By Martins Agbonlahor
Photos: YouTube Screenshots|Wikimedia Commons
The US State of Tennessee was agog last week, September 30 to be exact – not because of Donald Trump’s shenanigans or his trademark doublespeak, but for the botched execution of Christa Pike, who now carries the popularity or the notoriety of being the first ever to survive two lethal injections.
The facts of the case itself, is blood chilling: In 1995, when Pike was an eighteen-year-old teenager, she was arraigned before the courts accused of murdering a fellow female student whose throat she had slashed, keeping a piece of her skull – the allegation being that the deceased was amorously linked with Pike’s seventeen-year-old boyfriend. Pronounced guilty of murder, she had been on death row for over thirty years, waiting to be executed by lethal injections which eventually occurred at the Riverbend Maximum Institution in Nashville, Tennessee – but she survived during the botched execution attempt and had to be rushed to a hospital.
The substance of my argument focuses on the flawed execution and its legal implications – and not least – the psychological trauma that the accused had suffered during the botched execution, culminating in grievous and debilitating arm pain, injured veins, blood clot, pneumonia, inability to swallow, and brain damage.
A tsunami of blames is currently being hurled at the executioners who, themselves, are astounded over the unprecedented result of the otherwise, legal act. Some allege that the execution drugs used were untested, others say the intravenous needles were wrongly inserted, the drug missed the needed bloodstream, and so on and so forth. I think this should be for the executioners themselves to contend with. I hold no brief for Miss Pike, but worry that the law may be misapplied in a hurry. Before us, is a clear case of a hardened criminal who had committed a horrendous crime, is found guilty, sentenced to capital punishment only for the executioners to err in their avowed duty and ipso facto botch the execution.
When discussing botched executions, it is impossible not to look back at the harrowing fate of Ken Saro-Wiwa. On November 10, 1995, the despotic Nigerian military hanged the renowned Ogoni environmentalist alongside eight of his tribesmen on entirely fabricated charges. Saro-Wiwa famously survived multiple agonizing, botched attempts on the gallows before the state finally succeeded in taking his life. Under that dictatorship, ordinary citizens had no legal recourse; the regime routinely stripped regular courts of their jurisdiction through draconian decrees. But the United States is not a lawless military dictatorship. Given the country’s commitment to justice and human dignity, Christa Pike should be spared another round of lethal injections and instead sentenced to life in prison without parole.
To avoid committing an act of torture that directly violates the Eight Amendment, the state and the courts must stop any further attempts to execute Miss Pike. Her severe mental and physical deterioration, which required hospitalisation, means that proceeding would likely breach the Eight Amendment’s “competency” requirement. The state cannot legally put someone to death if they are medically unfit to grasp or understand their punishment, leaving authorities trapped in a clear constitutional dilemma.
I support retributive justice but not when it veers towards – or gravitates into arbitrary cruelty. The core issue in Miss Pike’s case is now a matter of judicial balance: deciding if a second attempt to carry out her death sentence violates the constitutional ban on cruel and unusual punishment, taking into due consideration her heart-rending experience at the execution chamber. Now is the time to temper justice with mercy. I reiterate this: spare this woman further agonies and give her a life sentence, instead.
If Tennessee’s lawmakers or Department of Correction officials railroad Miss Pike into another gruelling execution attempt – or resort to archaic methods like hanging to mask their past failures – it will cross the line into unconstitutional torture under the Eight Amendment. Beyond the law, it would be an act of sheer malice, mocking any notion of equity and justice. Ultimately, such cruelty may backfire, serving as the ultimate rallying cry for the pro-life movement to demand the total abolition of the death penalty.
This anomalous case has without doubt cast the concept of state-sanctioned execution into unfamiliar territory. We must therefore proceed with strict caution.
Martins Agbonlahor is an essayist, journalist, author, and criminologist. He resides in Greater Manchester, The United Kingdom. (https://www.martinsagbonlahor.com)
