Cult leader says he's too obese for execution

[lily]

Too fat (http://www.cnn.com/2006/LAW/10/18/bc.na.gen.us.cultleader.ap/index.html?section=cnn_topstories)

Cult leader says he's too obese for execution
POSTED: 4:45 p.m. EDT, October 18, 2006
Adjust font size:


COLUMBUS, Ohio (AP) -- A federal judge on Tuesday delayed next week's
execution of cult leader Jeffrey Lundgren to allow him to join a lawsuit by
five other death row inmates challenging the state's use of lethal
injection.

In his request to join the lawsuit, Lundgren, 56, said he is at even greater
risk of experiencing pain and suffering during the procedure than other
inmates because he is overweight and diabetic.

Similar lawsuits filed in several states have led to the halting of
executions in Missouri, Delaware and New Jersey.

Opponents have argued that the use of the lethal injection is
unconstitutionally cruel and painful and that the procedure is often carried
out without specifically trained medical personnel present.

But Ohio's method of lethal injection came under national scrutiny by death
penalty opponents in May after problems slowed the execution of another
inmate who was a former intravenous drug user and the vein the execution
team chose collapsed as the chemicals started flowing.

While Judge Gregory Frost issued an order temporarily delaying Lundgren's
execution, he said it appears to him that potential flaws with Ohio's
execution process could easily be corrected.

"Thus, any delay in carrying out Lundgren's execution should and can be
minimal," Frost said.

State Attorney General Jim Petro will appeal the ruling to the 6th U.S.
Circuit Court of Appeals in Cincinnati, said spokesman Mark Anthony.

Lundgren's sentence stems from a conviction for the fatal shooting of a
family of five in 1989. The family, which included three children, were
killed while they stood in a pit dug inside his barn in northeast Ohio.

Lundgren formed a cult after he was dismissed in 1987 as a lay minister of
the Reorganized Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints, now known as
the Community of Christ.

He said passages in the Bible told him to kill the family. Several witnesses
said the family was not as enthusiastic about the cult as Lundgren would
have liked.

The family he killed had moved from Missouri in 1987 to follow Lundgren's
teachings.

Frost's decision allows Lundgren to join a 2004 lawsuit brought by death row
inmate Richard Cooey, convicted of the rape and murder of two University of
Akron students in 1986.

Cooey argues that the way chemicals used in lethal injection are
administered makes the process painful enough to amount to cruel and unusual
punishment, in violation of the constitution.

Four other inmates had previously joined the lawsuit.

[bobbylien]

I think we might be seeing a lot of fat death row inmates in the future.

[Elrathin]

Food for freedom program.

[Labrocca]

I still want to know what's wrong with a single bullet to the head.

[Anti-Racism]

I still want to know what's wrong with a single bullet to the head.


Exactly. Shoot the part that ISN'T fat.

Or maybe...

[cs0564]

Shoots a family of five to death and now we cannot execute him. Bullet to teh brain pan sounds good to me. Can I help?

[underdawg]

I do not believe in corporal punishment maybe because I feel that innocent people could be wrongly killed, but if it is to be the law of the land, I do not see how being fat is an excuse in avoiding the death penalty. You are going to quickly die whether you are skinny or fat.

[cs0564]

I only feel capital punishment should be done to the most haneous of people. It is actually cheaper to send someone to jail for life than it is to execute. Execution is sometimes too easy for these hardened criminals. Becasue this person is too fat is just another reason why we need to overturn, out of control judges.

[Professor]

I still want to know what's wrong with a single bullet to the head.Â*Â*


It was good enough for those he killed. And he will die from a bullet no matter how fat or thin he is.

[cs0564]

I still want to know what's wrong with a single bullet to the head.Â*Â*


It was good enough for those he killed.Â*Â*And he will die from a bullet no matter how fat or thin he is.


Good observation. Can I squeeze it off?

