Saturday, March 04, 2017

WFAA - #VerifyThis - Death Penalty Series

For Publication on the WFAA site. 

As per the reporter's request for the #VerifyThis, Death Penalty Series: 

"An informed opinion, from an opinionated person. That's what we're going for." 

Well, here it is: 


Subject: How Important is the Pro Death Penalty Perspective? 

RE: Let's #VerifyThis: Do we need the death penalty?
David Schechter, WFAA 10:18 AM. CST February 24, 2017 

From: Dudley Sharp, a pro death penalty expert 

Please forward to Sharmin Anselm 

1) This is a story where we have one pro death penalty person, Sharmin Anselm, a random volunteer, not an expert, and five anti death penalty folks, of whom two are experts. 

Typical death penalty media balance. 

2) Sharmin's position is this: “If you're a pedophile and you've murdered a child, I don’t think you should have that right to live."
"For Sharmin it still comes down to this... the most horrific crimes deserve the ultimate punishment." 

"Sharmin's rock solid in favor of the death penalty." 

Why? Justice --  arguably the greatest of man's goals and accomplishments. 

3) So what does reporter David Schechter do? He  tests Sharmin's position against those 5 anti death penalty folks. 

The result? Sharmin's position is unscathed. 

4) Regarding soon to be executed robber/double murderer Terry Edwards, long time death penalty opponent, protester Hartwell asks: “What do we gain by killing Terry tonight? What is going to be accomplished?” “Nothing. Absolute nothing." 

Hartwell, completely, avoids justice, the reason the jury gave that sentence and the reason for the death penalty, as for all sanctions. 

That obvious answer eludes Hartwell, but not Sharmin. 

5) "Before (reporter) David headed in to witness the execution, he and Sharmin wanted to learn about the legal system that sends inmates to death row." 

So who does David choose to consult?

Rick Halperin, of course, an internationally recognized opponent of death penalty, who says "when it comes to the capital punishment -- if you're poor -- the legal system is broken." “It is the have-nots of our society. They are the easiest group of people not to like and to care even less about because most of them have done these terrible things." 

David reports: "The largest group are black, at 44%, . . .  65% report having less than a high school education." with Halperin adding: the "people least equipped to defend themselves." 

Is David implying that there is something amiss about the 44% or the 65%.  What is the racial breakdown of capital murderers in Texas? Are those educated at less than a 12th grade education incapable of knowing that capital murder is wrong? 

Halperin adds "I just don't think we should be in the business of killing people, especially when the system is so flawed." 

Just the same ole, same ole, anti death penalty mantra "the poor murderer". 

Notice, not one flaw was revealed by Halperin (just whining), nor by David. 

Left out of David's and Halperin's  "legal system" description is  . . .  the actual legal system . . . 

All defendants are provided two defense counsel and any experts deemed needed and approved by the judges, attended by incredible due process protections, with a unanimous 12-0 vote for death is required of the jury, if the murderer is sentenced to death, with the, now, death sentenced capital murderer having, on average, 11 years of appeals, with appointed appellate counsel, through both avenues of appeals, direct appeals and the writ, both through at least three courts, one state and two federal, all paid for by the taxpayers. Trips to SCOTUS are rare. 

Somehow, David "forgot" about the entire legal system. It was all left out, of course, because it is an anti death penalty biased story. Basic. 

Both Schechter and Halperin seem, completely, clueless that it was the murderers' fault that they were on death row. That thought never entered the story, except via Sharmin. 

6) "Sharmin talked with (anti death penalty) protesters, like Yancy Balderas", who "wasn't happy with her (death row) husband's court-appointed attorney." 

Of course, no mention that Yancy was unhappy or sorry for the innocent murder victims. Standard. 

7) "Protesters rang a bell 14 times, once for every year Edwards was on Death Row." 

Yet none for the innocent murder victims, whose names and lives were completely absent from the story. Typical anti death penalty sensitivity. 

8) With regard to Edward's execution, David reports, “The big sentiment I walked out of there with was the government has a lot of power. To take a life. That is a power I hadn’t thought a lot about the government having. They can take a life,” David told Sharmin. 

Governments have been taking lives, in many ways, ever since governments were created. David was unaware? 

And David's mention of the two innocent murder victims, the sole reason for Edward's execution?  - ZERO -  Very common anti death penalty stream of consciousness.

The murder victims are Subway manager Tommy Walker, 34, and an employee, Mickell Goodwin, a 26-year-old mother of two.

Walker was an ordained minister who had planned to leave the Subway job and open his own tattoo parlor soon, family members said. “He was a big teddy bear,” said Walker’s wife, Beth. “He was famous for making people laugh. His kids and grandkids were his life. He got himself ordained so he could preside at his own kids’ weddings.” 

No specific reference to them, at all, in the story.  Standard. 

9) "Sharmin and David then headed to Houston to meet with (anti death penalty activist) Anthony Graves. He spent almost 19 years on Death Row for a crime he didn't commit. 

"Fact checking? Graves was on death row for 12 years and when his death penalty was overturned, with an additional 6.5 years in prison, after that. 

Graves states: "You damaged me and now you say it’s okay?”

I have found no one who has stated that it was "OK" that Graves, or any other "actual innocent", was wrongfully convicted. No one. Ever.

 Innocents are more at risk without the death penalty (1).

10) Graves states: “So, if both (life without parole and the death penalty) are death sentences, why do we have to stoop so low to treat people like animals? Kill them like pigs and put poison in their vein when we can take the high road in society and let them die of natural causes?”. 

