HOT off the wires, kids...!!! :


'Obese' Inmate Dies Of Lethal Injection

UPDATED: 10:54 am EDT October 14, 2008


"LUCASVILLE, Ohio -- Ohio has executed a 5-foot-7, 267-pound double
murderer who argued he was too fat to die humanely by lethal
injection.

Richard Cooey died at 10:28 a.m. Tuesday at the Southern Ohio
Correctional Facility in Lucasville.

There were no immediate reports of problems finding suitable veins to
deliver the deadly chemicals.

A news conference is under way. Be sure to check back for updates from
NewsChannel5's Curtis Jackson.

His attorneys had argued that his weight problem could make it
difficult for prison staff to access a vein. A prisons spokeswoman
said earlier that Cooey received a pre-execution exam and was cleared.

Cooey was the first inmate executed in Ohio in more than a year, and
the first since the end of an unofficial national moratorium on
executions that began last year while the U.S. Supreme Court reviewed
Kentucky's lethal injection procedure.

The 41-year-old Cooey killed two University of Akron students in 1986.

Cooey and a co-defendant were convicted of killing two female students
from the University of Akron after disabling their car with a chunk of
concrete thrown from an overpass and then offering to help them.

Prosecutors said the women were taken to a secluded spot where they
were sexually assaulted, stabbed and bludgeoned, and had the letter
"X" carved into their stomachs.

Cooey was a 19-year-old soldier on leave from the U.S. Army at the
time. His co-defendant, Clinton Dickens, was 17 and was sentenced to
life in prison because of his age.

The last Ohio inmate to be executed was Christopher Newton -- who was
similar in size to Cooey -- in May 2007. The execution team had
trouble putting IVs in his arm, delaying his execution nearly two
hours. There were similar problems in the execution of Joseph Clark in
2006.

Cooey ordered a special meal Monday that included a T-bone steak with
A-1 sauce, onion rings, french fries, four eggs over easy, toast with
butter, hash browns, a pint of rocky road ice cream, a Mountain Dew
soft drink and bear claw pastries, Carson said..."

"Gregory Morrow" > wrote in message
m...
> HOT off the wires, kids...!!! :
>
>
> 'Obese' Inmate Dies Of Lethal Injection
>
> UPDATED: 10:54 am EDT October 14, 2008
>
>
> "LUCASVILLE, Ohio -- Ohio has executed a 5-foot-7, 267-pound double
> murderer who argued he was too fat to die humanely by lethal
> injection.
>
> Richard Cooey died at 10:28 a.m. Tuesday at the Southern Ohio
> Correctional Facility in Lucasville.
>
> There were no immediate reports of problems finding suitable veins to
> deliver the deadly chemicals.
>
> A news conference is under way. Be sure to check back for updates from
> NewsChannel5's Curtis Jackson.
>
> His attorneys had argued that his weight problem could make it
> difficult for prison staff to access a vein. A prisons spokeswoman
> said earlier that Cooey received a pre-execution exam and was cleared.
>
> Cooey was the first inmate executed in Ohio in more than a year, and
> the first since the end of an unofficial national moratorium on
> executions that began last year while the U.S. Supreme Court reviewed
> Kentucky's lethal injection procedure.
>
> The 41-year-old Cooey killed two University of Akron students in 1986.
>
> Cooey and a co-defendant were convicted of killing two female students
> from the University of Akron after disabling their car with a chunk of
> concrete thrown from an overpass and then offering to help them.
>
> Prosecutors said the women were taken to a secluded spot where they
> were sexually assaulted, stabbed and bludgeoned, and had the letter
> "X" carved into their stomachs.
>
> Cooey was a 19-year-old soldier on leave from the U.S. Army at the
> time. His co-defendant, Clinton Dickens, was 17 and was sentenced to
> life in prison because of his age.
>
> The last Ohio inmate to be executed was Christopher Newton -- who was
> similar in size to Cooey -- in May 2007. The execution team had
> trouble putting IVs in his arm, delaying his execution nearly two
> hours. There were similar problems in the execution of Joseph Clark in
> 2006.
>
> Cooey ordered a special meal Monday that included a T-bone steak with
> A-1 sauce, onion rings, french fries, four eggs over easy, toast with
> butter, hash browns, a pint of rocky road ice cream, a Mountain Dew
> soft drink and bear claw pastries, Carson said..."
>
>

