Speakeasy forum

General discussion

Cult leader says he's too obese for execution

by Mark5019 / October 19, 2006 1:04 AM PDT

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

ok use fireing squad its fast and over head shot will do it.


Discussion is locked
You are posting a reply to: Cult leader says he's too obese for execution
The posting of advertisements, profanity, or personal attacks is prohibited. Please refer to our CNET Forums policies for details. All submitted content is subject to our Terms of Use.
Track this discussion and email me when there are updates

If you're asking for technical help, please be sure to include all your system info, including operating system, model number, and any other specifics related to the problem. Also please exercise your best judgment when posting in the forums--revealing personal information such as your e-mail address, telephone number, and address is not recommended.

You are reporting the following post: Cult leader says he's too obese for execution
This post has been flagged and will be reviewed by our staff. Thank you for helping us maintain CNET's great community.
Sorry, there was a problem flagging this post. Please try again now or at a later time.
If you believe this post is offensive or violates the CNET Forums' Usage policies, you can report it below (this will not automatically remove the post). Once reported, our moderators will be notified and the post will be reviewed.
Collapse -
force feed him donuts until he explodes :(
by MarciaB / October 19, 2006 1:42 AM PDT

I apologize in advance to those who may take exception to my statement. I am not a person who advocates pain or suffering. I do, however, hold no compassion for someone such as Lundgren:
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.



Collapse -
(NT) (NT) why waste the food :)
by Mark5019 / October 19, 2006 1:47 AM PDT
Collapse -
(NT) (NT) Are you SURE that donuts are FOOD? ;-)
by holtnr / October 19, 2006 4:57 AM PDT
Collapse -
(NT) (NT) have you ever had a krispy kreeme?
by Mark5019 / October 19, 2006 5:07 AM PDT
Collapse -
by holtnr / October 19, 2006 5:28 AM PDT

Although Krispy Cremes are quite rare in New England, and yes they taste scrumptious. However, the fat and caloric content is excessive. FOOD is for survival, and nutrition. There are a great many ''foods'' that don't really qualify as nutritious. Of course, nobody I know ever eats those ''foods'' Wink

Collapse -
2 krispey kreems a day
by Mark5019 / October 19, 2006 6:49 AM PDT
In reply to: Yes,

make me happy:)

Collapse -
(NT) (NT) So put him in a hole and shoot at him
by Diana Forum moderator / October 19, 2006 11:31 AM PDT
Collapse -
(NT) (NT) A donut hole? ? ?
by Dan McC / October 23, 2006 3:42 AM PDT
Collapse -
In these cases, I'll agree to firing squad
by Roger NC / October 19, 2006 2:30 AM PDT

or any other fairly quick method, perhaps the old guillotine?

I'm sorry if that sounds mean-spirited, but other than avoiding deliberately prolong suffering during execution, I have little or no use for complaints about an execution being painful.

Debate about the death penalty and proper application is another discourse.

I cannot see why someone can go on a hunger strike and have their death sentence delayed while they are put in the infirmary and nursed back to health. I can't see delaying or cancelling an execution because of possible (particularly slight or short) suffering during the execution.

Actually, the old guillotine has to be as quick as could be doesn't it?

Furnish a blindfold if requested.


Collapse -
well i think ots the bleeding hearts
by Mark5019 / October 19, 2006 3:20 AM PDT

the do gooders are the problem did this thing care about the pain he caused?

Collapse -
Guillotines were generally reserved for royalty and
by Steven Haninger / October 19, 2006 3:38 AM PDT

other aristocracy. Hanging was the choice for the common man. Proper hanging evolved into a science. Depending on how obese this fellow is, either method could be difficult. I do agree with you about what should be debated. If we're going to put people to death, it's not possible to remove all pain and fear. In many cases it seems contrary to even try to be gentle about it.

Collapse -
I agree
by Evie / October 19, 2006 3:49 AM PDT

If one is against the death penalty that is another issue, but those are mostly the forces behind these cases trying to class various means as "cruel and unusual".

Hook up a car exhaust Wink

Evie Happy

Collapse -
Why is everyone so high on....
by caktus / October 19, 2006 5:54 AM PDT

killing defenseless fellow Human beings for hatred or convenience? It only serves to teach future generations that it is alright to kill defenseless fellow Human beings for hatred or convenience. We see this result every day here at home and around the world. What does it take to get the point across?

Collapse -
Hatred and convenience?
by Evie / October 19, 2006 5:57 AM PDT

I would differ with that assessment.