This is a typical anti death penalty response, with no evidence of reflection, at all.

 It is, quite simply, legally and morally, choosing that sanction which the judge or jury finds to be the most just under the circumstance. Well described by Sharmin but, unbelievably, never considered by Graves.

Most of us know that there is very distinct difference between being executed at age 38 and dying of natural causes after serving LWOP until age 78, the later preferred by about 100% of capital murderers. 

Graves never mentions the innocent murder victims.

 Innocents are more at risk without the death penalty (1).

11) "Experts say (that LWOP is) one reason why the number of death sentences in America has plummeted 84% in the last 20 years. From 311 sentences in 1995 to 49 in 2015." 

As a rule, that would be "anti death penalty" experts, just trying to fit their narrative. 

Likely, the greatest cause of the drop in death sentences is a 70-80% drop in capital murders. 

Texas, for example: 

The Texas Life Without Parole (LWOP) law went into effect September 1, 2005.

I am unaware of any capital cases, where the death penalty was an option, whereby the capital murder occurred after 8/31/2005 and which were resolved between 9/1/2005 -12/31/2005, based upon the new LWOP law.

There was a 69% drop in Texas death sentences, from 48 in 1999 to 15 in 2005, PRIOR to LWOP having any effect on death sentences.

The first year that the LWOP law could have had an effect on death sentences was in 2006 with 11.

In 2007, death sentences rose by 36%. 

With almost total consistency, death sentences averaged a little over 10 per year from 2006-2014, just adding a 10% drop, to 79%, from the 69% decline of 1999-2005, with that 10% being but an additional small drop which can, easily, just be seen as part of a 15 year (1999-2014)  downward trend, unaffected by LWOP.

Death sentences dropped in 2015 and 2016, to 2 and 4, respectively, 10 years after the LWOP law. There is no reason to suggest that LWOP was the reason for those numbers, after a 10 year wait. 

It is important to note that juries were not allowed to be told that the previous life sentences in Texas had parole eligibility. 

Texas had a 55% drop in murders (71% drop in rate),  37% drop in robberies (60% drop in rate), from 1991-2014.

Robbery/murder is the most common death eligible crime, which may have dropped 70-80%, or more, during that period, which may account for the entire drop.

We have also had a series of US Supreme Court (SCOTUS) decisions, which has contributed to that drop, in Texas and nationally, as well as 6 states that have repealed the death penalty option, during that period, with a national effect.

The LWOP effect, if any, appears to be tiny.

12) A great finish by Sharmin: 

“Is it possible you want the death penalty, more than we need the death penalty? Does it make you feel justice was done?” David asked. 

“Depending on the case, I sure do,” Sharmin answered. 

“But does everybody need it?” David asked. 

“I think it’s a good thing to have,” said Sharmin. 

“You want it, do we all need this?” David asked, further pressing the question. 

“I believe it’s needed in our society and our justice system,” she answered. “Used the correct way, done the right way, you need to be held to a higher punishment for the higher crimes,” she finished.


 1) The Death Penalty: Saving More Innocent Lives

Thursday, February 23, 2017

American Nurses' Assoc.: Dead Wrong on Death Penalty

American Nurses' Association: Dead Wrong on Death Penalty

Notes for first draft

It is hard to fathom how the ANA could have gotten so much, so wrong (1).

A rebuttal to all of ANA's death penalty "facts".

Each one of these is a rebuttal to what ANA presented.

(p 4, para 1, fn1)


White murderers are twice as likely to be executed as are black murderers

56% of those executed are white, 35% black

For the White–Black comparisons, the Black level is 12.7 times greater than the White level for homicide, 15.6 times greater for robbery, 6.7 times greater for rape, and 4.5 times greater for aggravated assault.

For the Hispanic- White comparison, the Hispanic level is 4.0 times greater than the White level for homicide, 3.8 times greater for robbery, 2.8 times greater for rape, and 2.3 times greater for aggravated assault.

For the Hispanic–Black comparison, the Black level is 3.1 times greater than the Hispanic level for homicide, 4.1 times greater for robbery, 2.4 times greater for rape, and 1.9 times greater for aggravated assault.

As robbery/murder is, by far, the most common death penalty eligible murder, the multiples will be even greater.

From 1977-2012, white death row murderers have been executed at a rate 41% higher than are black death row murderers, 19.3% vs 13.7%, respectively. ( Table 12, Executions and other dispositions of inmates sentenced to death, by race and Hispanic origin, 1977–2012, Capital Punishment 2012, Bureau of Justice Statistics, last edited 11/3/14)

"There is no race of the offender / victim effect at either the decision to advance a case to penalty hearing or the decision to sentence a defendant to death given a penalty hearing."

Is There Class Disparity with Executions?

"99.8% of poor murderers have avoided execution.

It may be, solely, dependent upon the definitions of "wealthy" and "poor", as to whether wealthy murderers are any more or less likely to be executed, based upon the very small number and percentage of capital murders that are committed by the wealthy, as compared to the poor.


 (p 5, para 2, fn1)

The Death Penalty: Saving More Innocent Lives

(p 5, para 3, fn1)

Saving Costs with The Death Penalty

(p 5, para 4, fn1)

It s impossible to prove that any sanction or any negative outcome does not deter some. Why? It would be contrary to reason and history, as we all well know.

--  Full rebuttal to Nagin (National Research Council)

Death Penalty Deterrence: Defended & Advanced

--  Full Rebuttal to Radelet (Criminologists)

Deterrence and the Death Penalty: A Reply to Radelet and Lacock

(p 5, para 5, fn1)

The Death Penalty: Fair and Just

(p 5, para 6, fn1)

There is a huge body of very well known legal work with regard to mental illness and the death penalty.

Apparently, the ANA has no clue. No surprise.

Cases to follow.


(p 5, para 7, fn1)

The ANA is unaware that because of state governments and states' rights, that the death penalty statutes, as all laws, may be different from state to state. This is no surprise and is well known to all, but not the ANA?

Nebraska reinstated the death penalty by popular vote, 61-39%, in 2016.

The other six states that have, recently, revoked the death penalty all did so contrary to those states popular death penalty support and could only accomplish repeal based upon a Democratic majority legislature, with a Democratic governor.


(p6, para 8, fn 1)

--  "The normal moral reason for upholding capital punishment is reverence for life itself. Indeed, this is the reason why scripture and Christian tradition have upheld it, a fact which suggests that, if anything, it may be the abolition of capital punishment which threatens to cheapen life, not its retention." J. Budziszewski, Professor of Government and Philosophy at the University of Texas at Austin, Jan. 25, 2002 conference, Pew Forum, titled "A Call for Reckoning: Religion and the Death Penalty"

--   John Murray: "Nothing shows the moral bankruptcy of a people or of a generation more than disregard for the sanctity of human life." "... it is this same atrophy of moral fiber that appears in the plea for the abolition of the death penalty." "It is the sanctity of life that validates the death penalty for the crime of murder. It is the sense of this sanctity that constrains the demand for the infliction of this penalty. The deeper our regard for life the firmer will be our hold upon the penal sanction which the violation of that sanctity merit." (Page 122 of Principles of Conduct).

--  The biblical support for the death penalty is, specifically, based within human dignity.

Genesis 9:5-6, from the 1764 Quaker Bible, the only Quaker bible.

5 And I will certainly require the Blood of your Lives, and that from the Paw of any Beast: from the Hand likewise of Man, even of any one’s Brother, will I require the Life of a Man.

6 He that sheds Man’s Blood, shall have his own shed by Man; because in the Likeness of God he made Mankind.

--  Vengeance cannot be the foundation for the death penalty. The death penalty, as all sanctions, are based within justice, with a just, proportional sanction, given within due process, whereby no one connected to the crime can decide either the verdict or sentence, which are both the sole provinces of the judge(s) and/or jury, neither of which has a a vengeance component, nor foundation - again, very well known by all, except ANA.


(p6, para 9, fn 1)

No "Botched" Execution - Arizona (or Ohio)

1) Capital Punishment and  Nurses’ Participation in Capital Punishment,


Sent to ANA 2/23/2017

From: Dudley Sharp, a death penalty expert

The American Nurses' Association: Dead Wrong on Death Penalty

It is hard to fathom how the ANA could have gotten so much, so wrong (1).

ANA's Death Penalty Facts

ANA, primarily, used an anti death penalty site for all of the alleged "facts" about the death penalty. ANA fact checked none of it, with the foreseeable result.

Here are just two of ANA's blunders, from a field of blunders.

1) ANA writes: "Since 1973, over 155 people have been exonerated and freed from death row." (p 5, par 2, fn 1)


Anti death penalty folks, simply, redefined both "exonerated" and "innocent", as if they had redefined lie as truth, and stuffed a bunch of cases into those new "definitions", as is, easily, discovered by basic fact checking (2), ignored by ANA. Various reviews find the "exonerated" claims to be 70-83% in error (2). This has been known for nearly 20 years.

2) ANA writes: "In California, the cost of confining one inmate on death row is $90,000 more per year than the cost of maximum security prison ." ". . . a study in North Carolina showed that the cost of a death penalty sentence was $216,000 and the total cost per execution was $2.16 million, more than the cost of life imprisonment (p 5, para 3, fn 1)."

Ludicrous. Neither is possible (3),  just like much of the ANA nonsense, as revealed by fact checking (4).

ANA Confusing Politics for Ethics and Morality

Some have undertaken an ill advised or dishonest effort to show that medical ethics require medical professionals to shun the death penalty.

It is an, utterly, false narrative.

The effort to ban medical professionals' participation in executions is an unethical effort to fabricate professional ethical standards, based upon personal anti-death penalty activism, from those whose professions are medically related.

As with, ANA: " . . . the principles of  social justice speak to the  importance of  the nursing profession’s taking a stance against the death penalty, due to the preponderance of evidence against the fairness and effectiveness of capital punishment as a deterrent." (p1, fn 1)

The foundation for the death penalty, as for all sanctions, is justice. Deterrence cannot be negated for the death penalty nor for any other sanction, nor for any other negative prospect (5). ANA chooses to risk sacrificing more innocent lives (5).

Fairness is a highly subjective consideration. For example, based upon 2008-2011, US data, " . . . the true number of premature deaths associated with preventable harm to patients was estimated at more than 400,000 per year. Serious harm seems to be 10- to 20-fold more common (4-8 million) than lethal harm." (6) 


There is no proof of an innocent executed in the US, at least since the 1930s.

Based upon ANA's constant errors (2-4), we know the ANA could not, possibly, have made an informed evaluation of fairness, as detailed.