[Pookie]

Too fat? Awww. Get him a bigger coffin and execute him anyway.
Pookie

[Elrathin]

There's an easier way. Guillotine. Theoretically, it is supposed to sever the nerves at the base of the skull to prevent feeling pain. Although I don't think they actually have this one verified and I wouldn't want to be the guinnea pig for it :)

[lily]

I'm going for the obvious......he's diabetic........give him an overdose of insulin. He'll die in his sleep.....that'll take care of his vein problems!

[Buck Laser]

Well, "too fat" is funny. But it hardly makes the case for capital punishment. I've spent a fairly long lifetime thinking about capital punishment, and I can't bring myself to believe it's ever a good idea--not even for truly bad people.

I might make an exception for stupid people...but the Lord made so many of 'em.:(

[cs0564]

No problem with Capital punishemtn on haneous crimes like this one! Shoots five family members and he is still breathing? I guess I could wait until he dies of a coronary................................naw..... Let's see him pay for his crimes!

[Professor]

Theoretically, it is supposed to sever the nerves at the base of the skull to prevent feeling pain.Â*Â*Although I don't think they actually have this one verified and I wouldn't want to be the guinnea pig for it :)


I'd like to know how they came up with that. I severed head is supposed to be able to speak for 5 seconds, maybe they asked then?

[micfranklin]

Maybe he's so fat that the bullets would bounce right off of him if he was shot:D

[Professor]

Maybe he's so fat that the bullets would bounce right off of him if he was shot:D


Ha ha, new armor for cops, donuts.

[crimzonsol]

Opponents have argued that the use of the lethal injection is
unconstitutionally cruel and painful and that the procedure is often carried
out without specifically trained medical personnel present.


You know I wonder how they can argue that it is painful, did they ask the person after the Lethal injection. I wonder why there are no trained medical people at a Lethal injection?

[jafar00]

Wow, all these people coming out in favour of execution, yet when any other country does it, they are labelled barbarians in need of an invasion.

What did the fatty do anyway?

[PatrickHenry]

Wow, all these people coming out in favour of execution, yet when any other country does it, they are labelled barbarians in need of an invasion.

What did the fatty do anyway?
Murdered a family of five including three kids. He's got it coming all right. :bye:

Listen. If lethal injection is good enough to euthanize our aged pets, it's good enough for lardo murderers.

[Northpaw77]

I still want to know what's wrong with a single bullet to the head.


THAT IS BEAUTIFUL!!!! If he's sentenced to death... who cares how they do it

[AnnEsthesia]

I do. Just because he is a monster does not mean we should be one too. Kill them, but do it painlessly. To do otherwise is to lose our humanity.

[PatrickHenry]

I know!

The prison officials should place him on a 1200 calorie diet, so that he gets skinny enough to euthanize!

[Lazarus]

As I find this " excuse " to avoid punishment totally laughable, I shall add to the humor :
Blubber bullets
How fat would you have to be to be bulletproof, so that your fat layer would prevent a bullet fired from an ordinary handgun from reaching your vital organs? I recently read it was about 500 kilograms, but find this hard to believe.

The damage a bullet does to its target is measured in two ways: the depth of penetration and the amount of tissue damage per centimetre of penetration. These two figures are normally found by firing live rounds into blocks of a thick, viscous gel that is formulated to have the same physical properties, such as viscosity, density, as human flesh.

A 9-millimetre handgun round - the most common type - is quoted in the Compendium of Modern Firearms by K. Dockery and R. Talsorian (Games, 1991) as being able to penetrate approximately 60 centimetres of human flesh before it stops, doing an average of 1 cubic centimetre of damage per centimetre of penetration. In reality the distance penetrated is often much less, because rounds frequently hit bones or simply pass through the target. This data is also based on a general body tissue average. Because fat is approximately 10 per cent softer and less dense than muscle, the figure of 60 cm may be too little.

Although being bullet-proof may sound advantageous, carrying a 60-cm-thick layer of body fat obviously comes with its own health hazards.

