\/\/illy Posted January 17, 2006 Report Share Posted January 17, 2006 Second-oldest convict in U.S. is executedLast Updated Tue, 17 Jan 2006 05:37:17 EST CBC NewsCalifornia executed a 76-year-old legally blind, nearly deaf man convicted of arranging a triple murder 25 years ago to silence witnesses in another killing. Clarence Ray Allen was pronounced dead by lethal injection shortly after midnight at San Quentin State Prison. His lawyers sought to have the capital punishment stayed by arguing that executing a wheel-chair bound frail old man would violate the U.S. Constitution's ban on cruel and unusual punishment. They also argued that the 23 years he spent on death row were unconstitutionally cruel. California Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger, the California Supreme Court and a federal appeals court previously refused to spare Allen's life. There is no upper age limit or exceptions on the basis of physical infirmity for executions. Allen was convicted of having his teenage son's girlfriend murdered for fear she would tell police about a grocery-store burglary he had committed in 1974. While behind bars, he tried to arrange for the deaths of eight other witnesses in the case, prosecutors said. His intention was to gain a retrial, which he believed he could win if there were no witnesses alive. He hired a hit man and three people were killed in that conspiracy. He was sentenced to death in 1982 for that crime. In September, the elderly convict's heart stopped, but prison doctors were able to revive him and return him to San Quentin Prison's death row. Allen was the second oldest U.S. inmate to be put to death nationally since the U.S. Supreme Court allowed capital punishment to resume in 1976. Last month in Mississippi, John B. Nixon, 77, became the oldest person executed in the U.S. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
\/\/illy Posted January 17, 2006 Author Report Share Posted January 17, 2006 [color:purple]It's wonderful that they revived him so that they could kill him in a crueler and more painful manner. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bradm Posted January 17, 2006 Report Share Posted January 17, 2006 It doesn't disturb any more than any other case of a prisoner being sentenced to death and then executed.Aloha,Brad Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gateaux Posted January 17, 2006 Report Share Posted January 17, 2006 I agree Brad. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
\/\/illy Posted January 17, 2006 Author Report Share Posted January 17, 2006 Really?! You don't think it's disturbing to revive a man from a natural death so that you can execute him? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ollie Posted January 17, 2006 Report Share Posted January 17, 2006 It kinda doesn't make sense but I'm sure it's just part of prison protocol. Imagine if they hadn't revived him. Don't you think there would be questions that those in charge conveniently let him die? Or assisted in hurrying up the process? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Birdy Posted January 17, 2006 Report Share Posted January 17, 2006 i think rather it boils down to a legal issue. if they didn't revive the guy they would have technically 'euthanized' him. normally, if a person's heart stops beating and there is the means to kick it back into gear, the means to kick it back into gear are taken. i don't think it especially cruel. i think they did what they had to do. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bradm Posted January 17, 2006 Report Share Posted January 17, 2006 Unless the person had specified he wasn't to be revived. I'm not sure, though, whether someone on death row can do that.Aloha,Brad Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Birdy Posted January 17, 2006 Report Share Posted January 17, 2006 me either. it would be interesting to see what kind of 'rights' a person really does have on death row. kind of contradictory.. the right to life when you're sentenced to death. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FairySari Posted January 17, 2006 Report Share Posted January 17, 2006 Well, at least by reviving him first, they gave him a chance to have his last meal. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Calamity Jane Posted January 17, 2006 Report Share Posted January 17, 2006 wow, Sari...that was a tremendously disturbing website!!! stanley "tookie" williams, california, december 13, 2005the menu:nothing but oatmeal and milk all day, refusing the privilege of a special last meali didn't spend too much time poking around....really creepy stuff on there....but what I did learn at a glance was that WAAAYYYY more people are executed than I thought. For some reason I was under the assumption that most death penalty convictions did end in old age on death row.now to Willy's question: I don't think a person's age should soften us towards the crimes he committed. I don't find it disturbing. As long as he is/was not of 'diminshed capacity' or developmentally challenged, as long as his trial was fair...then I agree with the punishment, regardless of his age and how long it took to get around to it.However, while I still am fairly PRO on the death-penalty issue, I have learned that there is a disproportional number of poor and/or black and/or retarded folks on death row in the US. So it is hard to really know if someone gets a fair shake. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
payce-ley Posted January 17, 2006 Report Share Posted January 17, 2006 Well, at least by reviving him first, they gave him a chance to have his last meal. shawn paul humphries, south carolina, december 2, 2005 the menu: McDonald's hamburger, french fries, broccoli and cheese, oat cereal, and a Dr. Pepper. thats the spirit Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alexis Posted January 17, 2006 Report Share Posted January 17, 2006 if the guy had signed a DNR i do think that they'd have to abide by it. if he hadn't signed a DNR i don't think they could choose to not save him, because what if he would've been given a stay of execution? or done something in court to get off of death row? then he'd be dead cause someone said "well jeb, we'rea gunna killem in 2 months enywayz, let em be" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Birdy Posted January 17, 2006 Report Share Posted January 17, 2006 jeb. lol Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
djmelbatoast Posted January 17, 2006 Report Share Posted January 17, 2006 Sounds to be like he was a pretty horrible son of a bitch. If we only went back to public hangings we could avoid all this. No one would have posted this if it was about a 45 year old killer who had just killed a handful of people. We need quicker justice without so many lawyers. That way we can quickly execute the law on the rich and poor alike. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bouche Posted January 17, 2006 Report Share Posted January 17, 2006 Really?! You don't think it's disturbing to revive a man from a natural death so that you can execute him?yeah, I think that is totally fugged up. It just shows how idiotic many laws and procedures are. Common sense just isn't common enough anymore. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SevenSeasJim Posted January 18, 2006 Report Share Posted January 18, 2006 Really?! You don't think it's disturbing to revive a man from a natural death so that you can execute him?If anything, at least they are consistent. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
timouse Posted January 18, 2006 Report Share Posted January 18, 2006 almost as good as swabbing a convict's arm with alcohol before administering a lethal injection. wouldn't want that to get infected... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SevenSeasJim Posted January 18, 2006 Report Share Posted January 18, 2006 Having suffered a heart attack back in September, Allen had asked prison authorities to let him die if he went into cardiac arrest before his execution, a request prison officials said they would not honor.[color:red]At no point are we not going to value the sanctity of life," said prison spokesman Vernell Crittendon. "We would resuscitate him," then execute him.Holy Shit Updated Story On CNN Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
\/\/illy Posted January 18, 2006 Author Report Share Posted January 18, 2006 You voting Conservative SSJ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SevenSeasJim Posted January 18, 2006 Report Share Posted January 18, 2006 I love Mr. Harper :wink: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now