ANA parrots that the death penalty is a human rights violation. Both freedom and life are fundamental human rights. Neither is inviolate, which is why we have both incarceration and executions, with due process. None of the groups stating that the death penalty is a human rights violation also state that incarceration is, as well. The only difference in the stances are that one is honest and the other not.

Nurses may ethically/morally participate in executions based upon their caring spirit, that they may assist in providing less painful executions and that they, also, may find the death penalty to be a just sanction that helps to save more innocent lives.

As per, Dr. Robert Truog, MD, Professor of Medical Ethics, Harvard Medical School:

"If I think of the kind of a hypothetical where you have an inmate who is about to be executed and knows that this execution may involve excruciating suffering, that inmate requests the involvement of a physician, because he knows that the physician can prevent that suffering from occurring, and if there is a physician who is willing to do that, and we know from surveys that many are, I honestly can't think of any principle of medical ethics that would say that that is an unethical thing for the physician to do." (7)

How could he reach that conclusion? Easily.

Just as per page 2, fn 1, ANA could have provided that "Nurses. . .  provide comfort care at the  end of life, if requested, including pain control, anxiety relief or procuring the services of a chaplain or spiritual advisor.", for nurses that find the death penalty to be just and ethical.

There has been a lot of ink used to review the long standing medical professions ethical prohibitions against the death penalty.

There is no such prohibition.

Some in the medical community have fabricated an ethical prohibition against medical professionals' involvement in state executions by invoking the famous "do no harm" credo and the Hippocratic Oath.

It is a dishonest effort.

THE ETHICS OF LYING - The Hippocratic Oath

Note: To their credit, ANA does not use the Hippocratic Oath to support their position, but does, foundationally, use "do no harm" (1).

Some have proclaimed that "First do no harm" is a centuries old foundation of medical ethics, weighing against death penalty participation.


It is an anti-death penalty fraud that "do no harm" is in the context of the state execution of murderers (8).

Neither the Hippocratic Oath nor "do no harm" have anything to do with executions (8).

Both are, solely, concerned with the medical profession and patients.

" 'do no harm' (a phrase translated into Latin as "Primum nonnocere") is often mistakenly ascribed to the (Hippocratic) oath, although it appears nowhere in that venerable pledge.(8)"

"Hippocrates came closest to issuing this directive in his treatise Epidemics, in an axiom that reads, 'As to disease, make a habit of two things - to help, or at least, to do no harm.'  (8)"

"As to disease" -  Nothing else.

There is no relevance outside medicine and, most certainly, no prohibition against medical professionals participation in the state execution of murderers.

The classic Hippocratic Oath & Its Brother, the Hypocrisy Oath

"I will neither give a deadly drug to anybody who asked for it, nor will I make a suggestion to this effect. Similarly I will not give to a woman an abortive remedy. In purity and holiness I will guard my life and my art." (8)

This is a prohibition against euthanasia and abortion (8) and has nothing to do with the fabricated medical prohibition of participation in state sanctioned executions.

Do those anti-death penalty physicians and medical associations promise license revocation if any of their members participate in euthanasia or abortion?

Of course not.

In fact, we have Belgium approving the assisted suicides of children, of any age, with participation by physicians (9).

Many medical professionals fully accept and participate in both abortion and euthanasia.

Many could care less about the true ethical prohibitions that exist in a medical, historical context.

Instead, they just invent new ones, against the death penalty and for child suicide, while avoiding the true prohibitions, ushering in the newly renamed and truthful - Hypocrisy Oath.

Is the ANA unaware that the lethal injection executions of murderers are a criminal justice sanction and that it is not a medical procedure with patients?

If nurses wish to participate in end of life situations that have nothing to do with patients, medical associations should not place political roadblocks in their way.

The few legal reviews of this topic have found as reason and fact require:

"Other courts have addressed (physicians participating in executions) and found that it does not violate the physician's code of ethics to participate in an execution . . ." "The Court... does not find that Missouri physicians who are involved in administering the lethal injections are violating their ethical obligations . .  ." (Taylor v. Crawford, Jan. 31, 2006, Court Order issued by the US Western District Court of Missouri)

Let's look at some additional sensible reviews:

The editors of The Public Library of Science (PLoS) Medicine write:

"Execution by lethal injection, even if it uses tools of intensive care such as intravenous tubing and beeping heart monitors, has the same relationship to medicine that an executioner's axe has to surgery." ("Lethal Injection Is Not Humane", PLoS, 4/24/07).

So to, The American Society of Anesthesiologists:

"Although lethal injection mimics certain technical aspects of the practice of anesthesia, capital punishment in any form is not the practice of medicine. ("Statement on Physician Nonparticipation in Legally Authorized Executions," 10/18/06).

Both confirm the obvious: The state execution of murderers has no connection, ethically or otherwise, to the medical treatment of patients.

Rationally, there is no ethical nor moral connection, Some folks just want to fabricate a false narrative. So that's what they do - just another anti-death penalty fraud.

