Lethal-injection trial wraps up

Arguments wrapped up Tuesday in a civil trial questioning Washington's lethal injection system, with lawyers for three death row inmates arguing the state's preferred execution method needs a major overhaul to satisfy bans on cruel punishment.

Attorneys for the Department of Corrections countered that Washington's lethal injection system passes constitutional tests because it is substantially similar to a Kentucky system upheld last year by the U.S. Supreme Court.

The lawsuit does not seek to end the death penalty in Washington. Instead, the inmates' lawyers are asking the state to trade its current mix of fatal drugs for a large dose of a powerful sedative, which they say could kill a condemned person with virtually no risk of pain or suffering.

Thurston County Superior Court Judge Chris Wickham indicated it could be several days before a ruling is posted.

Washington, like roughly three dozen states, gives successive doses of three separate drugs to render an inmate unconscious, paralyze their body, and then stop the inmate's heart.

But the lawsuit argues that Washington's lethal injection procedures are so sloppy and inconsistent that an inmate might be partially conscious when fatal drugs flow into their veins. If that happens, the condemned person could be subjected to suffocation and excruciating pain.

The list of alleged shortcomings is long, including no supervision by doctors or nurses, inadequate training and rehearsals for the execution team, and lack of medical qualifications for everyone involved.

Inmates' lawyers also point especially to the lack of a current execution team at the State Penitentiary in Walla Walla as proof the state is unprepared for a proper execution.

Members of the previous execution team resigned in March, worried their identities could be exposed through the lawsuit's examination of their qualifications and experience. A substitute team has not been assembled.

"There is no question that they could not constitutionally perform an execution were one scheduled tomorrow," said Diane Meyers, a lawyer for one of the inmates.

But John Samson, an assistant state attorney general, said the lawsuit incorrectly presumes that state officials must prove their execution procedures will be followed in a perfect manner, eliminating all risk of pain.

Rather, he said, it's the inmates who must prove that Washington's procedures represent a substantial, intolerable risk of harm. And since Washington's policies are similar to Kentucky's, including the requirement of some medical training or experience for the execution team, the inmates' arguments don't clear the legal hurdle.

"They essentially demand a perfect execution," Samson said. "But neither the state nor the federal Constitution requires a perfect execution. What the Constitution requires is that the execution not inflict cruel and unusual punishment."

The state also rejects the plaintiffs' argument that the Washington Constitution offers a stronger protection against cruel punishment than the U.S. Constitution's Eighth Amendment.

The case is a combined lawsuit on behalf of three death row inmates: Darold Stenson, who shot his wife and business partner in Clallam County; Cal Coburn Brown, who tortured and killed a Burien woman; and Jonathan Gentry, who killed a 12-year-old girl in Kitsap County.

Washington death row inmates may opt for hanging instead of lethal injection. The state's last execution was the lethal injection death of James Elledge in 2001.