An Alabama inmate would be the test subject for the “experimental” execution method of nitrogen hypoxia, his lawyers argued, as they asked judges to deny the state’s request to carry out his death sentence using the new method.
In a Friday court filing, attorneys for Kenneth Eugene Smith asked the Alabama Supreme Court to reject the state attorney general’s request to set an execution date for Smith using the proposed new execution method. Nitrogen gas is authorized as an execution method in three states but it has never been used to put an inmate to death.
Smith’s attorneys argued the state has disclosed little information about how nitrogen executions would work, releasing only a redacted copy of the proposed protocol.
This is interesting, and I personally feel he is fighting it only because it buys him more time. In a different article (linked in this one), where they announce Alabama’s plan to use nitrogen it says:
So he literally asked to use nitrogen, they said “ok” and now’s he’s saying “how dare you try to use me as a guinea pig”
Shocking news: man on death row does not want to die.
More at 11.
“I think something should be available” is not the same as “I volunteer to test it out”.
For example, I think ejection seats should be available on all fighter jets.
The correct analogy would be you refusing to get out of a fighter jet except via ejection seats, them refusing to be ejected lol. This guy apparently wasn’t saying it should be available in general but that it should be an option for him.
That said, I am in principle against executions.
This guy is apparently saying that he wants to know how they are planning to use nitrogen gas, and the state is refusing to tell him.
So the correct analogy would be you refusing to get out of a fighter jet except via ejection seats. Then someone says, “Okay you can get out via ‘ejection seats’, happy now?”. Then you say, “Hey what’s up with the air quotes around ‘ejection seats’? What exactly are you planning anyway? How does this ejection seat work?”. Then they say, “Don’t you worry about the details buddy. You’ll be ‘ejected’ from your ‘seat’, LOL! Now shut up and get in the plane”.
Fair point!
If you think his inconsistent argument is ridiculous, you don’t understand the legal system. It’s okay, that’s why there are lawyers. (1) Alternate pleading is a thing, (2) the State pulls the same shit except 1000% worse, (3) the judiciary, especially the GOP judiciary that is elected on a “tough on crime” platform (got to love politicized justice), is ABSOLUTELY the most inconsistent, as their goal is to accept any argument of the State that leads to speedy execution. It goes all the way up to the SCOTUS - former Chief Justice Rehnquist was absolutely a shining star of the death machine, regardless of actual innocence. EDIT: the thing that really pisses me off is when the media covers alternate pleading without context. It’s terribly biased reporting designed to give people justice boners and pump up support for the State. EDIT2: I might be slightly off with my terms of art - I’m in transactional law, not criminal law, and it’s been a hell of a long time since law school or anything involving criminal law beyond a traffic ticket.