1) Capital Punishment and  Nurses’ Participation in Capital Punishment,

2) The Innocent Frauds: Standard Anti Death Penalty Strategy


An Open Fraud in the Death Penalty Debate: How Death Penalty Opponents Lie - The "Innocent" and the "Exonerated"

3)  Death Penalty Costs: California


"Duke (North Carolina) Death Penalty Cost Study (1993): Let's be honest"

4) Review of other ANA fact problems

5) The Death Penalty: Saving More Innocent Lives

6) A New, Evidence-based Estimate of Patient Harms Associated with Hospital Care
James, John T. PhD, Journal of Patient Safety, September 2013 - Volume 9 - Issue 3 - p 122–128,

7) New England Journal of Medicine interview titled "Perspective Roundtable: Physicians and Execution", Jan. 18, 2008

8) Physicians & The State Execution of Murderers: No Medical Ethics Dilemma


The Death Penalty & Medical Ethics Revisited

9)  "What Belgium's child euthanasia law means for America and the Constitution", Eugene Kontorovich, Washington Post, February 13, 2014

Friday, January 20, 2017

Rebuttal: Botched Executions

Rebuttal: Botched Executions 
Dudley Sharp

To: Professors and Staff, Georgetown Law School
       and Georgetown Law Journal 

RE: Rebuttal:
Facing the Firing Squad, ANDREW JENSEN KERR, 104 Geo L.J. Online 74 (2016)
From: Dudley Sharp 

I hope this helps Kerr and the Law Journal to vet a little better. 

It appears that lethal injection executions are "botched" about 1% of the time, not 7%.

 The vast majority of the "botched" executions are no such thing.

 The majority of the false "botched" claims are attributed to multiple needle pricks and/or problems with the murderer's veins.

 Everyone familiar with lethal injections and other IV procedures knows that multiple needle pricks are a responsible and necessary function to avoid "botched" executions or botched medical IV use. 

Multiple needle pricks are 1) not "botched" executions, but represent a common, normal safety practice with all IV procedures, daily and worldwide, 2) preparation for the execution, not the execution, and 3) often required to have secure needle insertion and retention.

 It would be negligent not to go through that procedure, the opposite of "botched". 

The entire process of looking for good veins is to prevent "botched" executions. Once good useable , secure veins were found,  the executions proceeded.

 It is the opposite of "botched". 

Other, wrongly, identified "botched" executions are when the murderer is gasping for breath, coughing, etc., which are the expected, known outcomes of respiratory distress, common effects with these drugs, whose effects are well known to  include . . . .  respiratory distress, (1) with very few of those incidents having any evidence to show consciousness or pain. 

Other false claims of "botched" executions are cases where the murderer is making noise, jerking, having spasms, etc., well known in cases of drug overdoses, which is, precisely, what we are dealing with (1) - drug overdoses are what lethal injections are -  with zero evidence of consciousness or pain. 

These are the well known side effects of the drugs used, not "botched" executions. 

In addition, many of  the sources for alleged "botched" are media, which, completely, blew the reality of the Arizona execution of Wood and the Ohio execution of McGuire cases, two infamous "botched" executions (2). 

These were not botched executions, but just took a long time to die, as expected, with no evidence of any consciousness or pain (2). 

What happens when an author doesn't fact check their sources and their sources are media that don't fact check? Will anyone rely on those sources or the conclusions drawn from them? 

"(Wood's execution) doesn’t actually sound like a botched execution. This actually sounds like a typical scenario if you used that drug combination,” said Karen Sibert, an anesthesiologist and associate professor at Cedars-Sinai Medical Center. Sibert was speaking on behalf of the California Society of Anesthesiologists." (2). 

Both of those executions are included in "botched" execution claims, only because folks depended upon inaccurate media reporting and did not fact check them. 

Kerr writes: " The desiccated market for  this anesthetic has forced U.S.  wardens to shop for off- brand  pharmaceuticals in  places  like  India or  U.S.  state regulated  “compounding”  pharmacies,  where  standards  of  quality  control  might  be lacking." 

"Might" is irrelevant. Facts are relevant. Quality control might not be lacking. 

Denno brings up, constantly, the 2012 meningitis outbreak at a compounding pharmacy, as if that is representative of compounding pharmacies. 

Has there been one case of improperly compounded drugs used in an execution? No. 

Somehow, that was left out of the article. 

Has Kerr or Denno considered how many innocent people have died and or been injured, in the US, since 1973, because of errors by non-compounding pharmacies and because of the FDA and the drug companies approving drugs that were, later, found to be deadly or injurious? 

My educated guess is that it is way over 100,000 innocents dead, with countless injured (2). Why don't they check  out "medical misadventures" (3), finding up to 400,000 innocent patients dying, every year in the US, due to such "misadventure" (3).

I am speaking of innocent patients, not guilty murderers. 

Has it been shown that compounding pharmacies are a less reliable source for execution drugs than other sources? Not that I am aware of. 

Did Kerr review the medical literature on the overdosing properties of all the drugs being used for executions? It appears not. 

Does Kerr understand that those properties are the same, whether in an execution setting, or not? 

The properties of the drugs don't, all of a sudden, magically, change, when they are used in lethal injection. 

This, below, indicates that Kerr is unaware. 

Kerr writes:    " . . . in  the  post Baze world of midazolam and other off brand substitutes the trigger  anesthetic  might  fail  to sedate  the  executed." 

"Might" is not a fact. Factually, all the cases Kerr is  speaking of were sedated.

