Wednesday, 4 April 2007

At least we can see what the priorities were for the MO lege

At least we can see what the priorities were for the MO lege: Protecting members of the execution team from...
1) "retaliation" (has anyone retaliated against any member of any execution team, like, ever?) and
2) "ridicule," (arguably well-deserved ridicule) and
3) the continued unimpeded participation in unethical practices by medical staff
.......trumps disclosure & public oversight any day of the week.
See debate summary:
PROPONENTS: Supporters say that the bill is needed to provide
protection to the members of the execution team and their
families from retaliation and ridicule. The bill also provides
license protection for health professionals who participate in

Testifying for the bill were Representative Moore; and Department
of Corrections.

OPPONENTS: Those who oppose the bill say that nothing should
prohibit the disclosure of the disbursement of public funds, and
it takes away all public oversight. The public should be able to
make sure that the people on an execution team are competent to
ensure that the executions are carried out humanely.

Testifying against the bill were Missouri Association of Criminal
Defense Lawyers; Jeff Stack, Missourians to Abolish the Death
Penalty; and Missouri Catholic Conference.

OTHERS: Others testifying on the bill say that the Department of
Corrections should not establish policy. Its duty is to uphold
the laws of the state, and there is a need to protect state
employees and families.

Testifying on the bill were Department of Corrections; and
Missouri Corrections Officers Association.

No comments: