Christa Pikes is awake and ‘talking’

[wouldntyouwanthelp]

She’s out of the coma and talking to her lawyers. Aibu to think the state of Tennessee can’t possibly try to do the lethal injection again ? Surely not? People on Reddit are suggesting she might need an amputation of one of her arms because of how caustic pentobarbital is.

Christa Pike 'conscious and speaking at hospital' after failed execution in US
https://news.sky.com/share/13595950

No but they’re costing a fortune. Say they live for 30 years:

Keeping 75 prisoners for 30 years in the UK costs between £121.1 million and £135.0 million, assuming today's spending rates remain constant.
According to data released by the Ministry of Justice, the average annual cost to hold a single prisoner in England and Wales ranges between £53,801 (across the general estate) and £60,018 (specifically for public-sector prisons).
Calculated strictly at current flat rates without adjusting for future inflation:

• At the general estate average (£53,801/year): 75 prisoners × 30 years = £121,052,250
• At the public-sector average (£60,018/year): 75 prisoners × 30 years = £135,040,500

Cost Variations by Type of Prisoner
The actual cost could fluctuate dramatically depending on the category of the inmates:

• High-Security: Category A "dispersal" prisons (like HMP Whitemoor) can exceed £92,000 per prisoner annually due to high staffing levels, pushing the 30-year total for 75 inmates to over £208 million.

• Women's Prisons: The average cost for female inmates sits notably higher at £83,987 per year, resulting in a 30-year cost of £188.9 million

these are sex offenders in prison.

yes it bothers me is someone decides they are executioner. We don’t have the death penalty in this county, an no one person gets to decide we do.

plus again there’s still room for error. Someone has a grievance or wants someone dead so tells Dave hey mate, that young Bob over there is in for fiddling with kids..

I doubt hems checking their conviction records before passing sentence…

The problem with that is that it would make prisons unmanageable. The punishment is meant to be deprivation of liberty, not torture, and being made to sit staring at blank walls would certainly amount to torture. It's not a stretch tho see that that would lead to guards being regularly being put in danger.

And what is to be gained by that? Surely it makes sense to try for rehabilitation, or at the very least to make prisoners use their time constructively, whether that is via education, work, rehab sessions, or whatever?

Well no, you haven't read what I have written, so it's obviously pointless trying to discuss with you. I said taken into account "after" her trial.

And where is the Bible is Adam ?

So how much do you reckon it costs to keep someone on death row for 30 years, with the multiple appeals, legal challenges, and costs of that?

willing to bet knowing how much criminal lawyers in the US earn, that it costs way more than keeping someone on a life sentence, which is all it achieves anyway.

A bargain, if it buys a peaceful conscience ....

Executing someone is massively expensive. They are typically incarcerated in very high security and there are countless legal challenges. It isn’t a money saving measure compared to lifetime incarceration.

Why after her trail would you then bring all this up? Why wouldn’t this be discussed during her trial and part of her defense, and have some sort of explanation to defend her as to how she has come to this and why she ended up torturing and murdering someone?

That's not really a killer point, though, is it? The fact that US gun laws are fucked doesn't meant that they are wrong to outlaw cruel and unusual punishment. After all, so do we.

Obviously it's not ideal to have some vigilante running about a prison. But I couldn't describe myself as bothered, on the face of it. Again, I would hopefully assume this man is housed with other men who have committed terrible, violent, and serious crimes - so really, I wouldn't be weeping over any of them, anymore than I'd be praising the violent man who killed them.

No. This is the whole point!

the trial is guilty or not guilty.

she was found guilty.

after the verdict the judge then decides the sentence. This is the point the mitigating arguments are put. Her lawyers then should have advocated for her and that her issues meant she should not receive the death penalty. They failed to do this.

do you not know how the law works?

The rationale is that circumstances have changed, and that needs to be taken into account. Also she has demonstrated that the point her lawyers made was entirely valid: there was, and remains, an excellent chance that the death penalty as used in Tennessee would otherwise be effective on her. She is entitled to ask the courts to rethink to take all of that into account, including the fact that putting her at risk of a repeat would certainly violate the principle against cruel and unusual punishment.

It's only expensive because of woke snowflakes and their "compassion".

I mean few concrete blocks, 8 foot of water and a chain, and you could do it for a tenner. A snip if you can execute a few at the same time.

Are you claiming that wrongful convictions don't happen now? That would obviously be incorrect.

It's only expensive because of woke snowflakes and their "compassion".

Bingo!

She was sentenced in 1995 there has been a lot of time before her execution for this to be raised and it didn’t?

No I’m not.

Because it is a horrible cold blooded process, and because, if we had the death penalty and used it regularly, we would be guilty of multiple killings, including killings of innocent people.

Because she still committed the crime, and, as you have said, not everyone who has such an upbringing commits murder. It is not an excuse or a defense.

It should be brought up after the trial to determine suitable treatment and punishment.

To put it simply, someone with extreme mental issues who kills should be found guilty and kept away from society. But the way they are treated afterwards should probably be different from other killers. We send our crazies to secure mental health facilities for ever.

I do think people would second question becoming a murderer though, a lot of murderers don’t want to die.

Saying it this way I agree.

An absolute fortune I suppose, which is just one reason I thinking keeping people on death row for decades is ridiculous.

If someone had been sentenced to death they should just crack on and do it in my opinion.

“In the United States, the average time spent on death row between sentencing and execution has more than tripled since the 1980s, rising from roughly 6 years (74 months) in 1984 to over 22 years (264+ months) in recent years.”

Yet again. Where exactly did I say that people in this situation should be totally excused of any crime they commit? Please quote the precise post. And, when you can't find it, please come back and admit it.