 Kerr writes: "  . . . the anti epileptic drug  pentobarbital has even  been repurposed to replace  sodium  thiopental. The  deleterious  consequences  of  these  kinds of  substitute  compounds  are  exacerbated  by  the  tranquilizing  effect  of pancuronium  (the  second  drug  of  the  traditional  three part  cocktail)." ""The feint here is that in the botched injection this muscle relaxant can mimic a look of serenity on the face of the executed, when they are in fact experiencing the visceral terror of their “whole body burning. It is the orca’s false smile of Blackfish." "the terrific pain of the botched lethal injection remains masked". "The executed person’s musculature is too incapacitated to reflect the existential pain of cardiac arrest. Instead, the mask of  the  executed  is inflected  as a  performance of dignified  passing  for  the execution audience. " 

Such fiction. Such drama. Kerr has no evidence to support his claims.

Texas uses a one drug protocol,  pentobarbital and has had no problems. 

What evidence does Kerr have that those states, which use  pentobarbital, first, and pancuriun, second, have had any problems with that protocol? None.

Is Kerr aware that those two drugs, used together, may increase the potency or effects of both? 

Kerr fails to tell us why and how the first drug, which causes unconsciousness just, all of a sudden, decides, on its own, to stop being effective, and thus, somehow allows the murderer to become conscious, even though such is not possible, with the drugs known characteristics, at the dosages given.


Kerr could not have botched this more. 

Kerr, also, botched the physician's "do no harm" oath.

"(D)o no harm" is not part of the Hippocratic Oath (5) and is, only, specified with regard to patients (5), in another document.  Death row inmates are not patients. 

The Hippocratic Oath bans physician participation in both euthanasia and abortions (5), practices which countless physicians participate in, millions of times per year, without any complaints from the AMA or any concern for the Hippocratic Oath. 

There is no death penalty ban in that oath. 

The AMA seems to only follow the Hypocrisy Oath. 

The alternate method for execution in Oklahoma is nitrogen gas, by far the most foolproof method, when looking at 1) the fewest things that can go wrong, 2) the total lack of pain for the executed murderer and 3) it cannot be withheld or restricted (3). All organs are useful in the very off chance the murderer wishes to donate viable organs or their body to science. I agree that the firing squad is a responsible option. 

1)  There are a lot of medical writings on these issues. Here are just two. 

Opioid Drug Use and MyoclonusPosted in Physical Health 

Opiates and Sleep-Disordered Breathingby Barry Krakow, Sleep Dynamic Therapy | Nov 12, 2015 

2) No "Botched" Execution - Arizona (or Ohio) 

3) see Do MORE Harm: The Anti Death Penalty Solution

 within The Death Penalty & Medical Ethics Revisited 

4) Nitrogen Gas; Flawless, peaceful, unrestricted method of execution 

5)  see THE ETHICS OF LYING - The Hippocratic Oath 

within The Death Penalty & Medical Ethics Revisited

Friday, November 04, 2016



To:  Governor Pete Ricketts, his cabinet & staff
        Nebraska Catholic Bishops, staff and parishes

Nebraska Supreme Court
Nebraska Legislators & staff
Nebraska County Sheriffs
The Police Officers' Association of Nebraska
Attorney General Doug Peterson & staff           
Nebraska County Attorneys Association
Nebraska Crime Commission
U of Nebraska Law School
Colleges & Universities Throughout Nebraska

Media throughout Nebraska 

Distributed 11/4/16

Re:  "We Nebraska judges support retaining repeal of the death penalty", Local View, Lincoln Journal Star, 10/31/16  (1)

Subject: More Anti Death Penalty Nonsense: Clueless and/or Willful Ignorance? Nebraska Judges 

From: Dudley Sharp 

Judges As Jackasses 

Nationally, many (hopefully most) of us have been appalled by the series of judicial sentences, over the last few years, wherein we have witnessed  judges giving extremely light sentences for rapists (2) and for a 16 year old drunk driver, who killed four innocent people, injuring 9 more, 2 severely, with that judge giving no jail time, based upon the judge honoring the "affluenza" defense, that being incarceration being too harsh for someone who grew up spoiled and rich (3). 

All, horrendous decisions, contrary to any basic understanding of justice. 

Irresponsible judges have been a problem, as long as there have been judges. 

How Irresponsible Are the Non-Magnificent 7 (NM7)? 

Enter the referenced anti death penalty op/ed, by 7 retired Nebraska judges (4), the NM7,  presenting their own level of irresponsibility , contrary to justice.

This NM7 represent 4% of the state District Court and state Supreme Court justices who have served in Nebraska, in the post Gregg v Georgia (1976) era, generally viewed as the beginning of the modern death penalty era in the US. 

Let's see how irresponsible the NM7 are: 

Keep two things in mind . . .

 1) There is one constant  -  Judges are the case managers,  in charge of both timing and costs, pre trial, trial and on appeals. 

2) These jackass NM7 judges never mentioned the innocent victims murdered - a common anti death penalty "oversight" (5).  

1) The NM7 state, "Our legal experience has led us to conclude that the death penalty is an unworkable and failed policy." 

Proof of the NM7's irresponsibility: 

Most know this to be false, as I suspect the NM7 do, as well. 

One wonders: Are the judges clueless and/or willfully ignorant? Ask them. 

The NM7 blame the death penalty, when we all know that it is not the policy that has failed, but those, like the judges, who have failed to responsibly manage that policy. Governors, attorney generals, legislators and correction officials, also share, in that responsibility, or irresponsibility  . . . as do the citizens who allow such incompetents to continue being paid with their tax dollars. 

There is no legal nor rational reason why death penalty appeals, should take longer than 2-3 years, on average,  within each of the state supreme court, the federal district and circuit courts - or 6-9 years, total, on average. Cases, rarely, go to SCOTUS. 

