I thought it was Stevens, too, but the transcript appears to attribute it to Alito. The transcript also appears to have been scrubbed of the term as it only appears once, but it seemed to be that the term was used more frequently. Still, I could be mis-remembering.

Makes you wonder how much editing takes place in preparing transcripts. How does it hurt to leave it in? Moreover, why even bother to edit the transcripts when the audio is already available and contradicts it?

JAS

It definitely was Stevens, who sounded like he was mumbling. He even corrected himself once or twice.

The Panetti reference was classic liberal misdirection. Panetti stands for the proposition that we can't execute the mentally ill. So, that must mean it would be wrong to cause pain, even if done negligently. Ispo facto, no execution can take place through any method that involves pain, accidental or otherwise. It's the sort of logic that caused Socrates to drink poison. Hey, now there is an interesting train of thought.

Glad to know I'm not crazy. (That works on so many levels.)

Since dignity in death is not important to those who argued Baze in the SCOTUS this week, how about a return to the guillotine? It is more efficient and definite that electrocution, gassing, shooting, and hanging. We can also eliminate the fuss about which drugs in what amounts.


http://abcnews.go.com/TheLaw/SupremeCourt/Story?id=4099191&page=1

JAS