22 minutes ago, 20dawk4life said:

Shouldn’t they just let her die? Isn’t that the point?

Eh it's not that simple. One we don't know if they sedated her because of pain from the drug extravasating and basically melting her tissue. They do it for bad burn victims sometimes. Second even if it was intubation to protect her airway because of the phenobarbital effects, it's not a guarantee that she'd die. She could just asphyxiate, aspirate, have decreased but not zero blood flow to the brain etc. This is already a clusterF, imagine of she didn't die but got brain damage from intermittent hypoxia.

Hey did you guys see this one?

14 hours ago, Seventy_Yard_FG said:

Who is going to make that decision

The judge that sentenced her to death already did.

Did they call an ambulance and say quick come save the lady were executing she’s going to die?

13 hours ago, DEagle7 said:

Eh it's not that simple. One we don't know if they sedated her because of pain from the drug extravasating and basically melting her tissue. They do it for bad burn victims sometimes. Second even if it was intubation to protect her airway because of the phenobarbital effects, it's not a guarantee that she'd die. She could just asphyxiate, aspirate, have decreased but not zero blood flow to the brain etc. This is already a clusterF, imagine of she didn't die but got brain damage from intermittent hypoxia.

So plan b and shoot her in the head?

1 hour ago, 20dawk4life said:

So plan b and shoot her in the head?

Would be more humane 🤷

No idea what they're going to do now. I'm sure her lawyers are gonna go wild.

10 hours ago, 20dawk4life said:

So plan b and shoot her in the head?

That's what she originally wanted and the state said no because "they know better". Again this is barbaric, and the state should not be executing people because they can't get anything right.

On 10/2/2026 at 3:59 PM, 20dawk4life said:

Shouldn’t they just let her die? Isn’t that the point?

Yeah, and let’s make sure she suffers while being murdered. Oh wait, it’s not murder because the state says it’s legal when they kill.

5 hours ago, Tnt4philly said:

Yeah, and let’s make sure she suffers while being murdered. Oh wait, it’s not murder because the state says it’s legal when they kill.

She earned it.

12 hours ago, Gannan said:

That's what she originally wanted and the state said no because "they know better". Again this is barbaric, and the state should not be executing people because they can't get anything right.

It’s ok. She earned it.

8 hours ago, 20dawk4life said:

It’s ok. She earned it.

It only ok if you as barbaric as she is. I’m not a hardcore Buddhist, but I do try to follow their 1st precept, and it goes against just about everything they teach.

Seems to me an 8th Amendment violation to try and kill her again. They tried twice and failed. Life in Prison should be the result.

1 minute ago, Tnt4philly said:

It only ok if you as barbaric as she is. I’m not a hardcore Buddhist, but I do try to follow their 1st precept, and it goes against just about everything they teach.

Idc about Buddha. It’s a waste of space keeping her in jail for life. She has no morals and doesn’t deserve to live.

On 10/1/2026 at 8:21 PM, DEagle7 said:

Old school protocol was 3 drugs: a sedative, a muscle paralytic and potassium to stop the heart. Tennessee just uses phenobarbital. To induce a basically a coma and stop every signal from firing and your heart/lungs just stop. The drug itself shouldn't cause pain. Maybe a withdrawal symptoms after would suck. But it is super painful if it extravasates. Basically melts the tissue wherever it comes out. So that is almost definitely what happened if she's reportedly in a ton of pain

Why not just stick with the old school method? Were there problems or something? Maybe I'm not understanding something, but shouldn't it be relatively easy to kill someone with lethal injection? For example, if you just loaded someone up with sedatives, wouldn't they go asleep and then die?

On 10/4/2026 at 6:09 AM, 20dawk4life said:

It’s ok. She earned it.

Yes the state is never wrong. Great point.

2 hours ago, Phillyterp85 said:

Why not just stick with the old school method? Were there problems or something? Maybe I'm not understanding something, but shouldn't it be relatively easy to kill someone with lethal injection? For example, if you just loaded someone up with sedatives, wouldn't they go asleep and then die?

No clue, way outside my expertise. I guess the idea is 3 drugs leaves more to go wrong than 1. Which makes sense. But when something goes wrong with phenobarbital it can really go wrong as you can see. This was a pretty bad F up though. Definitely shouldn't be the norm with proper IV placement.

1 hour ago, DEagle7 said:

No clue, way outside my expertise. I guess the idea is 3 drugs leaves more to go wrong than 1. Which makes sense. But when something goes wrong with phenobarbital it can really go wrong as you can see. This was a pretty bad F up though. Definitely shouldn't be the norm with proper IV placement.

I know that it's more gruesome, but if a state is going to have capital punishment, it would seem to me that hanging or firing squad would be more humane than this where something can really terribly wrong.

6 hours ago, Gannan said:

Yes the state is never wrong. Great point.

Not in this case. The piece of sheet deserves to burn in hell.

13 minutes ago, 20dawk4life said:

Not in this case. The piece of sheet deserves to burn in hell.

Should it be public? For everyone to see?

58 minutes ago, 20dawk4life said:

Not in this case. The piece of sheet deserves to burn in hell.

Well that’s the problem. There are always cases where the state doesn’t get it right. "Death penalty only if they are for real for real guilty” doesn’t work. The state always thinks they are for real guilty and they’ve been wrong a ish load of times.

2 hours ago, Seventy_Yard_FG said:

Should it be public? For everyone to see?

I don’t really care. If they want to televise it for people to watch have at it. I wouldn’t watch but I’m sure some people would.

1 hour ago, Gannan said:

Well that’s the problem. There are always cases where the state doesn’t get it right. "Death penalty only if they are for real for real guilty” doesn’t work. The state always thinks they are for real guilty and they’ve been wrong a ish load of times.

It’s irrelevant to this case on if they get it wrong or not. They didn’t. She’s guilty. She earned this.

21 minutes ago, 20dawk4life said:

I don’t really care. If they want to televise it for people to watch have at it. I wouldn’t watch but I’m sure some people would.

Why wouldn’t you watch?