
在克丽丝塔·派克的处决日期前几个月,她和她的法律团队明确表示,这位田纳西州死囚牢房中唯一的女性囚犯,现年50岁,并不害怕死亡。她害怕的是处决过程本身。“她最大的恐惧不是死亡,”律师斯蒂芬·费雷尔在新闻发布会上表示,“而是对漫长、痛苦、创伤性死亡的恐惧。”援引她的凝血障碍和困难采血史,她的律师辩称,可能无法将静脉输液管正确插入派克的手臂,通过注射死刑执行她将构成残酷和非常规的惩罚。
In the months leading up to Christa Pike’s execution date, she and her legal team made it clear that she, the lone woman on Tennessee’s death row, 50 years old, wasn’t afraid to die. She was terrified of the execution itself“Her greatest fear wasn’t dying,” attorney Stephen Ferrell told in a press conference. “It was a fear of a prolonged, painful, traumatic death.”Citing her blood-clotting disorder and a history of difficult blood draws, her attorney argued that there could be problems properly affixing the IV into Pike’s arm and that executing her via lethal injection would amount to cruel and unusual punishment.
在处决前约一个月,她的律师曾推动改用绞刑或枪决。在最后关头,第六巡回上诉法院暂停了她的处决,但最高法院推翻了这一裁决。当她最终被带入监狱的死刑室时,派克和她律师的担忧在一定程度上得到了验证,程度超出了他们的预料:她成为了第一个在接受双倍致死注射药物后存活下来的人。
About a month before her execution, her lawyers had pushed for her to be hanged or shot by a firing squad instead. At the eleventh hour, the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals stayed her execution, only to have the Supreme Court overrule it. When she finally arrived in the prison’s death chamber, Pike and her lawyer’s concerns would be proven true to a degree they couldn’t have anticipated: she became the first person to survive the administration of a double dose of lethal injection drugs.
根据美联社报道,本应只需十到二十分钟的过程耗时两小时,最终以派克存活但情况危急告终。据报道,克丽丝塔·派克目前仍插管、使用呼吸机,在纳什维尔的一家医院接受救命治疗,此前她被注射了本应是两个致死剂量的戊巴比妥,这是许多州用于注射死刑的一种巴比妥类药物。根据她法律团队提交的一份紧急文件,当她到达医院时,派克的手臂“肿胀、烧伤和起泡”。
What should have been a ten- to twenty-minute process took two hours, according to the Associated Press, and ended with Pike alive but in critical condition. Christa Pike reportedly remains intubated, on a ventilator in a Nashville hospital, receiving life-saving care after being pumped with what should have been two fatal doses of pentobarbital, a barbiturate used by many states for lethal injection. When she arrived at the hospital, Pike’s arms were “swollen, burned and blistered,” according to an emergency filing from her legal team.
关于监狱官员在派克处决前和处决期间的行为,仍有许多未知之处。派克的律师认为,州政府的静脉输液管出现问题,导致戊巴比妥流入了她的组织,而不是静脉。
There’s still a lot that we don’t know about the actions of prison officials leading up to and during Pike’s execution. Pike’s attorneys believe that a problem with the state’s IV lines caused the pentobarbital to flow into her tissue, instead of her veins.
田纳西州州长比尔·李已下令暂停该州所有死刑执行,并启动“独立调查”。在派克住院数日后,田纳西州矫正部门负责人辞职,但为该执行程序进行了辩护,称该州“根据既定程序履行了其职责”。克里斯塔·派克的案件在许多方面都很特殊,却完美诠释了美国注射死刑这一执行方式的弊端。大多数人对注射死刑的理解——将其视为比过去那些公开残暴的处决方式更人道的替代方案——与该程序背后的实际野蛮行径形成了鲜明对比。这种误解并非巧合:这是蓄意设计的结果。
Tennessee Gov. Bill Lee has halted all executions in the state and ordered an “independent investigation.”The head of Tennessee’s Department of Correction resigned days after Pike’s hospitalization, but defended the execution, saying the state “carried out its responsibilities in accordance with the established protocol.”Christa Pike’s case, while unusual in many respects, is a perfect encapsulation of the pitfalls of lethal injection as an execution method in the United States. Most people’s understanding of lethal injection—as a humane alternative to more overtly brutal executions of yore—is in stark contrast to the actual barbarism behind the procedure. This misconception is no coincidence: it’s by design.
