Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

The actual report.

One Article:

When a prosecutor objected, Mullins said potassium chloride and potassium acetate were basically the same.

"Google it," Mullins told the prosecutor, according to the report.
...
A wide range of Corrections Department officials failed to notice the wrong drugs had been received for the Warner execution, from the general counsel to the IV team leader, who admitted being distracted by the need to calculate the proper formulations of the drugs.

"I'm not very good at math in my head," the leader said, adding, "I just totally dropped the ball."
...
After the Glossip execution was called off and officials were drafting an announcement, Mullins objected to using the phrase "wrong drug" in the explanation because it "would require having to inform people the wrong drug had been used in Warner's execution," the grand jury wrote.

Another Report:

“This investigation has revealed that most Department [of Corrections] employees profoundly misunderstood the [Execution] Protocol,” the grand jury report concluded in detailing one of its findings. “Although some … were able to intelligently testify regarding the Protocol, the majority simply could not.”

One more:

The department of corrections’ general counsel, David Cincotta, ordered the drugs from the pharmacist over the phone. It limited the paper trail, and perhaps the chance that someone would find out who was selling the drugs, but it also meant the pharmacist was never provided a written order, a prescription, or a copy of the execution protocol — all of which would have stated which drug should have been ordered.

Then Cincotta paid the pharmacist nearly $1,000 in cash in person for the drugs and kept scant receipts of the deal.

“The Department did not document its contract for the purchase of execution drugs… with either a written contract or a purchase order in conformity with” state law, the report said. ”Had the requirements of [state law] been followed, the Pharmacist should have had no question regarding which drugs to order for the Department.”
...
The report showed Fallin’s office was concerned most by optics. Her general counsel, Steve Mullins, vehemently pushed for using the wrong drug in the second execution so they wouldn’t have to disclose the problem — that the drug had been used in the prior execution — to the public.
...
Like in Oklahoma’s botched execution of Lockett, having lawyers write the procedures can lead to confusion on definitions of terms that aren’t necessarily used in the medical world.
After the Lockett execution, an attorney in the department of corrections said he used “Wiki leaks or whatever it is” to research which drugs to use.

In the end the Grand Jury recommended switching to the Nitrogen Hypoxia Execution Protocol, because it's so simple to use that hopefully even my incompetent state won't be able to screw that up.

I am well known to be anti-death penalty, and this report only reinforces my position. For me it's bad enough that there is a high risk that an innocent person gets the needle. But when you add the danger that an innocent person get's subjected to this level of incompetence it just makes it worse. You can still execute innocent people with nitrogen hypoxia, but at least the innocent person goes without suffering.

Today, I was working at a pharmacy when a customer payed for a large order with cash. I jokingly asked him if he was breaking bad. "No, I'm going to kill someone." Then he thanked me by name. FML.

Nitrogen hypoxia is a means that "you go to sleep and don't ever wake up". It's probably the most humane way to go.

However, because we're not perfect people, I still object to states administering the death penalty on principle.

Oh... and:

potassium chloride and potassium acetate were basically the same.

There's not enough face palm here to show my disgust here.

How many Joint Commission rules are there that exist purely to prevent KCl screw-ups, just like this?

My ass would be on the hot seat if I pushed the wrong stuff, and a lot of people who handled it along the way would be joining me there.

 d-usa wrote:
How many Joint Commission rules are there that exist purely to prevent KCl screw-ups, just like this?

My ass would be on the hot seat if I pushed the wrong stuff, and a lot of people who handled it along the way would be joining me there.

You ain't kidding...

I've had to write rules/alerts/reports just for KCI protocols.

@Thread: Joint Commission is a non-profit that accredits and certifies hospital institutions for providing effective and safe delivery of healthcare.

@Thread2: KCI is 'potassium chloride'. Administering 'x' amount of KCI will stop the heart... however, intravenously administering KCI is one of the most painful experience ever, hence why prior to KCI injection, a cocktail of barbiturates (depresses nervous system) is administered.

 whembly wrote:

[potassium chloride and potassium acetate were basically the same.

There's not enough face palm here to show my disgust here.

Uh, one of you guys want to expand on that for us non-chemists?

Also, although it's been said already, it's a little unreasonable to think the same government that can't run a DMV or a TSA is suddenly competent to execute the right person, or to do so humanely. I agree with the death penalty on paper, but only on paper. In reality, we can't handle it and we shouldn't do it.