I hadn't heard they actually did it, although I did read it in the paper
about him filing an appeal based on his weight. 267 lbs. at 5'7", while
obese, is not as morbidly obese as some in the news. If the appeal had gone
thru, I would have suggested they just take away his cholesterol and high
blood pressure meds (which undoubtedly he was on, compliments of the
residents of Ohio) and just keep allowing him to stuff his face 24x7. Let
him do himself in and save the state of Ohio the cost of the meds both for
his medical maintenance and for his execution.
-ginny

Gregory Morrow wrote:
> HOT off the wires, kids...!!! :
>
>
> 'Obese' Inmate Dies Of Lethal Injection
>
> UPDATED: 10:54 am EDT October 14, 2008
>
>
> "LUCASVILLE, Ohio -- Ohio has executed a 5-foot-7, 267-pound double
> murderer who argued he was too fat to die humanely by lethal
> injection.
>
> Richard Cooey died at 10:28 a.m. Tuesday at the Southern Ohio
> Correctional Facility in Lucasville.
>
> There were no immediate reports of problems finding suitable veins to
> deliver the deadly chemicals.

If ever they can't get a vein in these unlamentable slobs, they can call
me. I'll pay my own transportation, and I'll find a vein, by God. Or
I'll thread in a PICC, gratis. How 'bout a subclavian? Jugular? Leave it
to me, boys!

Pennyaline wrote:
>
> Gregory Morrow wrote:
> > HOT off the wires, kids...!!! :
> >
> >
> > 'Obese' Inmate Dies Of Lethal Injection
> >
> > UPDATED: 10:54 am EDT October 14, 2008
> >
> >
> > "LUCASVILLE, Ohio -- Ohio has executed a 5-foot-7, 267-pound double
> > murderer who argued he was too fat to die humanely by lethal
> > injection.
> >
> > Richard Cooey died at 10:28 a.m. Tuesday at the Southern Ohio
> > Correctional Facility in Lucasville.
> >
> > There were no immediate reports of problems finding suitable veins to
> > deliver the deadly chemicals.
>
> If ever they can't get a vein in these unlamentable slobs, they can call
> me. I'll pay my own transportation, and I'll find a vein, by God. Or
> I'll thread in a PICC, gratis. How 'bout a subclavian? Jugular? Leave it
> to me, boys!

Why can't we just switch to something more reliable like a guillotine?

Honestly, I'm not anti death penalty by any means, but I'd like to see
us get rid of it since it provides no deterrent value, costs a fortune
in appeals, provides media coverage for wing-nut anti groups, and of
course with the corrupt "legal" system half the people on death row are
probably innocent.

"l, not -l" wrote:
>
> On 14-Oct-2008, "Pete C." > wrote:
>
> > Honestly, I'm not anti death penalty by any means, but I'd like to see
> > us get rid of it since it provides no deterrent value,
>
> I beg to differ; Cooey has killed two, but has been deterred from killing
> any additional. Even life in prison is not as consistent a deterrent; some
> will manage to kill other inmates - not a great loss if their victims are
> equally horrid people; but not all inmates are.
>
> ObFood: Given the chance to request it, I'd like my last meal to be fried
> chicken, mashed potatoes with gravy, spinach and pecan pie.
>
> --
> Change Cujo to Juno in email address.

You seem to have some confusion about the difference between "Deterred"
and "Prevented".

Pete C. wrote:

> Honestly, I'm not anti death penalty by any means, but I'd like
> to see us get rid of it since it provides no deterrent value,
> costs a fortune in appeals, provides media coverage for wing-nut
> anti groups, and of course with the corrupt "legal" system half
> the people on death row are probably innocent.