死刑州对注射死刑过程的每一个环节都极其保密。为什么?据里奇蒙大学法学教授、前检察官科琳·巴雷特·莱因称,这是因为注射死刑具有最佳的政治观感——只要人们不太了解幕后发生了什么。
Death penalty states are incredibly secretive about every step of the lethal injection process. Why? According to University of Richmond law professor and former prosecutor Corinna Barrett Lain, it’s because lethal injection has the best political optics—as long as people don’t know much about what’s happening behind the scenes.
正如莱因在其2025年新书《注射死刑的秘密》(暂译名,原文书名未提供,此处根据语境意译)中所写:其他所有执行方式——绞刑、电椅、毒气室和枪决——都赤裸裸地展示了以我们之名杀人的国家的残暴。注射死刑则将其掩盖。有了注射死刑,我们就不必面对血腥的场面、烧焦肉体的气味或痛苦的哀嚎,这些都是国家实际所为的有力提醒。取而代之的是,我们可以告诉自己,囚犯只是沉入了永恒的睡眠。
As Lain wrote in her 2025 book Every other execution method—hanging, the electric chair, gas chamber, and firing squad—lays bare the brutality of the state that kills in our name. Lethal injection hides it. With lethal injection, we don’t have to deal with the sight of blood, or the smell of burning flesh, or the sounds of suffering, all potent reminders of what the state is actually doing. Instead, we get to tell ourselves that prisoners are just drifting off into forever-sleep.
这本书揭开了笼罩注射死刑的帷幕,揭示了从药物供应商到这种执行方式背后的科学原理,无一不问题重重。我联系了莱因,想了解派克执行过程中可能出了什么问题,以及注射死刑的问题并非个别现象,而是系统性的,烙印在其根基之中。得知克里斯塔·派克执行失败的消息后,您的最初反应是什么?
pulls back the curtain that shrouds lethal injection, revealing how everything from the drug suppliers to the science behind this method of execution is riddled with issues. I reached out to Lain to learn what might have gone wrong in Pike’s execution, and how the problems with lethal injection are not individual but systemic, baked into its very foundation. What was your initial reaction to hearing about the failed execution of Christa Pike?
又是一起执行死刑的严重失误。我对它是如何发生、为何发生有些想法,但当然,问题的一部分在于我们没有任何信息。我研究[注射死刑]已有七年,所以听到 Christa 的遭遇,真的令人悲伤和沮丧。
Yet another botched execution. I had some ideas of how it happened, why it happened, but of course, part of the problem is we don’t have any information. I’ve been studying [lethal injection] for seven years, so hearing about Christa, it’s really sad and frustrating.
“在前 35 到 40 年里,各州使用一种肌肉松弛剂……这能确保看起来像给宠物安乐死一样。”你知道,在某些方面,她的案例是注射死刑一切弊端以及死刑一切弊端的典型范例。更广泛地说,这是注射死刑弊端的一个缩影。
“For the first 35 to 40 years, states used a paralytic…that would ensure it would look like putting down a pet.”You know, in some ways, her case is a paradigm example of both everything that’s wrong with lethal injection and everything that’s wrong with the death penalty. More broadly, it’s an example of what’s wrong with lethal injection.
我们现在有一份不断增长的名单,上面的人执行死刑时严重失误,以至于他们“活过了”自己的处决。但我们也知道,我们见过长达一小时、两小时、三小时的处决。我见过尸检报告上有 14 处、16 处、18 处穿刺伤口。这些事情正在发生,但现在,终于引起了公众的关注。
We now have a growing list of people whose executions are so badly botched that they survived their own execution. But we also know we’ve seen executions that are one hour long, two hours long, three hours long. I’ve seen autopsies with 14, 16, 18 puncture wounds. This is the stuff that’s happening, but now, finally, it has drawn the public’s attention.
在您的书中,您在开头花费大量篇幅揭开了注射死刑真正恐怖的面纱,以及执行死刑的州是如何相当巧妙地对其进行“重新包装”的。您能描述一下公众对死刑与该程序实际情况之间最大的误解是什么吗?
In your book, you spend a good chunk of the beginning pulling back the curtain on the real horrors that come with lethal injection and how execution states have pretty brilliantly rebranded it. Can you describe people’s biggest misconceptions when it comes to the death penalty vs. the actual reality of the procedure?
过去 45 年来,公众一直被告知注射死刑类似于给心爱的宠物安乐死,但这一切都不是真的。公众被兜售了一套谎言,在前 35 到 40 年里,各州在注射死刑中使用一种肌肉松弛剂,这能确保看起来像给宠物安乐死一样。
The public has been told for the last 45 years that lethal injection is akin to putting your beloved pet down, and none of that’s true. The public has been sold a bill of goods, and for the first 35 to 40 years, states used a paralytic as one of the drugs in lethal injection that would ensure it would look like putting down a pet.
这种肌肉松弛剂同时也是一种肌肉松弛剂,它会松弛面部所有肌肉,然后将其冻结在该状态。所以你会看到一种安详入睡的样子,无论实际上发生了什么,而我们知道实际发生了什么,因为现在我们有数百份尸检报告显示,那些也是暴力的死亡。克丽丝塔·派克遭遇的一切,无非是真相大白。
The paralytic was also a muscle relaxant, so it relaxed all the muscles in the face, and then it froze them that way. So you’re going to get this nice drifting-off-to-sleep look, no matter what is actually happening, and we know what’s actually happening because now we have hundreds of autopsies that show us that those are violent deaths too. What happened to Christa Pike was simply the truth breaking through.
这完美引出了我的下一个问题。能谈谈为何在注射死刑中使用戊巴比妥,用个不太恰当的词说,是“成问题的”吗?戊巴比妥是医生协助自杀和动物安乐死所用的药物。因此人们可能会认为,它比各州沿用多年的传统“三药方案”更适合注射死刑。
That goes perfectly into my next question. Can you talk about why the use of pentobarbital in lethal injections is, for lack of a better word, problematic Pentobarbital is the drug that we use in physician-assisted suicide and also in animal euthanasia. So one might think that it is a better drug for lethal injection than the traditional three-drug protocol that states were using all these years.
但尸检研究显示,戊巴比妥的 pH 值在 10 到 11 之间,会化学灼烧肺部娇嫩的毛细血管,导致毛细血管渗漏,肺部充满液体。
But what we know from autopsy studies is that the pH of pentobarbital, which is between 10 and 11, is chemically burning the delicate capillaries in the lungs, causing the capillaries to become leaky and the lungs to take on fluid.
这种状况称为“闪发性肺水肿”,根据不同研究,它出现在 84% 的戊巴比妥注射死刑案例中。
This condition is called flash pulmonary edema, and it shows up, depending upon the study, in between 84 percent of all pentobarbital executions.
将药物注入静脉后,闪发性肺水肿在几秒钟内就会发生。药物先到达心脏,再到达肺部。因此,当身体试图缓冲这种 pH 差异以便代谢药物并发挥麻醉作用时,药物已经到达肺部,且这一过程即时发生。
Flash pulmonary edema happens in seconds when you inject a drug into the veins. It goes first to the heart. Then to the lungs. So, as the body is trying to buffer that difference in the pH so that it can metabolize the drug and use it as an anesthetic, it’s already gone to the lungs, and that happens immediately.