Thomas Lambert
Baslow, Derbyshire, UK

A human body would never be entirely bulletproof when you take into consideration tissues and appendages such as the hands, feet, eyes, ears and male genitals. Even if the skin was sufficiently thick to stop a bullet, the shock wave could seriously harm internal organs and the network of nerves below the skin, an effect which shot pellets exploit. Pellets from a shotgun can kill a human without penetrating the skin.

A bullet's depth of penetration in a body depends on a number of factors, such as the bullet's energy, diameter, mass, shape and material. Bullets from rifles and handguns may range from approximately 5 to 15 millimetres in diameter and from 70 to 7000 joules in energy. A typical police handgun bullet has a diameter of 9 mm and an initial energy of 500 joules. Penetration depth is measured in a gelatine block, and the police handgun bullet typically penetrates about 30 cm of gelatine at a distance of 5 metres from the barrel.

To estimate how much such a fat layer would weigh, start with the surface area of the person "underneath". There are several formulae to calculate the body surface area; I will use the Mosteller formula, which gives an individual's body surface area in square metres as the square root of the product of their height in centimetres and their weight in kilograms, all divided by 60. For a man 175 cm tall and weighing 75 kg, this yields a body surface area of 1.91 m2. So in order to cover this area with a 30-cm-thick layer of fat with a density of 1 gram per cm3, we would need at least 573 kilograms. When you add this to the weight of the body, you find that a typical bulletproof person would weigh about 650 kilograms.

Let the executing commence.

[Truth_and_Power]

I still want to know what's wrong with a single bullet to the head.


I don't think he would experience pain for more than a microsecond.. what's the problem with it?? I mean, just shoot the guy full of street-grade heroin and pop one in his head. People kill themselves all the time, sounds like plenty of real-world testing to me.

[Northpaw77]

I do. Just because he is a monster does not mean we should be one too. Kill them, but do it painlessly. To do otherwise is to lose our humanity.


A bullet going into their brainstem will kill someone on impact. This is much better than lethal injection. Infact, they just stayed an execution in florida because they found that the lethal injection may be causing tremendous amounts of pain after the "executee" is knocked unconcious.

This man killed a family of five. Why show mercy, anyways?

[preservanation]

This is the sort of stuff Universal Health Care will bring...
"Sorry, can't treat you for diabetes untill you lose 30 pounds"
The gov can't even figure out how to execute a convicted murderer in accordance with the law, but we want to turn our $300 bill/yr health care system over to them?
Sweet

[Alonzo]

Wow, all these people coming out in favour of execution, yet when any other country does it, they are labelled barbarians in need of an invasion.

What did the fatty do anyway?
Murdered a family of five including three kids. He's got it coming all right. :bye:

Listen. If lethal injection is good enough to euthanize our aged pets, it's good enough for lardo murderers.


Pat, lethal injection is often used to euthanize pets, but I've refused to allow them to euthanize my pets that way for years. I insist on having them put them under general anesthesia before injecting them. That way there's no pain or risk of pain.

Some vets always do it that way as well.

The way I see it there's no advantage to having them awake unless you want them to suffer.

[AnnEsthesia]

We have had three pets put down. They always give them something to make them comfortable and then they give them the injection. I cannot see why anyone would just give them the injection without the pain meds first.

[Northpaw77]

They are going to be dead in a matter of minutes, anyways!

[Alonzo]

They are going to be dead in a matter of minutes, anyways!


So lets make their last moments as miserable as possible, right?

[Northpaw77]

Making them miserable is not the point. Making them dead is. They obviously did something absolutely terrible. Euthanization is not something to be done with grace. So... if pain is a side effect, so be it.

[Truth_and_Power]

Well what we should do is suspend all executions and have about 3-4 years of high priced court cases to determine what to do and then we'll commission and 80 year study to euthanize all different types of primates to determine what is the optimal concentration of drugs, ETCETCETCETC.

Jesus just put some damn morphine in the thing and get moving for christ's sake. How much morphine? Well studies show that... A LOT. What, are you worried about an overdose?

[Northpaw77]

Well what we should do is suspend all executions and have about 3-4 years of high priced court cases to determine what to do and then we'll commission and 80 year study to euthanize all different types of primates to determine what is the optimal concentration of drugs, ETCETCETCETC.

Jesus just put some damn morphine in the thing and get moving for christ's sake. How much morphine? Well studies show that... A LOT. What, are you worried about an overdose?


Couldn't have said it better.

[ViolaLee]

Wow, we sure do have a lot of eager killers around here.

I don't believe in the death penalty.

Because if it was wrong for him to kill, then why is it right for us?

[BoogyMan]

Wow, we sure do have a lot of eager killers around here.

I don't believe in the death penalty.

Because if it was wrong for him to kill, then why is it right for us?


Actions have consequences Viola. No-one told the guy to murder someone, and now that he has, he should pay with the same price he exacted from the innocent.

[PatrickHenry]

... if it was wrong for him to kill, then why is it right for us?

We will all die. If you cut someone's life short, your life ends sooner. It's not an unusual punishment...

[Alonzo]

I find it odd that those who profess their religion more openly seem to be the same ones more comfortable with the death penalty. I wonder if that's really true, but it seems like it. You'd think it would be the other way around.

[PatrickHenry]

What's so bad about dying?

If you make someone else die, you oughta be able to face your own...

[Alonzo]

Advocating vengeance seems so at odds with most mainstream religious beliefs. I know for Catholics the anti-death penalty position is relatively strong and that makes sense to me.

Acceptance of the death penalty seems so at odds with the teachings of Jesus which is why I find it bizarre. Those who seem very religious, but privately, or those whose religion plays little or no role in their life seem more likely to find the death penalty immoral. As I said I don't know if that's true, but ti seems like it.

[PatrickHenry]

It's not vengeance... at least for me its not.

More like flushing the toilet...

But I guess some people enjoy the smell of sh*t....

[Alonzo]

But how does getting rid of failures by killing them fit into a mainstream christian worldview?

[PatrickHenry]

Don't ask me...I am outside the mainstream.

Most US Christians are in favor of the Cult of Uncle Sam and his hired killers...

[ViolaLee]

Wow, we sure do have a lot of eager killers around here.

I don't believe in the death penalty.

Because if it was wrong for him to kill, then why is it right for us?


Actions have consequences Viola. No-one told the guy to murder someone, and now that he has, he should pay with the same price he exacted from the innocent.
If killing has the consequence of death, soon we'll all be killed. An eye for an eye leaves the whole world blind.



... if it was wrong for him to kill, then why is it right for us?

We will all die. If you cut someone's life short, your life ends sooner. It's not an unusual punishment...
We don't have the right to decide when another human shall die. That's why murder is illegal.


I find it odd that those who profess their religion more openly seem to be the same ones more comfortable with the death penalty. I wonder if that's really true, but it seems like it. You'd think it would be the other way around.
I'm astonished by the hypocrisy too.


Don't ask me...I am outside the mainstream.

Most US Christians are in favor of the Cult of Uncle Sam and his hired killers...
Erik Prince, owner of Blackwater is a member of the evangelical cult too.

[PatrickHenry]

Erik Prince, owner of Blackwater is a member of the evangelical cult too.
Heh. The cult I refer to is the worship of Uncle Sam...a false religion.

And there are evangelicals who oppose US militarism.
http://go.sojo.net/campaign/surgeforpeace

[Truth_and_Power]

Wow, we sure do have a lot of eager killers around here.

I don't believe in the death penalty.

Because if it was wrong for him to kill, then why is it right for us?


Personally I think the death penalty is a waste of money and an ineffective deterrent, based on the studies I have seen. Cheaper to jail 'em for life and state-sponsored killing probably has an violence-increasing effect in society.

But if you're going to do it cut the crap and just put them out of their misery. Personally I'm a pragmatist and not going all moralistic on what to do with child-raping-murdering criminals and such. The point is to protect the rest of society from these kinds of criminals and deter others from doing it in the first place. Whatever accomplishes that goal is fine with me.