Please clarify how you're not "anti death penalty", which you claim
just before listing some of the reasons you are.


--
Blinky
Killing all posts from Google Groups
The Usenet Improvement Project: http://improve-usenet.org
Blinky: http://blinkynet.net

"l, not -l" wrote:
>
> On 14-Oct-2008, "Pete C." > wrote:
>
> > > > Honestly, I'm not anti death penalty by any means, but I'd like to see
> > > > us get rid of it since it provides no deterrent value,
> > >
> > > I beg to differ; Cooey has killed two, but has been deterred from
> > > killing
> > > any additional. Even life in prison is not as consistent a deterrent;
> > > some
> > > will manage to kill other inmates - not a great loss if their victims
> > > are
> > > equally horrid people; but not all inmates are.
> > >
> > > ObFood: Given the chance to request it, I'd like my last meal to be
> > > fried
> > > chicken, mashed potatoes with gravy, spinach and pecan pie.
> > >
> > > --
> > > Change Cujo to Juno in email address.
> >
> > You seem to have some confusion about the difference between "Deterred"
> > and "Prevented".
>
> No confusion on my part; perhaps you should consult a dictionary before
> correcting others. Merriam-Webster online dictionary defines deter as "to
> turn aside, discourage, or prevent from acting"; my usage was fully
> consistent with "prevent from acting".

It is more properly "cause to choose not to act" and is not
appropriately used in the context of someone being physically prevented
from acting. Again, executing someone simply has no measurable deterrent
effect on the population at large.

Blinky the Shark wrote:
>
> Pete C. wrote:
>
> > Honestly, I'm not anti death penalty by any means, but I'd like
> > to see us get rid of it since it provides no deterrent value,
> > costs a fortune in appeals, provides media coverage for wing-nut
> > anti groups, and of course with the corrupt "legal" system half
> > the people on death row are probably innocent.
>
> Please clarify how you're not "anti death penalty", which you claim
> just before listing some of the reasons you are.

I have no "moral", "religious" or similar issue with a death penalty.
What I do have an issue with is the fact that it wastes my tax dollars
while providing no benefit.

On Tue 14 Oct 2008 08:31:20p, Pete C. told us...

>
> Blinky the Shark wrote:
>>
>> Pete C. wrote:
>>
>> > Honestly, I'm not anti death penalty by any means, but I'd like
>> > to see us get rid of it since it provides no deterrent value,
>> > costs a fortune in appeals, provides media coverage for wing-nut
>> > anti groups, and of course with the corrupt "legal" system half
>> > the people on death row are probably innocent.
>>
>> Please clarify how you're not "anti death penalty", which you claim
>> just before listing some of the reasons you are.
>
> I have no "moral", "religious" or similar issue with a death penalty.
> What I do have an issue with is the fact that it wastes my tax dollars
> while providing no benefit.
>

It also costs a fortune to house an inmate for the rest of his/her life.

--
Wayne Boatwright
(correct the spelling of "geemail" to reply)

*******************************************
Date: Tuesday, 10(X)/14(XIV)/08(MMVIII)
*******************************************
Countdown till Veteran's Day
3wks 6dys 3hrs 24mins
*******************************************
Today's disaster is tomorrow's archaeology.
*******************************************

In article >,
Wayne Boatwright > wrote:

> On Tue 14 Oct 2008 08:31:20p, Pete C. told us...
>
> >
> > Blinky the Shark wrote:
> >>
> >> Pete C. wrote:
> >>
> >> > Honestly, I'm not anti death penalty by any means, but I'd like
> >> > to see us get rid of it since it provides no deterrent value,
> >> > costs a fortune in appeals, provides media coverage for wing-nut
> >> > anti groups, and of course with the corrupt "legal" system half
> >> > the people on death row are probably innocent.
> >>
> >> Please clarify how you're not "anti death penalty", which you claim
> >> just before listing some of the reasons you are.
> >
> > I have no "moral", "religious" or similar issue with a death penalty.
> > What I do have an issue with is the fact that it wastes my tax dollars
> > while providing no benefit.
> >
>
> It also costs a fortune to house an inmate for the rest of his/her life.

