The First Nitrogen Gas Execution:
Examining the Crime, Justification for Punishment, and Implications for Future Cases
The first nitrogen gas execution:
The recent decision to proceed with the first nitrogen gas execution in Alabama has sparked intense debate and raised important questions about the nature of the crime, the rationale behind the punishment, and the potential implications for future cases.
There are strong arguments from both supporters and opponents of the sentence. Ironically Alabama is a pro life state. But whether people are for or against the execution is one thing, the unusual method is what makes this decision interesting.
Who committed the crime in this case?
Kenneth Eugene Smith's execution will be the first by nitrogen hypoxia. After what he called a botched execution in November 2022 he requested the state execute him by nitrogen gas. During the execution attempt in 2022, 4 hours was spent puncturing him with needles.
What was the crime?
Smith was convicted of murdering Elizabeth Dorlene Sennett in 1988 in a murder-for-hire-plot along side John Forrest Parker (Forrest Parker was executed in 2010). The pair were hired by Charles Sennett, the husband of the victim. Charles Sennett was a pastor and was struggling in debt, the murder was with a plan to cash in on the insurance. He killed himself when he became a suspect.
The murder was a brutal attack inside the victims home, she had been stabbed 10 times in the chest and neck and beaten by a fireplace implement.
Why nitrogen gas?
The process of Nitrogen hypoxia is when pure nitrogen gas is inhaled to the point of causing asphyxiation.
The UN human rights office has said using nitrogen gas could amount to torture, resulting in a painful and humiliating death. However the state of Alabama have called it the most painless and humane method of execution known. It is however, untested. But if the crime fits does humane matter? Didn't his victim have a painful and humiliating death?
This method has never been used anywhere in the world before so as of yet.
The first
The first nitrogen gas execution is a significant event that has ignited discussions surrounding the crime committed, the reasons behind the chosen punishment, and the potential ramifications for future cases.
Future cases
The crimes committed in further cases leading to the nitrogen gas executions must be thoroughly examined. Supporters of the sentence argue that the crime must be of such heinous nature that it warrants the most severe form of punishment. For instance, crimes involving multiple murders, acts of terrorism, or extreme cases of violence against innocent individuals may be seen as deserving of the death penalty. The severity of the crime is often a key factor influencing the public's stance on capital punishment.
Justification for Punishment
The proponents of the first nitrogen gas execution believe that capital punishment serves as a deterrent and a form of retribution. They argue that the fear of facing the ultimate consequence can dissuade potential criminals and protect society. Additionally, they contend that certain crimes are so morally repugnant that the only just response is the loss of the perpetrator's life. By imposing the death penalty, supporters assert that justice is served and the victims' families can find closure.
Opposition to the Sentence:
Opponents of the first nitrogen gas execution raise several concerns. They argue that capital punishment violates the fundamental right to life and constitutes cruel and unusual punishment. Furthermore, they contend that the justice system is fallible, and the risk of executing an innocent person is too great. Additionally, opponents assert that capital punishment does not effectively deter crime and that alternative punishments, such as life imprisonment, can achieve the same objectives without the irreversible loss of life. Examples: To illustrate the differing perspectives, consider the case of a serial killer who has taken numerous innocent lives. Supporters of the death penalty may argue that the severity and magnitude of the crimes justify the ultimate punishment, as it provides a sense of justice for the victims and their families. Conversely, opponents may highlight cases where individuals have been wrongfully convicted and later exonerated, emphasising the inherent flaws in the justice system and the irreversible nature of capital punishment.
Conclusion: The first nitrogen gas execution has ignited a contentious debate surrounding the nature of the crime, the rationale behind the punishment, and the potential implications for future cases. While supporters argue that the severity of certain crimes justifies the death penalty as a deterrent and form of retribution, opponents emphasise the violation of the right to life, the potential for wrongful convictions, and the lack of evidence supporting its effectiveness as a deterrent. The outcome of this case will undoubtedly set a precedent for future cases, shaping the ongoing discourse surrounding capital punishment and its place within society.
Do you think this execution should be going ahead despite the unusual circumstances?
