t understand is why the cops (or the actual killer) picked on this guy to finger. What did he do that made him such a plausible mastermind?

    2. Google it. The victim was going to confront the condemned man over missing money when he was murdered. The guy who actually beat the deceased to death did not know or directly work for the victim, he was an associate of the condemned man who said he was hired to do the killing. The condemned man admitted to helping cover up the murder and lying to police about it.

  7. Discriminatory application of the death penalty, besides being unjust to the condemned, suggests that some victims’ lives are worth more than others. A study published in Crime & Delinquency (October 1980) found that, of black persons in Florida who commit murder, “those who kill whites are nearly 40 times more likely to be sentenced to death than those who kill blacks.”
    I’m just a libertarian, mom, ideologically against the death penalty.

      1. Smokin’ hot too.

    1. A study published in Crime & Delinquency (October 1980) found that, of black persons in Florida who commit murder, “those who kill whites are nearly 40 times more likely to be sentenced to death than those who kill blacks.”

      What’s the proper proportion?

      1. October 1980? Why not use Civil War data figures?

        1. Blacks won’t use a time machine to go back before 1980.

          https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6CmzT4OV-w0

    2. Discriminatory application of the death penalty, besides being unjust to the condemned, suggests that some victims’ lives are worth more than others

      I certainly hope so: someone who murders a law abiding citizen while committing a rape or property crime should receive a harsher penalty than someone who murders another felon.

      found that, of black persons in Florida who commit murder, “those who kill whites are nearly 40 times more likely to be sentenced to death than those who kill blacks.

      Well, that would be an indication of racism if offender and victim were just drawn randomly from the population (“all things being equal” assumption). But, in fact, racial statistics on homicide are highly biased in favor of black-on-black violence, which already tells you that assumptions of “all things being equal” must be wrong.

  8. Oppose the death penalty? Fine, I’m in sympathy if not total agreement.
    Oppose the death penalty in this case? I pretty much agree although I’m not a citizen of Oklahoma (thank God) and certainly wasn’t on the jury.

    Think Glossip is innocent of hiring his associate to murder his employer? You’re smoking crack

    1. This sounds about right. In any event it’s bizarre that the man who murdered the victim receives a greater degree of lenience than the man he claims asked him to do it.

      1. Kelly Renee Gissendaner, who was sentenced to death in 1998 for orchestrating the murder of her husband Doug, was executed yesterday in Georgia while the co-conspirator who comitted the murder will be eligible for parole in 2022.

        1. If what you’ve typed is correct, how are the ways you think can we ordinary citizens can go about changing such things?

          It is an honest question to which I do not know the solution,

      2. It depends on the degree of responsibility.

      3. I don’t agree. IF you believe in the death penalty (which I don’t), then it makes sense to go after the person that initiated the murder plot.

        1. But to leverage the testimony of the actual murderer by offering to plead him down to less than death row… that’s the sticking point.

  9. What’s wrong with shooting someone in the face at close range with a .30-06?

    It’s far more humane and effective than this pseudo medical bullshit. And it might even be a better deterrent.

    1. Absent a state, the condemned man in this case almost certainly would have been lynched (20 years ago). This is a good example of the inefficiency of government vs the private sector.

    2. Shooting someone in the face with a .30-06 is very likely to cause them serious injury, and may even kill them.

      1. If you had to choose between a botched lethal injection and a botched firing squad using .30-06, which would you choose?

        I know which story I’d want to tell at a bar (in between sips from my beer straw).

        1. This made me laugh.

    3. Drawing and quartering seems so much more classic.

      1. I am more of a lingchi sort of guy.

      2. What? No fans of the Iron Maiden here? Wtf?

        1. Hair bands, feh.

        2. The Iron Maiden is (a) a torture device and not an execution device, and (b) wasn’t invented until the 1800’s and wasn’t used for torture.

          1. The Iron Maiden is my buddy’s wife. He has a curious scar on his chest, from fighting with her while she was doing laundry.

    4. Did scaphism finally fall out of the collective h&r memory?

      Not yet!

        1. Why no catchy name for “being rolled down a hill inside a spiked barrel” ? t’s probably even longer to write out in Latin, or to say in illiterate barbarian-babble.

          1. I’m now on a mission to scan Polybius for the term.

        2. You people are all nuts.

          The Blood Eagle’s where it’s at. Keeps the wimps out of Valhalla.

          1. I am re-watching of season two of Vikings, so this is a good choice, and also ouchies.

            Additionally, Rollo is the fucking man.

            1. If you’re willing to make a trip to France, you can see his real grave at the cathedral in Rouen. Glad to see they’re setting him up as Duke of Normandy for the next season.

    5. The guillotine is the obvious answer: fast, effective, cheap.

      1. I have an image of you sitting by the basket, knitting.

        1. A little known H&R fact is that Mrs. Struthers convinced Dr. Guillotine that his giant head smashing rock plan was stupid back in 1789.

        2. I don’t do handy crafts.

  10. It is amazing that you can be such a coward, yet still be the governor of the state. Ms. Fallin must jump at every shadow she sees.

  11. It is amazing that you can be such a coward, yet still be the governor of the state. Ms. Fallin must jump at every shadow she sees.

    1. She’s almost as cowardly as those military age Syrian welfare leaches angling to scam their way into the US and whine about our felafel-joints not being as good as the ones back home where their children are being raped and murdered by Assad and/or ISIS.

      1. Wrong leech.

  12. OT: This shit infuriates me.

    An assistant director of the Secret Service urged that unflattering information the agency had in its files about a congressman critical of the service be made public, according to a government watchdog report released Wednesday.

    “Some information that he might find embarrassing needs to get out,” Assistant Director Edward Lowery wrote in an e-mail to a fellow director on March 31, commenting on an internal file that was being widely circulated inside the service. “Just to be fair.”

    Every agency is a weapon to be used against perceived enemies.

    1. I emailed that in earlier, hoping they’d put it on Hit and Run.

      I think it was Tarran’s theory that there’s a 4th branch of government: Civil Service.

    2. That is infuriating.

      All told, 18 supervisors, including assistant directors, the deputy director and even Clancy’s chief of staff knew the information was being widely shared through agency offices, the report said.

      Roth himself has faced criticism over his handling of the investigation because he allowed inspectors from the Secret Service’s internal affairs office to sit in on interviews and question some witnesses alongside his investigators.

      Federal agents cannot be fired or investigated property. Lovely.

  13. Food thread jack:

    I’m making this tomorrow.

    Should be ready in about 10 days.

    1. Nice.

      I have a big hunk of pork in a brine in my refrigerator. Step one from a recipe for gumbo I took out of BeerAdvocate magazine.

      1. This is my first time curing. I suppose it’s necessary though, because the smoking temperature is 150.

        1. I don’t have a smoker, though it still on my to-buy list.

          This is the first brining. The brine smells delicious.

          1. urgh… This is my first time brining.

            1. Brining is mandatory for poultry. MANDATORY.

    2. Since this is a food thread, I’m going to pimp these guys. I’ve ordered from them and so far everything I’ve had is great. My favorite so far is the Tyroler Jagdwurst. It goes very well with eggs.

      1. First thing I see is the Bairische colors – I am so there. Definitely will check this out.

  14. Is it just me or does that guy look like he could be Aaron Roger’s older brother?

  15. I understand that you and I want to rip killers and genocidal maniacs limb to limb and boil their organs in chocolate sauce and stab needles into their living flesh parts and balls and cunt lips and intestinal walls and seep their knees in odd stews for eating on cold nights in the boring Midwest where even ghosts are boiled in corn cob water but somehow past all these rivers of delivery remains the ethics of killing. Killing others is defensible when direct lasers and muscle and evil is launched with no question that to engage in otherwise results in the death of self or others nearby.

    The state is rarely, if ever, faced with such direct recoil and is required to determine the execution of others within its borders with a fierce fucking purist process that negates an infinity of ‘ifs’ and question marks which is often the case so to avoid being like the fucking friends we call the horrible shit baskets called the UAE can we please act like motherfucking responsible ethical humans in this thing called America and end the fucking death penalty forever? Because no fucking prosecutor can ever be trusted for one. Trust a prosecutor like a serial killer and kill neither and maybe throw both in jail forever.

  16. How about those Hillary emails????

    Jesus Christ she’s incompetent, and it’s in writing.

    1. Hillary was incompetent when she was a lass. Her only saving grace in this fellow’s sight was that she obviously gets off on her husband fucking babes which I actually understand being a fucking fellow that enjoys the dungeons and sex clubs and basements writhing with dirty drunks fucking all sorts of each other.

      1. I don’t think she gets off on it, or even tolerates it. But she wants power so badly that she allows it to go on.

        1. How does she not tolerate it, lovely Playa? Generally, when one doesn’t tolerate aberrant behavior all sorts of ninja stars slam into the various malleable surfaces. I’m comfortable with the ‘not getting off on it’ but rich elite women do get off on some serious shit that would send a Kardashian or average Midwestern good Methodist babe to the courts.