I used to think that also. Everything I've read for the last few
decades claims that execution is far more expensive than life in prison
without possibility of parole. Even if there is a confession and the
condemned pleads for a quick death, there are mandatory appeals. These
are incredibly expensive. Prisoners often spend ten years on death row,
with special accommodations that cost a lot of money for a single room.

http://www.nyadp.org/main/faq

--
Dan Abel
Petaluma, California USA

Pete C. wrote:

>
> Blinky the Shark wrote:
>>
>> Pete C. wrote:
>>
>> > Honestly, I'm not anti death penalty by any means, but I'd
>> > like to see us get rid of it since it provides no deterrent
>> > value, costs a fortune in appeals, provides media coverage
>> > for wing-nut anti groups, and of course with the corrupt
>> > "legal" system half the people on death row are probably
>> > innocent.
>>
>> Please clarify how you're not "anti death penalty", which you
>> claim just before listing some of the reasons you are.
>
> I have no "moral", "religious" or similar issue with a death
> penalty. What I do have an issue with is the fact that it wastes
> my tax dollars while providing no benefit.

To be "anti" doen't have to involve a moral call. Anti means
"against". It doesn't specify any particular reasons. So you're
anti, but not on moral grounds. You're still anti.

--
Blinky
Killing all posts from Google Groups
The Usenet Improvement Project: http://improve-usenet.org
Blinky: http://blinkynet.net

Blinky the Shark wrote:
>
> Pete C. wrote:
>
> >
> > Blinky the Shark wrote:
> >>
> >> Pete C. wrote:
> >>
> >> > Honestly, I'm not anti death penalty by any means, but I'd
> >> > like to see us get rid of it since it provides no deterrent
> >> > value, costs a fortune in appeals, provides media coverage
> >> > for wing-nut anti groups, and of course with the corrupt
> >> > "legal" system half the people on death row are probably
> >> > innocent.
> >>
> >> Please clarify how you're not "anti death penalty", which you
> >> claim just before listing some of the reasons you are.
> >
> > I have no "moral", "religious" or similar issue with a death
> > penalty. What I do have an issue with is the fact that it wastes
> > my tax dollars while providing no benefit.
>
> To be "anti" doen't have to involve a moral call. Anti means
> "against". It doesn't specify any particular reasons. So you're
> anti, but not on moral grounds. You're still anti.

I'm anti wasting my tax dollars, not anti death penalty.

Pete C. wrote:

>
> Blinky the Shark wrote:
>>
>> Pete C. wrote:
>>
>> >
>> > Blinky the Shark wrote:
>> >>
>> >> Pete C. wrote:
>> >>
>> >> > Honestly, I'm not anti death penalty by any means, but I'd
>> >> > like to see us get rid of it since it provides no
deterrent
>> >> > value, costs a fortune in appeals, provides media coverage
>> >> > for wing-nut anti groups, and of course with the corrupt
>> >> > "legal" system half the people on death row are probably
>> >> > innocent.
>> >>
>> >> Please clarify how you're not "anti death penalty", which
you
>> >> claim just before listing some of the reasons you are.
>> >
>> > I have no "moral", "religious" or similar issue with a death
>> > penalty. What I do have an issue with is the fact that it
wastes
>> > my tax dollars while providing no benefit.
>>
>> To be "anti" doen't have to involve a moral call. Anti means
>> "against". It doesn't specify any particular reasons. So
you're
>> anti, but not on moral grounds. You're still anti.
>
> I'm anti wasting my tax dollars, not anti death penalty.

Every point you've offered about the death penalty has been a
negabive, even while you've been claiming to not be against it.