 Ouze wrote:

 whembly wrote:

[potassium chloride and potassium acetate were basically the same.

There's not enough face palm here to show my disgust here.

Uh, one of you guys want to expand on that for us non-chemists?

For medical purposes, there are two main problems:

1) They metabolize slightly differently. One lowers the pH of the blood and one raises it. In my 15 years as a nurse I have never used potassium acetate, but it can be used if someone has severe acidosis since the acetate breaks down into bicarb and buffers the pH of the blood. I don't know how often it is actually used, but I have never seen it ordered or given in the ER or a regular med-surg floor. The level of care it is most likely to be used would be the ICU, and I really don't have any experience there.

2) Since they are different molecular combinations, they don't have equivalent dosing of potassium. Giving the same amount of potassium chloride and potassium acetate does not result in the same amount of elemental potassium in the blood. So 1 mEq of KCl and 1mEq of Potassium Acetate are not the same thing as far as the effect of the potassium alone. If you had to absolutely substitute acetate for chloride, and the doc is okay with it, you would have to calculate the correct dosage to make sure it results in the same amount of elemental potassium in the blood (in addition to having to give additional medications to counteract the buffering effects of the acetate on the pH of the blood).

The problem with what happened here:

It's just that the people involved were all thinking "feth it, it will kill you either way". Why have any kind of protocol at all with that mindset if you don't care if you use the correct drugs? Calcium will kill you at high enough doses, why not just push that if you don't have potassium chloride? Or just push a ton of morphine, or Michael Jackson the guy? If they discovered they had the wrong form of potassium and were able to change the protocol the legal way to say "KCl and/or Potassium Acetate", and then give the drug then nobody would have cared. It's just the whole "feth it, killing is killing, the important thing is we don't leave a paper trail and don't let anybody know we fethed up last time, but I'm sure it's all okay because I googled the hell out of that gak" mindset by almost everyone involved that kills me.

Molecularly they're very different, but have similar effects on the body. The problem may be that you need a different dose to kill with acetate than chloride. Claiming they're 'the same thing' is plain ignorant though, the people administering this stuff should appreciate some basics of what they're handling. My suspicion is that they didn't care as long as it got the job done.

Hanging would be quicker and cleaner than this. Why is lethal injection considered superior?

 Howard A Treesong wrote:
Hanging would be quicker and cleaner than this. Why is lethal injection considered superior?

Possibly because it is, in some ways, the most humanely inhuman way to kill. It's clinical, cold, clean. No violence, no passion, no dramatic event.

 Tannhauser42 wrote:

 Howard A Treesong wrote:
Hanging would be quicker and cleaner than this. Why is lethal injection considered superior?

Possibly because it is, in some ways, the most humanely inhuman way to kill. It's clinical, cold, clean. No violence, no passion, no dramatic event.

It really didn't start to develop the kind of problems we are currently seeing until the manufacturers of the drugs that were previously used stopped selling them to the states.

 d-usa wrote:

 Tannhauser42 wrote:

 Howard A Treesong wrote:
Hanging would be quicker and cleaner than this. Why is lethal injection considered superior?

Possibly because it is, in some ways, the most humanely inhuman way to kill. It's clinical, cold, clean. No violence, no passion, no dramatic event.

It really didn't start to develop the kind of problems we are currently seeing until the manufacturers of the drugs that were previously used stopped selling them to the states.

That's the shortage of sodium thiopental... that's still ongoing as I believe most of the European manufacturers refuses to sell them to the US.

I think Pfizer also recently announced a ban on the sale of their drugs to states to be used for death penalty use. Which is significant since they purchased Hospira, which is the biggest manufacturer of generic injectable drugs, like KCl, and which is also the company that stopped producing sodium thiopental.

To deal with a lack of legal sources for medications, more states are passing "pharmacy protection" laws to make sure that nobody knows where the drugs are coming from.

 whembly wrote:

That's the shortage of sodium thiopental... that's still ongoing as I believe most of the European manufacturers refuses to sell them to the US.

Just looked that up and it is fascinating XD No idea that was going on. I always figured drugs was drugs. Never occurred to me that the state wouldn't be able to buy the ones it needed XD

Now I'm curious. I'll have to take a look at our drugs and see where our KCl is coming from at our facility.

 Tannhauser42 wrote:

 Howard A Treesong wrote:
Hanging would be quicker and cleaner than this. Why is lethal injection considered superior?