[PatrickHenry]

Executing killers is cheap.

Prolonging their lives while endless appeals are heard costs the big buck$.

[Truth_and_Power]

Executing killers is cheap.

Prolonging their lives while endless appeals are heard costs the big buck$.


Executing killers is cheap as long as you don't mind the fact that 10% of them are innocent. The ridiculously expensive appeals process is a sad attempt to design a system that filters out that last 10%.. or 40%.. or whatever it really is.

[Alonzo]

Executing killers is cheap.

Prolonging their lives while endless appeals are heard costs the big buck$.


How ironic for someone who denounces the government for chasing profit, yet you oppose a process that reduces the amount of innocent people executed due to the cost.

[PatrickHenry]

Executing killers is cheap.

Prolonging their lives while endless appeals are heard costs the big buck$.


How ironic for someone who denounces the government for chasing profit, yet you oppose a process that reduces the amount of innocent people executed due to the cost.

Show me how many innocent have been executed.

[BoogyMan]

If killing has the consequence of death, soon we'll all be killed. An eye for an eye leaves the whole world blind.

I have killed no-one Viola, have you? Maybe you could explain a bit for me?

Using this kind of reasoning however seems to negate the whole idea of consequences to our actions, wouldn't you think?

[Lazarus]

The way I see it is, if the application of the death penalty is designed to be some sort of deterrent, it is destined for failure.

We, being the inquisitive type, always are asking " why ? ".
" Why did this individual kill ? "

We ask that question in the hope of learning something to lessen the probability of the next individual acting on his thoughts and killing.

But the problem with that question is that some of the answers lead to mitigating circumstances into why the person-in-question did what he did.

So, we are led to a crossroads: do we ask those questions during trial, or only after conviction and sentencing?
Do we exclude any and all mitigating circumstances?

From all " taking of a life " trials ?

No excuses ; you killed = you will be killed ?

[Alonzo]

Executing killers is cheap.

Prolonging their lives while endless appeals are heard costs the big buck$.


How ironic for someone who denounces the government for chasing profit, yet you oppose a process that reduces the amount of innocent people executed due to the cost.

Show me how many innocent have been executed.


In recent years, however, numerous studies have found that one in seven people sent to death row are later proven innocent. And in one disturbing recent case, a prisoner was 48 hours from execution when he was proven innocent. In the last 25 years, 102 innocent people have been released from death row.

http://www.aclu.org/capital/innocence/10362res20030510.html

A 23-year-long study released on June 12, 2000, states that two-thirds of all capital punishment cases contained flaws serious enough to warrant that they be retried.

http://www.infoplease.com/spot/deathpenalty2.html

Columbia University law professor James S. Liebman led the researchers from Columbia and New York University, who studied more than 4,578 death penalty appeals from 1973 to 1995 and found that state or federal courts overturned either the conviction or the imposition of the death sentence 68 percent of the cases.

&quote;What we found is it's not just one case, and it's not just one state,&quote; Liebman said in releasing the report.

The study said incompetent defense attorneys, and the suppression of evidence by police or prosecutors are among the most common mistakes made in capital cases. Liebman said if the government spent more time and money during trials, fewer errors would generate a shorter appeals process and a higher success rate.

http://www.infoplease.com/spot/deathpenalty2.html

[PatrickHenry]

Alonzo, I'll give the Mexican Mafia your calling card.

They would regard you as a brother, since their agenda is MURDER and they enjoy doing it again and again and again...

I would have them eliminated from the face of the earth after their FIRST murder...

[Alonzo]

Patrick, isn't dealing with murderers a given when the death penalty is discussed?

And since you disputed nothing I posted, I can only wonder why you would be so intent on executing those people that you'd increase the chance of executing innocent people is beyond me. A few innocent dead people for the greater good of killing the bad guys, gee, sounds a lot like Bush and the rest of the government you so despise. Except they're killing bad guys on the loose, you want to put innocent people at risk to kill bad guys who would otherwise be locked down in a cell for life.