Cancer Drugs Give Killer Stay Of Execution.

What should they do?

  • Kill him anyway.

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • Or let the bugger die the painful way.

    Votes: 0 0.0%

  • Total voters
    0
#1
They should just let the bastard die the long way.


Cancer drugs give killer stay of execution...

A convicted killer has escaped execution - after complaining about how his body might react to lethal injection.

Terminally-ill Daniel Lee Siebert insisted his cancer drugs would cause 'unnecessary pain' when combined with a lethal injuection.

Now he has been given a stay of execution while court officials investigate.

Siebert, 53, was facing the death penalty today for strangling two women and two young boys in 1986.

But his lawyer submitted a letter from an oncologist forecasting that "complications could arise" from the drug combinations.

Dr Jimmie Harvey suggested Siebert might regurgitate his stomach contents during the execution.

Siebert, suffering from terminal pancreatic cancer, has been on Alabama's death row for more than 20 years.

http://www.metro.co.uk/weird/article.html?in_article_id=72920&in_page_id=2
 
#4
Might as well let Nature take it's course: If he has got cancer of the Pancreas then he won't last long. It would even save a few bob on the execution but Brer Yank won't see it like that
 
#5
Stop taking the cancer drugs then, I'm sure the lethal injection is going to be quicker than cancer.

And if being sick is a problem, then the last meal is laced with laxatives, once he's shat it out, in with the needle.

I'm full of compassion today
 

Biped

LE
Book Reviewer
#6
Well, if he's being topped . . . he is past redemption and forgiveness; so, cave his fcuking head in, it'll probably be quicker anyway - or get SO19 to 'stop' him.
 
#7
RitchieRitch69 said:
They should just let the fatherless die the long way.
Agreed as long as the general public don't have to pay towards that :evil:
 
#8
Cheaper option, no drugs, no regurgitation of stomach contents. job done
 
#11
It does seem a strange old thing.

Why keep him on cancer meds if he is going to be killed?

Best thing to do, class him as dead on the day of his execution. Carry out all normal procedures, except kill him. Obviously cremation may require a bit more gas, and the grave diggers should fill the grave in a bit quicker. But other than that business as usual.

Why give him lethal injection? He strangled his victims......

Just shows what a stupid system of laws we make up. Oh, we can't lethal inject him, it could cause him "unneccessary suffering". Did HE give a sh1t about the suffering of HIS victims?

Ergo, he forfeited the right for society (as a whole) to give a rats ass about his suffering the moment he killed his first victim.
 
#13
Pacreatic cancer is a mean mean way to die, he'll be begging for the needle when the pain kicks in
 
#15
If they're only worried that he'll throw up, why don't they stop feeding him a couple of days before ?. Or just fit him in a respirator, or shove a sock down his throat.
 
#16
If they are that worried he will throw up....

How many more are on death row? Have they got anything planned? No, trips to Disneyland? Splendid, warden, get some mops.
 
#17
of course hes going to have a reaction hes going to be dead, what a lunatic place we live in. infact let him die of cancer and not treat him. that will learn him
 
#18
thegimp said:
Pacreatic cancer is a mean mean way to die, he'll be begging for the needle when the pain kicks in

I just had an uncle die from it 2 days ago. I just saw him last sunday. I think you are right.

Plus, he'll be puking up his food anyway.

Maybe they should just strangle him, he seemed to think that was a reasonable method for his victims. <shrug>
 
#19
chocolate_frog said:
It does seem a strange old thing.

Why keep him on cancer meds if he is going to be killed?

Best thing to do, class him as dead on the day of his execution. Carry out all normal procedures, except kill him. Obviously cremation may require a bit more gas, and the grave diggers should fill the grave in a bit quicker. But other than that business as usual.

Why give him lethal injection? He strangled his victims......

Just shows what a stupid system of laws we make up. Oh, we can't lethal inject him, it could cause him "unneccessary suffering". Did HE give a sh1t about the suffering of HIS victims?

Ergo, he forfeited the right for society (as a whole) to give a rats ass about his suffering the moment he killed his first victim.
I agree. I had chemotherapy, which cost £1,000 per dose. Just stop treating the tw@t and let nature take its course.
 
#20
O/d of morphine would be cheaper and quicker than the lethal injection
malarky.Personally if that was my diagnosis would be crawling towards the
death chamber .It is a very unpleasent way to go .
 

Similar threads

New Posts

Latest Threads