这些人本质上是在溺亡于自身的体液中。一些案例显示为急性闪发性肺水肿,也称为暴发性肺水肿。此时肺部极度充血,泡沫——空气与液体的混合物——实际上会上移进入气管、喉咙,导致他们窒息而亡。
These people are essentially drowning in their own fluids. Some of the cases show acute flash pulmonary edema. It’s also called fulminating pulmonary edema. That’s where the lungs are so congested that the froth—the mixture of air and fluid—actually moves up into the windpipe, into their throats, and they choke on it.
“报告发现的其中一点是,行刑者在执行死刑前夕,竟在维基百科上查阅该注射多少药物。” 一名法官在法庭上询问一位解释肺水肿的医疗专业人员,这种感觉是否如同从体内溺水。法官问道:“这是否与水刑的感觉相同?” 该医疗专业人员回答:是的。
“One of the things [the report] found was executioners, on the eve of an execution, looking in Wikipedia to figure out how much of the drugs to inject.”One court asked a medical professional on the stand, while explaining pulmonary edema, if the sensation would be one of drowning from within. The court said, “Is this the same sensation as waterboarding?”And the medical professional said yes.
公众对静注射死刑的看法就像是安乐死一只宠物一样。但事实上,我们实际上是在对人进行水板灌肠致死,而我并不是为了夸张而这样说。我这样说是为了清晰、诚实和坦率地面对我们实际上正在做的事情。
The public has this view of lethal injection as just putting a pet to sleep. In reality, we are actually waterboarding people to death, and I don’t say that to be dramatic. I say that to be clear, honest, and candid about what we’re actually doing.
在她被处决之前,皮克获得了一个上诉法院的暂停令,但这一决定很快被最高法院推翻。贯穿始终的一个线索是政治在推动死刑执行中的作用。你能否描述为什么——你是否认为政治在加速克里斯塔·皮克的处决中发挥了作用?
Before her execution, Pike was issued a stay by an appeals court, which was quickly overruled by the Supreme Court. A throughline throughout is the role that politics plays in pushing executions forward. Can you describe why—and do you believe that politics played a role in the fast-tracking of Christa Pike’s execution?
政治确实发挥了作用,因为这个“反对堕胎”的最高法院对死亡充满了特别的兴趣,并为之进行宣传。所以说,克里斯塔·皮克的案子实际上并不罕见。
Politics played a role in the sense that this “pro-life” Supreme Court is uniquely excited about death and advocates for it. So what happened in Christa Pike’s case is actually not unusual at all.
我们在Trump第一任期的死刑执行中也看到了这个主题,其中一场法院审理了对单一药物的五氯巴比妥方案的挑战;犯人们提交了两周的证据,数千页的文件和文档,专家证词,所有这些材料,而地方法院发布了一项预liminary禁令,并顺便说一下,要发布preliminary禁令,你必须做出事实认定,而法院也确实做出了这样的认定,即原告在其主张的实质性问题上很可能胜诉。
This is a theme that we saw in the executions from Trump’s first term too, where a court had heard a challenge to the one-drug pentobarbital protocol; the prisoners had presented two weeks’ worth of evidence, thousands of pages and documents, expert testimony, all of that stuff, and the district court issued a preliminary injunction on the execution and said—by the way, to issue a preliminary injunction, you have to make a factual finding, and the court did—that the plaintiffs were likely to succeed on the merits of their claim.
所以就请你停下来想一想这一点。一个联邦法院在听完两星期的证据后,暂时推迟了处决,以便他们能够进行审判。但这个标准非常高。你必须能够证明原告方很可能会胜诉。他们可能会成功。所以她签发了初步禁令,而最高法院撤销了它,并批准了特朗普的处决。我想那是13次特朗普处决中的第一次,它都始于最高法院在影子法庭上撤销暂停令。
So stop and think about that. A federal court that heard two weeks’ worth of evidence paused the execution just till they could get to trial. But the standard for that is incredibly high. You have to be able to find that the plaintiffs are probably going to win. They are likely to succeed. So she issues the preliminary injunction, and the Supreme Court lifts it and greenlights the Trump executions. That was the first of, I think it was 13 Trump executions, and it all started with the court lifting a stay on the shadow docket It’s incredibly perverse that the court in those Trump executions would lift the stay over executions. Litigation over the very method of execution that they were then subjected to.