The NM7 are the case managers, denying their own responsibility for failing both justice and the citizens they work for. 

It seems, nearly, always the case, that government officials, employed by the citizens, blame everyone or everything, but themselves, for their own irresponsibility. These NM7 judges and the death penalty are no different. 


It has been nearly 20 years since Nebraska's last execution, while the other death penalty states have executed nearly a thousand murderers.  Why? Irresponsible Nebraska officials, inclusive of the judges.  

Nationally, from 1984-1988, when double digit executions began, it took 6.6 years of appeals, on average, prior to execution, nationally (6).

6.6 years. 


2) The NM7 state: "In the four decades since the Supreme Court reinstated the death penalty in 1976, states have tinkered with death penalty statutes, repeatedly promising that they can fix them. The evidence is clear that they cannot." You cannot design an efficient system of capital punishment, which delivers punishment swiftly, while also avoiding the risk of executing the innocent.  States that hold onto the death penalty end up with a government program that fails on both these fronts – it is inefficient and makes mistakes."

Proof of the NM7's irresponsibility: 

The NM7's statements are, blatantly, false. 

Since 1976, Virginia has executed 112 murderers, representing 70% of those so sentenced and has executed them within 7 years of full appeals on average, with not even a hint of an innocent executed (7) - very efficient, no "mistakes". 

Virginia's last execution, Oct. 1, 2015, was after 5 years of FULL appeals. 

If Virginia can do it so can all states. 

The roadblock? Most often, irresponsible judges (6), as well as others, who have all failed both their citizens and justice. 

Innocents are better protected, in three ways, by the death penalty than with a life sentence (8). 

One wonders: Are the NM7 clueless and/or willfully ignorant? Ask them. 


Pennsylvania judges/jackasses, both state and federal, are very obvious in their efforts to stop the death penalty in that state. With some 420 death sentences since 1973, there have been only 3 executions. Why? Because the judges will only allow murderers who waive their appeals to be executed. 

Any murderer, sentenced to death in Pa. will never be executed as long as they continue appeals, because the judges will not allow appeals to end or they will overturn the sentence. 

It is a blatant and obvious fight against the law, by the judges, aka dictators in robes. 


3) The NM7 state: "The death penalty prolongs and adds uncertainty to the legal process, often harming murder victims’ families. More death sentences are overturned than end in an execution. For those few death sentences ending in an execution, the average wait between conviction and execution is more than 15 years, and sometimes much longer (as we have seen in Nebraska)." 

Proof of the NM7's irresponsibility: 

The NM7 dead wrong, again. 

The death penalty does not prolong itself nor does it add uncertainty to itself nor does it harm murder victims' families, by itself - it takes the judges, like these NM7, as other of the citizens' employees, to do all of those irresponsible, harmful things. Government policies are managed - or mismanaged - by the employees of the citizens, inclusive of the judges, as the NM7 jackasses well know.

95% of murder victims families support the death penalty (9). 

One wonders: Are these NM7 judges clueless and/or willfully ignorant? Ask them. 


California judges/jackasses --  Since 1977, California has executed 1.4% of their death row murderers, after an average of 18 years on death row.The last 5 murderers executed have averaged  22 years on death row. 

It will only get longer, based upon the horrendous irresponsibility of Ca judges, a continuing disaster usurping the law . . .  unless folks stand against them. 

California's jackass judges are, obviously, trying to kill the death penalty. 


4)  The NM7 state: "Despite promises to the contrary, politicians cannot dramatically expedite this process. Because of past mistakes, death penalty cases must go through a complex federal appeals process, which state lawmakers can't change. Death penalty cases thus force murder victims’ families to endure a prolonged and uncertain legal process. For them, the death penalty is a false promise." 

Proof of the NM7's irresponsibility: 

This is, clearly, false. Politicians, with earnest resolve, as Gov. Ricketts, can work with judges, the attorney general, legislators, prosecutors, defense counsel and citizens to produce a responsible death penalty system, as we all know and as occurs in other states. 

We also know that irresponsible anti death penalty politicians and judges will do all they can to drain as much time and money out of their citizens, in order to make sure that our worst murderers live, as detailed, throughout.

As with Virginia and Texas, if those states can produce responsible death penalty protocols, so can Nebraska, as can all states.

 With or without mistakes, all cases must go through the federal courts, so the NM7 statement is bizarre.

 One wonders: Are these NM7 judges clueless and/or willfully ignorant? Ask them. 


Colorado -  "A Colorado study in 2013 found that death penalty cases took more than five years on average to complete, compared to 1 1/2 years for cases involving life without parole." (10) 

Understand, that is 5 years for pre trial and trial, only, not appeals. How irresponsible are Colorado judges/jackasses? 

In contrast, we have: 

John Allen Muhammad , the DC sniper, was arrested on October 24, 2002, his Virginia trial began on October 14, 2003, he was sentenced to death on November 24, 2003 - 13 months after arrest . . .

 and the prosecution called more than 130 witnesses and introduced more than 400 pieces of evidence. (10) 

and this mass murderer was executed in Virginia on November 10, 2009, after 6 years of FULL appeals. (10) 

and then we have  Colorado judges and many other irresponsible state judges/jackasses doing all they can to increase costs to destroy the death penalty, as is obvious. 