          1. She would have divorced him after the Lewinsky thing. It was definitely an option.

            But she REALLY REALL REALLY wants to be president.

            Hillary is a post-menopausal asexual. She’s just trying to keep a lid on Bill’s behavior so it doesn’t ruin her plans….

            1. Hillary is a post-menopausal asexual.

              SugarFree begs to disagree.

            2. even pre-menopausal, no one accused her being sexual. She made a business decision to marry a guy she believed was going places. He did that, he is willing to campaign for her, and she keeps up her end of the agreement. The daughter is on the same plane as the Obama girls; now, there’s a pair of grownups I would call asexual.

            3. Closets can be public bathroom stall shallow or very velvet red deep with locked door. No fucking way you or I can figure out that woman’s sexuality and I am fucking perfectly happy not doing so, brother.

              We can agree, prohaps, on the very exigent reality that Hillary the queen of too fucking much needs to retire and stop fucking with American reality.

    2. Pl?ya Manhattan.|9.30.15 @ 7:55PM|#
      “How about those Hillary emails????”

      New set of lies I missed?

      1. More of her incompetence.
        http://blogs.wsj.com/washwire/…..er-father/

        She has no idea what is going on in the department she’s supposedly in charge of.

        1. And concern that Fox News would make hay of it is the very height of concern for a professional and effectve SoS, right?
          Bleegh…..

  17. Philosophically, I have nothing against the death penalty. Sometimes death seems like an appropriate punishment for a horrible crime, but we know the state is criminally corrupt (see above) and can never be trusted to carry out a just sentence.

    1. Well of course.

    2. What the good Mrs Struthers said. “He needed killin'” is a perfectly acceptable defense under the right circumstances, to my thinking, but there is no way the government can be trusted to handle the process.

      1. “He needed killin'” is a perfectly acceptable defense under…

        …Texas law.

        1. You had to know there was a reason I put up with scorpions.

        2. Fuck Texas. Texas is when Jesus decided that real hell isn’t applicable work for hipsters and America lovers who’ve never read a word of philosophy or a line in the constitution. Texas is the gray area between heaven and hell in some various curves of the socioplastic world.

          1. And that’s without mentioning the heat. Or the snakes.

            1. Well, there’s Austin. All heat and critters, but good partying.

      2. “but there is no way the government can be trusted to handle the process.”

        I’ll go further:
        Even if the sate could be trusted and was 100% accurate in judgement, I won’t grant the state that power.
        There was argument on the earlier thread that the death penalty is different only in degree from any other government activity, since they are all based on coercion.
        I disagree: Purposely killing someone already in custody is functionally different from a parking ticket, no matter that they can toss your butt in jail for the ticket and kill you if you try to escape.

        1. Exactly. I’ve yet to see a well made argument that killing a prisoner in any way makes up for any of his/her crimes. It also has never been shown to be a deterrent to criminality. It’s almost certain that innocents have been put to death. For all those reasons and more, I don’t trust the state with this power.

          1. Exactly. I’ve yet to see a well made argument that killing a prisoner in any way makes up for any of his/her crimes. It also has never been shown to be a deterrent to criminality.

            It stops them from committing any more crimes and it serves as a protectant for correctional officers working with prisoners that otherwise have nothing to lose. When you look at murders committed by people post-Furman:, who were under sentence of death, had their sentences commuted by Furman, were released, and went on to commit more murders, it’s more than the number of people who’ve been wrongfully executed, even if the Innocence Project is taken wholly at face value.

            I agree with you in that I don’t think the death penalty, as practiced pretty much everywhere other than ‘DP-practiced’ jurisdictions such as Harris County, Texas, is much of a deterrent to criminals. Criminals traditionally do not plan very well, don’t assess relative risk all that well, and the prospect of catching a capital case is what, less than 5 percent of all murders? Even if you do catch a capital case, execution will be done, what, 10-plus years down the line? Who’d be deterred by that, especially if you felt you wouldn’t be caught?

            That said, deterrence isn’t the only goal of punishment.

    3. *we know the state is criminally corrupt (see above) and can never be trusted to carry out a just sentence*
      All things considered, this is probably the biggest factor in changing my belief that the death penalty is justice served.

      1. I’m just not willing to let off the most heinous characters who are guilty of nasty things beyond any and all doubt simply because there are some bad actors working for the state. There have been numerous people executed for whom society need shed no tears because their acts deserve no sympathy or justification.

