Hanging
So today Saddam Hussein's cronies were hung.

No, I'm not about to talk politics. Don't worry. If, however, you have a weak stomach, stop reading now.

One of the guys was apparently decapitated by the noose. The floor dropped out from under him, his body drops, there's a moment of tension, then suddenly, pop!, the noose swings free as the weight of 90% of his body is released as his head snaps off.

I made it my business over the last year to study executions. I read about people being burnt. I read about executions in England from 1500-1850. I read about all sorts of hangings.

People do NOT simply have their heads pop off when they're being hung.

Depending on how merciful an executioner is wanting to be, an individual can be strangled to death with a short, slow drop. This takes a long time. The individual is fully aware they're choking to death. More merciful is a longer drop. The individual's neck breaks. They're dead next to instantly. Either way, hanging is NOT a pretty death.

**Edit - 9:43 p.m.**Having said that, people were thrown off castle walls and weren't decapitated. The BBC has kindly informed me that a drop longer than 10 feet can result in decapitation, but I'd like to see an instance in which this has actually happened. I sure haven't heard of any. I haven't seen the video. I refuse to watch it. I don't know if there was more than a 10-foot drop. And if the drop was more than 10 feet, why didn't other peoples' heads pop off, eh?**

It's possible that the neck was broken in such a way that a bone punctured the skin, muscle, etc, allowing the pull of the noose to literally rip someone's head off. But highly fucking unlikely. They might have used fishing wire to hang the guy. Again, highly fucking unlikely.

Something is rotten in the state of Iraq execution-land. And I couldn't care less about the politics of it all... I don't care what implications the mutilation of the body has. I don't care who managed to rip off the man's head and why... Nope, I just want to figure out the physics, 'cuz it just don't seem right...
Labels: , edit post
9 Responses
  1. Crispy Says:

    that's bizarre. That's all I have to say about that. Bizarre.


  2. Anonymous Says:

    nothing makes any sense in the world anymore - nothing...
    when i come in wednesday - ask me about my "official statement" rant - it's a gooder...


  3. Wow, I was hoping that someone would have replied to this with an answer, but I too am left without knowledge of how that happens. As a matter of fact, I have heard the same things you have which is that it is virtually impossible to decapitate a person, especially with ROPE. If I am not mistaken, wasn't that one of the problems with the guillotine is that when the blade came down that the head wasn't cleanly cut off, so they had to re-raise the blade and do it again? If a blade can't do the trick, how can a rope?


  4. Anonymous Says:

    the guillotine was created to create 'the smooth cut' which was lacking in executioner's swords. it was meant to be more humane as it was a quick death, like a proper hanging, which snaps the neck (rather than strangling). decapitation by rope though--i too had thought that that was an impossibility. either we learned something new today, or as kate something is rotten...
    ***i've just been informed by an ex-miliitary that it is possible but very, very rare. only with a longer hang (ie, rope) or when weight is added. it's considered to be an 'unclean' or 'incomplete' job


  5. Kate Mc Says:

    If anyone has been brave enough to watch the video and can judge the distance of the drop, I'd be interested in knowing...

    To be quite honest, any of the "old" methods of capital punishment are subject to a lot of potential for error. There were just so many things that could go wrong to make it an un-'clean' execution (I won't go into it here unless you'd really really like me to)... I'm just a little shocked that after years of devoting my life to studying people who died of judicial execution I've not found ANY account of someone having their head ripped off by the hangman's noose.

    Someone's calculations were a little off. I'm just sayin'.


  6. Magnolia Says:

    Okay, before I jump in, allow me to say that I do respect the gravity of the situation and the conversation, so this is not to disrespect the topic or the issues. With 2 English degrees and 4 years of technical writing I can't help but be tripped up over this. What's your take on the grammar issues surrounding the term "hang?" In your research, you've probably seen it written a number of ways. What seemed to be the more common use in your readings--"He was hung" (which of course could also be referring to something else, ahem) or "he was hanged"? From a grammarian's standpoint, "hanged" would be the appropriate use, but language changes over time too based on how terms are used in regular speech/writing. Thoughts?


  7. Kate Mc Says:

    Bugger! I usually pride myself on my grammar, but you caught me.

    "They were hanged yesterday".

    "They hung on January 15".

    That's probably how I'd go about using them if I had been paying close attention.

    Fighting... urge... to edit... original... post...


  8. genderist Says:

    C'mon, Magnolia... You know that language changes grammar. Let the girl change the world.

    He's been hanged. He hanged out to dry. Maybe being hung would account for all the extra weight needed for the hanging to actually decapitate him.


  9. Magnolia Says:

    Hey, I'm all for being present at a moment of linguistic revolution. Vive la double entendre!