这真是非常颠倒的事情,法院在这些特朗普处决案中撤销了暂停令,却正是针对他们即将面临的处决方式提出的诉讼。他们提出了主张。他们说,这是违宪的。法院说:“你知道什么?我觉得你可能会赢这场官司。让我们至少让你能够进行审判。”而最高法院撤销了暂停令。他们甚至无法进行审判,然后就被处以了他们所证明可能违宪的方式。这纯粹是权力。纯粹是非司法的。
They made a claim. They said this is unconstitutional. The court said, “You know what? I think you’re probably going to win this. Let’s at least let you get to trial.”And the Supreme Court lifts the stay. They can’t even get to trial, and then they are executed by the very method that they had shown was probably unconstitutional. It’s pure power. Purely unjudicious.
lethal injection的品牌定位中有一个重要部分,那就是它是一种“科学程序”:“我们经常安乐死动物,不少国家对人类也合法化了安乐死。为什么我们不能在这里做同样的事情?”但你的书的第二章和第三章揭示了这些程序究竟有多远远不是, forgive the pun,“一门完美的科学”。你能谈谈这一点吗?
One large part of the branding for lethal injection is that it’s a “scientific procedure”: “We put down animals all the time, and euthanasia is legal in some countries for humans. Why can we do the same thing here?”But chapters two and three of your book unveil just how much these procedures are not, forgive the pun, “a perfect science.”Can you talk about this?
我们之所以认为它是科学的,是因为我们知道动物安乐死和医生辅助自杀背后有科学依据。但非常具有启发性的是,在传统的三药方案中,每个州在处决注射的前35到40年里,从未使用过我们用于动物安乐死和医生辅助自杀的药物。甚至没有一种药物是我们用于动物安乐死和医生辅助自杀的药物。
We assume it’s science because we know that there is science behind animal euthanasia and physician-assisted suicide. But it’s quite telling that in the traditional three-drug protocol that every state used for the first 35 to 40 years of lethal injection—not a single one of those drugs was the drug that we use for animal euthanasia and physician-assisted suicide. Not one of those drugs.
当被问及他如何发明致死注射时——“嘿,你是怎么想出这些药的呢?”——他说道(引述):“我没有做任何研究。”他就是凭头想象编造出来的。这么离奇,如果不是真的的话,几乎难以置信。但确实是这样,而且这不仅仅是关于1977年致死注射被发明时的事情。
When the man who invented lethal injection was asked about that—“Hey, how did you come up with the drugs?”—he said, and I quote“I didn’t do any research.”He just made it up off the top of his head. It’s so fantastical that it would be hard to believe if it weren’t true. But it is true, and it’s not just about what happened in 1977 when lethal injection was invented.
在2024年,亚利桑那州在2022年搞砸了三次处决,州长暂停了处决并表示,我们将进行一次独立调查。他们聘请了一位退休联邦法官。该法官展开了调查,起草了一份报告,其中发现了各种问题。但州长解雇了他并说:“我们要走另一条路。”这实际上就是她告诉他的话。
In 2024, Arizona botched three executions in 2022, and the governor put executions on hold and said, we’re going to have an independent investigation. They hired a retired federal judge. The judge looked into it, drafted a report that found all kinds of things. And the governor dismissed him and said, “We’re going to go a different direction.”That’s literally what she told him.