--
Blinky
Killing all posts from Google Groups
The Usenet Improvement Project: http://improve-usenet.org
Blinky: http://blinkynet.net

Blinky the Shark wrote:
>
> Pete C. wrote:
>
> >
> > Blinky the Shark wrote:
> >>
> >> Pete C. wrote:
> >>
> >> >
> >> > Blinky the Shark wrote:
> >> >>
> >> >> Pete C. wrote:
> >> >>
> >> >> > Honestly, I'm not anti death penalty by any means, but I'd
> >> >> > like to see us get rid of it since it provides no
> deterrent
> >> >> > value, costs a fortune in appeals, provides media coverage
> >> >> > for wing-nut anti groups, and of course with the corrupt
> >> >> > "legal" system half the people on death row are probably
> >> >> > innocent.
> >> >>
> >> >> Please clarify how you're not "anti death penalty", which
> you
> >> >> claim just before listing some of the reasons you are.
> >> >
> >> > I have no "moral", "religious" or similar issue with a death
> >> > penalty. What I do have an issue with is the fact that it
> wastes
> >> > my tax dollars while providing no benefit.
> >>
> >> To be "anti" doen't have to involve a moral call. Anti means
> >> "against". It doesn't specify any particular reasons. So
> you're
> >> anti, but not on moral grounds. You're still anti.
> >
> > I'm anti wasting my tax dollars, not anti death penalty.
>
> Every point you've offered about the death penalty has been a
> negabive, even while you've been claiming to not be against it.
>

I'm all for it if you want to pay for all the costs associated with it.
I'll even be happy to volunteer for the execution team, or just do it
all myself.

In article >,
Blinky the Shark > wrote:

> Pete C. wrote:
>
> >
> > Blinky the Shark wrote:
> >>
> >> Pete C. wrote:
> >>
> >> >
> >> > Blinky the Shark wrote:
> >> >>
> >> >> Pete C. wrote:
> >> >>
> >> >> > Honestly, I'm not anti death penalty by any means, but I'd
> >> >> > like to see us get rid of it since it provides no
> deterrent
> >> >> > value, costs a fortune in appeals, provides media coverage
> >> >> > for wing-nut anti groups, and of course with the corrupt
> >> >> > "legal" system half the people on death row are probably
> >> >> > innocent.
> >> >>
> >> >> Please clarify how you're not "anti death penalty", which
> you
> >> >> claim just before listing some of the reasons you are.
> >> >
> >> > I have no "moral", "religious" or similar issue with a death
> >> > penalty. What I do have an issue with is the fact that it
> wastes
> >> > my tax dollars while providing no benefit.
> >>
> >> To be "anti" doen't have to involve a moral call. Anti means
> >> "against". It doesn't specify any particular reasons. So
> you're
> >> anti, but not on moral grounds. You're still anti.
> >
> > I'm anti wasting my tax dollars, not anti death penalty.
>
> Every point you've offered about the death penalty has been a
> negabive, even while you've been claiming to not be against it.

I'm with Pete here. He's not against the death penalty, he's just
against the way it is implemented in the US. There are other countries
that do it differently, especially if they are war torn. A few seconds
after you are found to be giving information to the enemy, you are on
the ground, dead. If you have a wife and kids, hopefully there are
relatives, because the government isn't taking care of the family of a
traitor.

Many years ago, there was a family that lived near us. We saw them here
and there. Our kids went to the same school, they played soccer
together and took swim lessons together. The father played in a band
with my wife. He played flute. He was from Iran, his wife was from the
US. She said it was "interesting". The kids looked middle eastern.
The guy had some problems playing the flute. He was missing a finger,
the index finger on his right hand. It looked like a clean cut. I
never asked, but I had my suspicions. I would think that would be a
real deterrent to stealing.