Possibly because it is, in some ways, the most humanely inhuman way to kill. It's clinical, cold, clean. No violence, no passion, no dramatic event.

Given the great natural fear of death, there isn't a humane method of execution.

 LordofHats wrote:

 whembly wrote:

That's the shortage of sodium thiopental... that's still ongoing as I believe most of the European manufacturers refuses to sell them to the US.

Just looked that up and it is fascinating XD No idea that was going on. I always figured drugs was drugs. Never occurred to me that the state wouldn't be able to buy the ones it needed XD

The other issue is that many pharmacists refuse to make the drugs for the state unless they're guaranteed secrecy. Once word gets out that Pharmacy X is making the death penalty drug, their business dries up.

 Tannhauser42 wrote:

 LordofHats wrote:

 whembly wrote:

That's the shortage of sodium thiopental... that's still ongoing as I believe most of the European manufacturers refuses to sell them to the US.

Just looked that up and it is fascinating XD No idea that was going on. I always figured drugs was drugs. Never occurred to me that the state wouldn't be able to buy the ones it needed XD

The other issue is that many pharmacists refuse to make the drugs for the state unless they're guaranteed secrecy. Once word gets out that Pharmacy X is making the death penalty drug, their business dries up.

The free market at work!

All the more reason to do away with capital punishment.

 Kilkrazy wrote:

 Tannhauser42 wrote:

 Howard A Treesong wrote:
Hanging would be quicker and cleaner than this. Why is lethal injection considered superior?

Possibly because it is, in some ways, the most humanely inhuman way to kill. It's clinical, cold, clean. No violence, no passion, no dramatic event.

Given the great natural fear of death, there isn't a humane method of execution.

That being said, there are still those that do need to be executed for the safety of the public and fellow inmates.

Relapse wrote:

 Kilkrazy wrote:

 Tannhauser42 wrote:

 Howard A Treesong wrote:
Hanging would be quicker and cleaner than this. Why is lethal injection considered superior?

Possibly because it is, in some ways, the most humanely inhuman way to kill. It's clinical, cold, clean. No violence, no passion, no dramatic event.

Given the great natural fear of death, there isn't a humane method of execution.

That being said, there are still those that do need to be executed for the safety of the public and fellow inmates.

Except, y'know, life in prison and supervised guards. But that doesn't tickle that revenge itch as much.

While most criminals retain their humanity, there are a select few that are not redeemable, and who have become nothing more than animals. I'm not sure how to sort the wheat from the chaff with any sort of precision, but I've seen some messed up junk in my line of work. There are some that need to pay for their heinous deeds. My state has been letting offenders out recently due to money problems. Some are the "non-violent" drug offenders. Others are killers. We've already had some reoffend. I have to keep telling myself only a small segment of society are habitual criminals. But when you see the same faces year after year it makes you lose faith.

 d-usa wrote:
Now I'm curious. I'll have to take a look at our drugs and see where our KCl is coming from at our facility.

Most hospital organizations don't purchase drugs directly from the manufacturer... but, from wholesale distributors like:
CardinalHealth
McKesson
etc...

There's a GOP governor running for Missouri this year... it's "really" pro-life, such that, he wants to abolish the death penalty and institute Criminal Justice Reforms. I'm hoping that these drug shortages that impacts executions is another ammo for politicians to realize that this isn't a worthy "fight".

 Monkey Tamer wrote:
We've already had some reoffend. I have to keep telling myself only a small segment of society are habitual criminals. But when you see the same faces year after year it makes you lose faith.

You have to treat the sources and causes of crime, not just lock people up and then release them right back into the same situation again (or worse as they now have a criminal record and are unlikely to find work to support themselves/their families) and telling them not to do it again.

Relapse wrote:

 Kilkrazy wrote:

 Tannhauser42 wrote:

 Howard A Treesong wrote:
Hanging would be quicker and cleaner than this. Why is lethal injection considered superior?

Possibly because it is, in some ways, the most humanely inhuman way to kill. It's clinical, cold, clean. No violence, no passion, no dramatic event.

Given the great natural fear of death, there isn't a humane method of execution.

That being said, there are still those that do need to be executed for the safety of the public and fellow inmates.

That is one opinion.

Is it a common event in America to have high-risk criminals - those who would warrant a death sentence in some eyes - escape and continue to commit crimes?

