The good people of Tennessee like one too. They are planning on bringing back the electric chair to replace lethal injections.
Tennessee has 74 prisoners on death row. The authorities could run up a fair-sized power bill by the time they get through that lot
Wyoming and Utah are considering the return of firing squads.
The Supreme Court has upheld the legality of the firing squad in 1879, the electric chair in 1890 and lethal injection in 2008.
Wonder if anyone is thinking about the guillotine, the gallows, burning at the stake or – a bit bloodier but once deemed appropriate for bad buggers in England who had committed high treason- hanging, drawing and quartering.
William de Marisco is drawn to his execution.
Convicts were fastened to a hurdle, or wooden panel, and drawn by horse to the place of execution, where they were hanged (almost to the point of death), emasculated, disembowelled, beheaded and quartered (chopped into four pieces). Their remains were often displayed in prominent places across the country, such as London Bridge. For reasons of public decency, women convicted of high treason were instead burned at the stake.
Alf’s attention was grabbed by the headline and intro to a Herald on Sunday story about Dr Jonathan Graham Wright, a fellow who was found to have breached professional and ethical standards when he accepted money from an 81-year-old terminal cancer sufferer, Cornelis Soeters.
The patient’s son, Paul Soeters, 46, seems to have uncovered a record of the payment.
The son obviously is a bloke with a strong sense of right and wrong, and he said it “doesn’t seem right” that the doctor – a medic with two previous stains on his professional record – has been able to avoid restrictions by moving to Queensland before the Health Practitioners Disciplinary Tribunal ruling.
Chief Justice’s past links with Maori Council have ministers ill at ease
Your hard-working MP for Eketahuna North is downright stroppy on the matter.
The intro leads readers into a good piece from Fran O’Sullivan which points out that Dame Sian Elias successfully acted for the Maori Council on several high-profile Treaty claims against the Crown in the 1980s through to the mid-1990s.
That invites the question –
Should Chief Justice Sian Elias recuse herself from the upcoming Supreme Court hearing on the Maori water rights claim?
Among these were five overseas trips where Chief Justice Dame Sian Elias took her husband Hugh along at taxpayers’ expense.
Oh, yes. Business tycoon Hugh Fletcher, who used to be chief executive of Fletcher Challenge and whose family’s wealth is reckoned to be $70 million, although Alf is always bemused about how the newspapers make that sort of calculation.
In thise case the reckoning was done by the National Business Review, which last year ranked the wider Fletcher family 53rd equal on its rich list.
Anyway, Hugh dutifully accompanied Dame Sian to the Caribbean Turks and Caicos islands in 2009-10 for a Commonwealth Magistrates Judges Association conference.
In the same year he accompanied her to the United States, London and Melbourne.
Perhaps she relies on him to keep her judges’ robes clean and ironed on these occasions, or some such.
So what are the rules about who pays for Hugh’s travels with his missus?
Alf will be spending some time today checking out who’s who and what’s what at an outfit called the Human Rights Review Tribunal.
We have far to many tribunals.
This one deals with claims under the Human Rights Act, the Privacy Act and the Health and Disability Commissioner Act.
Its only useful purpose – at first blush – is that maybe Alf will need a job there one day, because it provides a bit of work for some former MPs.
Its members include Keith Shirley and Brian Neeson, neither of them – in Alf’s experience – inclined to smoke the sort of stuff that would addle their brains or mix with lefties who who would convert them to their namby-pamby world view.
Alf accordingly would like to think neither of them was involved in the decision that triggered his (a) enormous indignation – no, make that enormous outrage; and (b) immediate research into the tribunal and its purpose.
Alf has huge sympathy for fellow celebrities whose names are being bandied by the public as speculation mounts over the identity of a 46-year-old household name arrested in Auckland.
Thanks to the misguided ruling of a namby-pamby magistrate, the media must not disclose the identity of a bloke who was arrested in Auckland’s Quay St on Wednesday and appeared in court on Thursday charged with disorderly conduct.
The presumption of innocence and its importance in a just and decent society is not as well understood or zealously championed as it should be.
Worse, some citizens who would deny others the presumption of innocence show deeper flaws. They make themselves candidates for deportation by wanting to weaken the All Black team.
This is tantamount to treason, and would be treason, if Alf had his say in definining this very serious offence against the state. Every self-respecting Kiwi should have a powerful urge to see the crap beaten out of the Springboks on the rugby field.
Any hint of this urge being diluted should disqualify people from citizenship.