Evie Happy

Collapse -
(NT) (NT) How so?
by caktus / October 19, 2006 6:37 AM PDT
Collapse -
I don't see the death penalty ...
by Evie / October 19, 2006 6:48 AM PDT
In reply to: (NT) How so?

... if carried out in a fair justice system, qualifying as hateful or convenient. I see it as justice served. Another way to look at it is that if one looks at the arguments on both sides pro/con of the DP, equal arguments could be made that either argument can be framed as one of hatred (although I think revenge is probably a better term) or convenience.

Evie Happy

Collapse -
Reply to: I don't see...
by caktus / October 19, 2006 7:48 AM PDT

Revenge [is] probably a better term than hatred. But isn't revenge the ultimate product of hatred or vain-ed glory?

And isn't the death penalty considered a convenience to keeping one locked up to remove one from society?

It seems to me that the best deterrent to capital crimes is knowing that one would spend the rest of one's life alone in and 8x10. Call it a life row rather than death row. And regardless how much technology offers us it cannot prevent the ''justice'' system as applied by man from literally and at times deliberately screwing things up. And with no death penalty there is no such thing as a [final] injustice in our justice system regardung capital punishment. I'm pretty sure that capital punishment in some manner has been applied through-out millions of years, and man's propensity to commit capital crimes just keeps growing. When something doesn't work as desired, eventually comes a time to change direction.

Collapse -
I think ...
by Evie / October 19, 2006 12:34 PM PDT

... the case can be made that both sides of the death penalty debate rely equally on both.

If you see the threat of life in prison to be deterrant (not arguing that it wouldn't be), then you must believe that it is a harsh punishment. I've seen it stated on this board that death is too good for some criminals, that letting them stew in their own minds for years and years is a worse punishment than just ending their life. If this is true, then I don't see how a life sentence is any less revengeful than death, it may even be more so, as some argue, because the criminal suffers more.

As for convenience, it's a bit more difficult to explain, but reality is that it's not more convenient to put a person to death than imprison them. Often it's more convenient to just let them waste away. How many legal resources are expended because of the Tookie Williams that is not on death row? Those facing the death penalty often garner support from activists or those that believe in their innocence. It is far more rare for the lifer. Justice can be somewhat less careful if a mistake doesn't kill the person ... right?

Personally, I look at sentencing to be a vehicle for exacting justice for the crime committed and the public safety. I'm not interested in rehabilitation for the worst class of criminals, and it doesn't seem to matter whether the death penalty is on the table, death or life in prison just isn't going to deter some people.

I don't believe we have an increasing propensity to commit capital crimes.

Evie Happy

Collapse -
by caktus / October 20, 2006 7:55 AM PDT
In reply to: I think ...

Yes. I do see life in prison as more a deterrent. It [seems] that many folks [often children] learn so little respect for Human life that they don't really care if they die. After all, if they die their pain or frustrations would simply cease.

While I believe this lack of respect for fellow Human life or simply fellow Human beings in general starts at home the fact that our justice system, society and government exhibit the same characteristic simply reinforces such teaching.

I believe that killing more often than not as exhibited by capital punishment, murder, abortion all of which are carried out by various means, both legal and illegal are for convenience. Rather than face and deal with problems as well as matters that should [not] be considered [problems]. I believe that many in society and government think that our younger generations don't listen to and learn from them, but it seems they do much more than we think. Kids associate what we do with what they should do regardless weather we say ''do as I say, not as I do''.

It may be that capital crimes only increase with the growing rate of our populations. But still, it seems capital punishment isn't working as well as a deterrent as we would like.

Collapse -
How would you punish someone who
by Diana Forum moderator / October 20, 2006 10:51 AM PDT
In reply to: Reply

is in prison for life without parole who kills one of the guards or even another inmate? He, or she, has nothing to lose.


Collapse -
Well don't you see?
by duckman / October 20, 2006 10:55 AM PDT

Society is to blame !!

Collapse -
"to blame"
by caktus / October 20, 2006 2:36 PM PDT
In reply to: Well don't you see?

for permitting and encouraging it to escalate.

Collapse -
Reply to: How
by caktus / October 20, 2006 2:31 PM PDT

Obviously couldn't be punished any more. However, such a lifer shouldn't be permitted such an opportunity as [is] the case regarding death rowers. Here my biggest concern would be how/why such a lifer was permitted such an opportunity. I believe a
person(s) who afforded the lifer this opportunity should bare about as much responsibility.

As with death rowers I would expect such a lifer would generally be condemned to an 8x10 with 30 minute of controlled access to daylight per day.

BTW, if the prisoner you refer to were sentenced to be killed managed to kill again, what do you expect would be a punishment or condemnation just or equal to the second killing?