她所选择的“另一条路”是让矫正部门对自己进行审查,他们随后进行了审查并表示:“我们做得很好。现在给我们签发授权,我们将从一位志愿者开始。”所以根本没有 adversarial 程序可言。但这让那位法官非常生气,以至于他实际上公开了他的草稿报告。你可以在网上找到它。其中发现的一个问题是,处决前夕,执行人们还在查阅维基百科,以弄清楚应该注射多少药物。
The different direction was having the Department of Corrections do a review of itself, which it then did, and said, “We’re great. Now give us our warrant, and we’re going to start with a volunteer.”So there’s no adversarial process at all. But this made the judge so mad that he actually released his draft report. You can find it on the internet. And one of the things he found was executioners, on the eve of an execution, looking in Wikipedia to figure out how much of the drugs to inject.
“对他们来说,争论保密问题并承担保密的后果,比让公众知道真相要容易得多。”
“It’s easier for them to argue about secrecy, and to take the hit for secrecy, than for the public to know.”
这就是2024年的情况。这甚至没能进入书中。他们根本不知道自己在做什么。致命注射的核心问题在于,医学科学家不会告诉各州如何实施这一过程。他们非常坚信希波克拉底医师誓言,他们是治愈者。他们为治愈者创造这种知识,而不会告诉你如何杀人。所以,你有人在维基百科上查阅。美国公众听到他们说:“哦,是的,我们很小心。哦,是的,我们很关心。我们正在遵循协议。”但事实上,这简直一团糟,任何公民如果知道真正发生在这道帐幕后的事情,都会感到愤怒。
That’s 2024. This didn’t even make it in the book. They don’t know what they’re doing. The problem with lethal injection, at its core, is that medical scientists are not going to tell states how to do this. They are very much believers in the Hippocratic Oath. They are healers. They’re creating this knowledge for healers, and they are not going to tell you how to kill. So, you’ve got people looking on Wikipedia. The American public hears them saying, “Oh yes, we’re careful. Oh yes, we care. We’re following the protocol.”And the fact of the matter is, it’s a hot mess that would make any citizen outraged if they knew what was really happening behind this curtain.
这引出了我的下一个问题:保密问题。从阅读这本书中学到的最大重要的领悟之一是,致命注射执行过程中有多少保密措施,包括执行者是谁、药品从何而来,甚至死亡室内发生的具体事件。而且这种保密是有意为之的。为什么会这样呢?
Which goes into my next question: the secrecy. One of the biggest realizations that I learned from reading this book was how much secrecy goes into an execution via lethal injection, from who the executioners are, where the drugs were obtained, to even the events happening within the death chamber. And this secrecy is by design. Why is this the case?
我的看法是,各州无法解决致命注射所面临的根本性问题。他们无法获得药品,因为制药公司不会生产用于杀人的药物。他们无法获得所需的医疗专业人士来胜任这些执行工作。他们甚至无法找到合适的静脉。死囚人群体是一个年老体衰、静脉 notoriously 脆弱的人群。这些人普遍健康状况不佳,其中许多人曾经是静脉注射毒品的使用者。甚至克里斯塔·派克——她的律师都在说她的静脉很差。
My sense is states can’t fix what is broken with lethal injection. They can’t get the drugs because pharmaceutical companies didn’t make medicine for killing. They can’t get the medical professionals they need to competently do these executions. They can’t get access to the veins. The death row population is a geriatric population with notoriously weak veins. These are people with histories of poor health in general, and many of them are former IV drug users. Even Christa Pike- her lawyers were saying she has bad veins.
这些都是使用药物来杀人的计划本身所固有的难题。那么,当你无法解决问题时,你该怎么做?你就将其隐藏起来。
These are problems inherent in the project of using drugs to kill. So what do you do when you can’t fix the problem? You hide it.
他们更容易争论关于保密的问题,并承担保密的后果,而不是让公众知道他们实际上是从哪里获得毒品,他们如何违法,他们使用的是谁;在国家处于最强大的时候为保密辩护,比根据事实上的优点为他们的做法辩护要容易得多。
It’s easier for them to argue about secrecy, and to take the hit for secrecy, than for the public to know where they’re actually getting their drugs from, how they’re breaking laws, who they’re using; it’s easier for them to defend secrecy with the state at its most powerful moment than to defend their practices on the merits.