 Kilkrazy wrote:

Relapse wrote:

 Kilkrazy wrote:

 Tannhauser42 wrote:

 Howard A Treesong wrote:
Hanging would be quicker and cleaner than this. Why is lethal injection considered superior?

Possibly because it is, in some ways, the most humanely inhuman way to kill. It's clinical, cold, clean. No violence, no passion, no dramatic event.

Given the great natural fear of death, there isn't a humane method of execution.

That being said, there are still those that do need to be executed for the safety of the public and fellow inmates.

That is one opinion.

The wrong one, no less.

 curran12 wrote:

Relapse wrote:

 Kilkrazy wrote:

 Tannhauser42 wrote:

 Howard A Treesong wrote:
Hanging would be quicker and cleaner than this. Why is lethal injection considered superior?

Possibly because it is, in some ways, the most humanely inhuman way to kill. It's clinical, cold, clean. No violence, no passion, no dramatic event.

Given the great natural fear of death, there isn't a humane method of execution.

That being said, there are still those that do need to be executed for the safety of the public and fellow inmates.

Except, y'know, life in prison and supervised guards. But that doesn't tickle that revenge itch as much.

Of course! No one ever gets murdered or raped or beaten up in prison! Convicted murderers never escape and kill other people! How could I have thought otherwise?

Relapse wrote:

 curran12 wrote:

Relapse wrote:

 Kilkrazy wrote:

 Tannhauser42 wrote:

 Howard A Treesong wrote:
Hanging would be quicker and cleaner than this. Why is lethal injection considered superior?

Possibly because it is, in some ways, the most humanely inhuman way to kill. It's clinical, cold, clean. No violence, no passion, no dramatic event.

Given the great natural fear of death, there isn't a humane method of execution.

That being said, there are still those that do need to be executed for the safety of the public and fellow inmates.

Except, y'know, life in prison and supervised guards. But that doesn't tickle that revenge itch as much.

Of course! No one ever gets murdered or raped or beaten up in prison! Convicted murderers never escape and kill other people! How could I have thought otherwise?

A decent argument, but it falls apart under statistics.

Studies show that only about 10% of death row inmates engage in violence or other crimes while on death row. So abolishing the death penalty is not going to be some cure to violence within the prison, it won't even be an enormous reduction in prison violence.

As for a source on that, here you go: http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/documents/CunninghamDeathRowReview.pdf it's a long document, but the section on violence begins near the bottom, on page 202 if you use the heading page numbers.

Needless to say, reducing prison crimes is a good thing, however, the death penalty is not going to be a pancea that causes a massive reduction.

Relapse wrote:


Of course! No one ever gets murdered or raped or beaten up in prison!

And if they are a danger to their fellow inmates we have something called solitary confinement.

Convicted murderers never escape and kill other people! How could I have thought otherwise?

And escapes are rare enough to be an afterthought. Not only that, you are relying on escaped prisoners also going around killed people, which is even more unlikely.

And, honestly, if you think that escapes are that much of a problem, then just stop the escapes.

 curran12 wrote:

Relapse wrote:

 curran12 wrote:

Relapse wrote:

 Kilkrazy wrote:

 Tannhauser42 wrote:

 Howard A Treesong wrote:
Hanging would be quicker and cleaner than this. Why is lethal injection considered superior?

Possibly because it is, in some ways, the most humanely inhuman way to kill. It's clinical, cold, clean. No violence, no passion, no dramatic event.

Given the great natural fear of death, there isn't a humane method of execution.

That being said, there are still those that do need to be executed for the safety of the public and fellow inmates.

Except, y'know, life in prison and supervised guards. But that doesn't tickle that revenge itch as much.

Of course! No one ever gets murdered or raped or beaten up in prison! Convicted murderers never escape and kill other people! How could I have thought otherwise?

A decent argument, but it falls apart under statistics.

Studies show that only about 10% of death row inmates engage in violence or other crimes while on death row. So abolishing the death penalty is not going to be some cure to violence within the prison, it won't even be an enormous reduction in prison violence.

As for a source on that, here you go: http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/documents/CunninghamDeathRowReview.pdf it's a long document, but the section on violence begins near the bottom, on page 202 if you use the heading page numbers.

Needless to say, reducing prison crimes is a good thing, however, the death penalty is not going to be a pancea that causes a massive reduction.

Just to be clear, I am not saying kill em all for the warm fuzzies it gives. There are some who are just too dangerous to let live, though.

By way of example, here is an item from the BBC:

http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-16638227