Collapse -
If that were really true ...
by Evie / October 20, 2006 11:23 AM PDT
In reply to: Reply

... there wouldn't be as many criminals that eventually show their yellow-bellied sides when faced with the DP. One of the benefits of having the DP on the table is that often, the guilty don't go free (taking chances at trial where you might get an OJ-esque defense and jury). To the extent that punishment is a deterrant, I think both are probably of about equal value, but ultimately the DP is slightly worse (judging by how many will accept life in prison with confession to avoid the DP), and has the added benefit to society of providing the ultimate in protections against recidivism. The victims cannot be brought back, but knowing what has happened to their loved ones is priceless to those left behind. I can think of many cases off the top of my head where at least the families got that.

I'm not such an advocate that I would "go to the mat" so-to-speak to defend the DP. A "life row" with minimal amenities, no life-extending medical treatments (heart bypasses? OUT!) where the public is assured they will never get out would be amenable to me.

I do not agree, however, with the comparison of the DP to murder and abortion. The last two are perpetrated on innocents, the DP can be thought of as self-defense for society, exacting justice, whatever. We're not a society that applies the DP w/o a plethora of opportunities for appeal, etc.

Evie Happy

Collapse -
Life or death option??
by Steven Haninger / October 20, 2006 12:37 PM PDT

Call it an "indefinite" (with DP potential) sentence. Carry out the DP sentence only and immediately upon the death of any of the victim's (s') immediately family (blood relative, adopted child) or spouse as so named and listed in the court decision. Add, as well, a victim who survived a murder attempt where others were killed. The list could be long and ages vary greatly. The convicted could be kept informed of health issues of the listed so they could sweat it out over and over. They get to live on the edge every day the same as did their victims. Too cruel??

Collapse -
Reply to: If...
by caktus / October 20, 2006 3:00 PM PDT

I compare the DP to murder and abortion in the sense the at consider them all the result of disrespect for Human life.

As for the "OJ-esque" managery, I think perhaps the prosecution's jumping-the-gun in an attempt to effect a quick trial as well as sloppy investigation had a lot to do with things getting screwed up. So often we see criminals walk because prosecutors, officers, witnesses or jurors tried to some how take matters into their own hands.

A "life row" with minimal amenities, etc... you mention is pretty much what I'm suggesting.

As for "the DP can be thought of as self-defense for society", how can shackling and strapping down a person prior to killing them be "self defense"?

Collapse -
Can't harm anymore
by Evie / October 20, 2006 3:08 PM PDT
In reply to: Reply to: If...

I guess I can't see these monsters as "the most vulnerable among us" forms of human life that need protecting. THEY made their beds IMO. Respect for human life doesn't translate much better in confining a human being to conditions that would probably be termed torture by some here.

But, as I said, a life row would be amenable to me if it was as stated. The devil is in the details. They need more time to recreate, more books, visitation, TV, etc. If you value their life, how can you deny them these things?

Evie Happy

Collapse -
I figure...
by caktus / October 21, 2006 7:54 AM PDT
In reply to: Can't harm anymore

if that would be a problem how could we deny the Gitmo prisoners TV? Simply put their not worth it. The taxpayers simply shouldn't have to foot such a bill. The lives of defenseless Human beings should have a right to protection, not TV.

As a poster mentioned earlier "THEY made their bed". But to take the life of a defenseless Human being is just wrong.

Collapse -
We'll have to agree to disagree on this one ...
by Evie / October 23, 2006 12:19 AM PDT
In reply to: I figure...

... I don't see the violent criminal as a defenseless human being. They gave up that right when they took the life of a truly defenseless human being. Perhaps you are not aware of all of the amenities they DO have at Gitmo. As I've said before, I am not "married" to the idea of a death penalty, but I don't see the alternative carried out very well anywhere to the ultimate defense of civil society.

Evie Happy

Collapse -
and a killer like this
by Mark5019 / October 19, 2006 6:51 AM PDT

should stay alive while his victems arent?

Popular Forums
Computer Newbies 10,686 discussions
Computer Help 54,365 discussions
Laptops 21,181 discussions
Networking & Wireless 16,313 discussions
Phones 17,137 discussions
Security 31,287 discussions
TVs & Home Theaters 22,101 discussions
Windows 7 8,164 discussions
Windows 10 2,657 discussions


Help, my PC with Windows 10 won't shut down properly

Since upgrading to Windows 10 my computer won't shut down properly. I use the menu button shutdown and the screen goes blank, but the system does not fully shut down. The only way to get it to shut down is to hold the physical power button down till it shuts down. Any suggestions?