        1. And numerous people innocent of the crimes they were convicted for.

          1. Something fight with monsters something something gaze into the abyss something gazes also into you.

        2. The un-just death of even one human being should not be a price we are willing to pay.

  18. I wouldn’t want to be a woman because their t-shirts suck on Amazon. Like if I was a woman i’d fucking hate the internet. Nothing on the internet is cool for women. I know this because this motherfucking shroom eating bitch buys t-shirts for my daughter on this fucking thing and tshirts for little girls suck cock. FUCKING SUCK COCK. Little men have the best fucking t’s ever in the history of the world so I buy cool boy shirts for my little fucking girl. Jessica Simpson’s shit is always made for fucking midget Asians and Jesus Christ should grant me a special wand to magically make some of that shit fit my kid. Fuck the internet.

    1. I’m not sure Jesus is in the wand business, AC. I was with you up until then.

      1. I would buy you a shirt but shirts that melt human flesh into wormhole portals haven’t been invented yet.

        1. +1 click shopping

    2. I wouldn’t want to be a woman because if I was a woman I would always be cold, and I do not want to always be cold.

      1. I just plan on enjoying the Crust juggle a pile of babes.

        1. juggle a pile of babes

          There’s an image I could do without.

            1. don’t be sad babe. I ate a mushrom that made be led your shit harvesting babes and then your fucking arms became squid arm popeye arms and Crusty the God juggled a million dimensions of babes and their jiggling boobs and the new universes that were creationed have to be explored by NASACRUSTY…

    3. Jessica Simpson’s shit is always made for fucking midget Asians and Jesus Christ should grant me a special wand to magically make some of that shit fit my kid.

      Not my fault you chose not to breed some cute Laotian girls.

      Seriously, my daughter is a teeny-tiny little thing.

  19. Billy Ray Cyrus does improve a classic jaunt down internet row on the odd minute but Billy’s little songs don’t make for cool graphics for cool women and little punkass girls…. I can find thousands of great shit for men and little boys but why the FUCK does the graphic and fashion community think that little big girls don’t warrant fucking great graphics? What the FUCK?j

    Even Jessica Simpson’s crap is shit for girls. Nothing super edgy and powerful and mystiqua and bring a god down for girls…. I guess girls are little fucking females that should make babies and be fucking simple cock suckers and salad makers…

    Fuck the internet. PROOF? Type in Quicksilver girl. And then type in Quicksilver boy. On All Amazon… Note the difference.

  20. Two points:

    1. The State is not competent to administer the death penalty. I am certain that the death penalty is warranted in some cases but there is no entity competent to deal it out.

    2. What is with the ridiculous concoction they use to kill? It is absurd.

    I had to have my mother’s chihuahua euthanized last week. Poor little guy went into a very peaceful unconscious state within seconds after the first injection and death occurred before the vet could finish the second injection (less than 3 seconds). It was clean, peaceful and stunningly effective. Why does the state fuck around with salt water?

    http://www.petmd.com/blogs/ful…..s-101-5780

    1. Do you believe private individuals should put people to death instead?

      1. Do you think that’s an actual alternative?

  21. What’s this stupid headline about a murder not committed?

    1. It’s a cosmo thing. Everyone on death row is innocent.

      1. Yeah, non-cosmos prefer the state to murder people, right SIV? State murder is soooo libertarian!

        1. Is there any punishment for criminals that you could not apply the same libertarian arguments against as the death penalty?

    2. It is playing a bit loose with what the man was convicted of. Glossip did not kill the victim by his own hand, but he was not convicted of that. He was convicted of hiring the man who did the killing to carry it out. What the convict’s lawyers are saying is they have evidence that he did no such thing.

      The implication of the headline is that you should not be convicted of murder if you get someone to do it for you. The is an overly clever construction that suggests too much.

  22. Google pay 97$ per hour my last pay check was $8500 working 1o hours a week online. My younger brother friend has been averaging 12k for months now and he works about 22 hours a week. I cant believe how easy it was once I tried it out.
    This is wha- I do…… ?????? http://www.buzznews99.com

  23. Everyone keeps saying ‘the state’ is doing X,Y or Z, and ‘the state’ is incompetant to blah.

    But I didn’t know that there were capital bench trials. It was my understanding that juries found these people guilty, and juries sentenced them to death.

    Juries. Not ‘the state’.

    The state is a mechanism here. It’s Sneed being paid to do the dirty.

    And, because it has to deal with the whims of The People, execution methods are downright byzantine–because DP opponents do their best to make every execution method ‘cruel and unusual punishment’ so that it can’t be used.

    So, in the case of administering the death penalties The People decree, the state is Sneed, wearing oven mitts and a moth eaten blindfold.

  24. He was found guilty based on evidence that was sufficient to dispell any reasonable doubt. Clearly the jury disagrees with you and the celebrities.

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.