 5) The NM7 state: "The death penalty wastes resources that should go to measures that actually reduce crime. Death penalty cases are more complex, take more time, require more lawyers, and therefore cost more money. There is no valid evidence that the money spent on the death penalty impacts murder rates. It is imperative, then, to dedicate our law enforcement dollars to measures that – unlike the death penalty – actually reduce crime." 

Proof of the NM7's irresponsibility: 

We can see why the NM7 jackasses blame the death penalty as a waste of resources, when it is the judges, themselves, as others, who create that waste - not the death penalty, as easily known and demonstrated, as herein. 

There is no legal nor rational reason for the death penalty to cost any more than life without parole (7), as demonstrated. 

Never has it been shown that any criminal sanction, any negative prospect and any negative outcome did not deter some. Never. (8) 

One wonders: Are these NM7 judges clueless and/or willfully ignorant? Ask them. 


Kansas -   "The U.S. Supreme Court struck down the last seven attempts by (The Kansas Supreme Court)  to reverse the convictions of murderers and predators. If the nine robed jurists in Washington consistently overrule Kansas’s highest court, it’s not only embarrassing to the state—it’s evidence that these justices are making up the law." (11)

" . . . the U.S. Supreme Court found the Kansas Supreme Court had misapplied the Constitution. But each of these cases is emblematic of a broader pattern of lawlessness that merits voting against retaining these justices." (11) 

"As the late Justice Antonin Scalia wrote just weeks before his untimely death, “Kansans ... do not think the death penalty is unconstitutional and indeed very much favor it, which might suggest that a retention election that goes before such people would not come out favorably for those justices who create Kansas law.” (11) 

When justices " . . . thwart the application of criminal law by rewriting the laws the people's representatives passed, they undermine the sovereignty of “we, the people” and replace it with “we, the enlightened judges.” Removing them from office does not politicize the courts — the justices’ choice to impose their politics already did that. Voting them out is the only way to restore impartiality and the rule of law . . ."  (11) 

" . . . vote corruption out and the law back in." (11)


6) The NM7 state: "The death penalty puts innocent lives at risk of execution. As judges, we strove to ensure that the innocent were protected and the guilty held accountable. At the same time, we recognize that judges and others in the criminal justice system are fallible. It is simply too much to expect perfection in any human institution – which is what the death penalty demands, since it is impossible to bring back the wrongfully executed. The more than 155 death row exonerations nationwide, and wrongful convictions of the Beatrice 6 here in Nebraska, make clear that the death penalty should have no place in our fallible justice system." 

The jackass NM7 avoid reality: 

There is no proven actual innocent executed in the US, after the 1930s (8, 12). 

Just since 1973: 

Some 16,000 actual innocents have  been murdered by those known murderers we have allowed to murder, again - recidivist murderers (8); 

Some 400,000 actual innocents have  been murdered by those known criminals we have allowed to harm, again - recidivist criminals (8). 

The 155 "exonerated" has been a very well known fraud (12) since 1998, when the numbers started at 69. Basic fact checking reveals there might be 36 removed from death row based upon actual innocence, that being about 0.4% of those sent to death row in the modern era - none were executed.

 Did the NM7 fact check, anything? 

It appears unlikely that the jackass NM7 can tell us where innocents are at risk in our "fallible justice system". 

Maybe they could hazard a guess?! 

One wonders: Are these NM7 judges clueless and/or willfully ignorant? Ask them. 


". . .  in California, appeals attorneys are not appointed (by judges) for three to five years. (Those attorneys, then, allowed by judges) to take four years to learn the case and file their appeal. Attorneys for habeas appeal (through the federal courts) are not appointed (by the judges), on average, until eight to 10 years after the death sentence." (6) 

California judges/jackasses are, obviously and intentionally, killing the death penalty, in conflict with the law. 


In 1996, the US Congress passed the Anti Terrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act (AEDPA), part of which was supposed to quicken death penalty appeals. 

Every year since then, the average time of appeals, until execution, has been  greater than in 1996 (10.4 years), with the longest being 16.5 years, (2011) (6). 

Apparently, judges didn't like the AEDPA and have taken a stand in conflict with the law -

The judicial move against the death penalty became even more obvious. 



1) Found here: 


3) watch the video
What Is Ethan Couch's 'Affluenza': An Explainer, Gillian Mohney, ABC News, Dec 30, 2015, 

4) Retired judges/jackasses:  Nebraska Supreme Court Justice William Connolly, District Judge Stephen A. Davis, District Judge Sandra L. Dougherty, District Judge Patrick Mullen, Douglas County; District Judge Ronald Reagan, District Judge John Hartigan, District Judge Merritt C. Warren. 

5) Anti Victim: Anti Death Penalty Movement 

6) Judges Responsible For Grossly Uneven Executions 

7) See Virginia Saving Costs with The Death Penalty  

8) The Death Penalty: Saving More Innocent Lives  

9) 95% Death Penalty Support by Loved Ones of Capital Murder Victims  

10)  see paragraph 3, sections B. Judicial Roadblocks and C.2. 128% INCREASE IN APPEALS TIME and paragraphs 4 and 6, within 

Courts, states put death penalty on life supportDeath Penalty: 

11) Kansas' Judges Should Be Recalled Before They Do Any Further Harm BY T. ELLIOT GAISER, PJ Media,  AUGUST 24, 2016, 

12) a) The Innocent Frauds: Standard Anti Death Penalty StrategyREAD SECTIONS 3&4 FIRST 
     b)  The 4.1% "Innocent" on Death Row: More Nonsense