--
Dan Abel
Petaluma, California USA

On Wed, 15 Oct 2008 09:01:01 -0500, Pete C. wrote:

> Blinky the Shark wrote:
>>
>> Pete C. wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> Blinky the Shark wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Pete C. wrote:
>>>>
>>>> > Honestly, I'm not anti death penalty by any means, but I'd
>>>> > like to see us get rid of it since it provides no deterrent
>>>> > value, costs a fortune in appeals, provides media coverage
>>>> > for wing-nut anti groups, and of course with the corrupt
>>>> > "legal" system half the people on death row are probably
>>>> > innocent.
>>>>
>>>> Please clarify how you're not "anti death penalty", which you
>>>> claim just before listing some of the reasons you are.
>>>
>>> I have no "moral", "religious" or similar issue with a death
>>> penalty. What I do have an issue with is the fact that it wastes
>>> my tax dollars while providing no benefit.
>>
>> To be "anti" doen't have to involve a moral call. Anti means
>> "against". It doesn't specify any particular reasons. So you're
>> anti, but not on moral grounds. You're still anti.
>
> I'm anti wasting my tax dollars, not anti death penalty.

you're all heart, pete.

your pal,
blake

"Wayne Boatwright" > wrote in message
5.61...
> On Tue 14 Oct 2008 08:31:20p, Pete C. told us...
>
>>
>> Blinky the Shark wrote:
>>>
>>> Pete C. wrote:
>>>
>>> > Honestly, I'm not anti death penalty by any means, but I'd like
>>> > to see us get rid of it since it provides no deterrent value,
>>> > costs a fortune in appeals, provides media coverage for wing-nut
>>> > anti groups, and of course with the corrupt "legal" system half
>>> > the people on death row are probably innocent.
>>>
>>> Please clarify how you're not "anti death penalty", which you claim
>>> just before listing some of the reasons you are.
>>
>> I have no "moral", "religious" or similar issue with a death penalty.
>> What I do have an issue with is the fact that it wastes my tax dollars
>> while providing no benefit.
>>
>
> It also costs a fortune to house an inmate for the rest of his/her life.
>
> --
> Wayne Boatwright


Showing some of the insanity:

A few years ago, a (now) former NY state governor took possession of a
criminal to serve his 20 years in NY. The con would then be transferred to
Texas, where he awaited the death penalty for another crime.
The new governor came in, released the con to Texas, who fried him 2 weeks
later.

On Sat 18 Oct 2008 02:28:16p, Kswck told us...

>
> "Wayne Boatwright" > wrote in message
> 5.61...
>> On Tue 14 Oct 2008 08:31:20p, Pete C. told us...
>>
>>>
>>> Blinky the Shark wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Pete C. wrote:
>>>>
>>>> > Honestly, I'm not anti death penalty by any means, but I'd like
>>>> > to see us get rid of it since it provides no deterrent value,
>>>> > costs a fortune in appeals, provides media coverage for wing-nut
>>>> > anti groups, and of course with the corrupt "legal" system half
>>>> > the people on death row are probably innocent.
>>>>
>>>> Please clarify how you're not "anti death penalty", which you claim
>>>> just before listing some of the reasons you are.
>>>
>>> I have no "moral", "religious" or similar issue with a death penalty.
>>> What I do have an issue with is the fact that it wastes my tax dollars
>>> while providing no benefit.
>>>
>>
>> It also costs a fortune to house an inmate for the rest of his/her
>> life.
>>
>> --
>> Wayne Boatwright
>
>
> Showing some of the insanity:
>
> A few years ago, a (now) former NY state governor took possession of a
> criminal to serve his 20 years in NY. The con would then be transferred
> to Texas, where he awaited the death penalty for another crime.
> The new governor came in, released the con to Texas, who fried him 2
> weeks later.

Applause for the new governor!

--
Wayne Boatwright
(correct the spelling of "geemail" to reply)

*******************************************
Date: Saturday, 10(X)/18(XVIII)/08(MMVIII)
*******************************************
Countdown till Veteran's Day
3wks 2dys 9hrs 24mins
*******************************************
There is no sincerer love than the
love of food.