司法 · 死刑执行失败持续报道 · 第 2 篇，共 4 篇

两剂药物，一场失败的死刑执行：派克幸存后田纳西州暂停死刑执行

两剂戊巴比妥未能杀死克丽斯塔·盖尔·派克。田纳西州已暂停死刑执行至年底，但她的预后、执行失败原因以及是否会再次尝试仍未有定论。

播出 2026年10月2日 UTC 09:12文字 2026年10月2日 UTC 09:29阅读需 11 分钟150 个来源

通过 RSS 关注

原语言视频

文字实录 · 正在加载

译自英文原文。

持续报道第 9 天

4 篇报道129 家媒体301 个来源92 个视频

完整报道

自上次报道以来的变化

35 小时后

当时9月30日 22:22 UTC

克里斯塔·派克的处决被叫停；田纳西州请求最高法院解除暂缓令

我们当时说尚无定论的问题

现有记录无法确定田纳西州撤销暂缓执行令的申请是否得到处理，也无法确定后续是否执行死刑或是否另定执行日期。
已有答案
请关注最高法院对案号为26A428的申请作出决定，或第六巡回上诉法院发布进一步命令，以确定是否会对此前的联邦诉讼程序进行更多审议。
已有答案

现在10月2日 09:12 UTC

两剂戊巴比妥未能杀死克丽斯塔·盖尔·派克。田纳西州已暂停死刑执行至年底，但她的预后、执行失败原因以及是否会再次尝试仍未有定论。

此后已有答案

现有记录无法确定田纳西州撤销暂缓执行令的申请是否得到处理，也无法确定后续是否执行死刑或是否另定执行日期。
最高法院批准田纳西州撤销暂缓执行令的申请，9月30日的死刑执行尝试在使用两剂药物后失败。目前尚未确定新的死刑执行日期。 ⁶⁸¹⁸
请关注最高法院对案号为26A428的申请作出决定，或第六巡回上诉法院发布进一步命令，以确定是否会对此前的联邦诉讼程序进行更多审议。
法院于9月30日处理了案号为26A428的申请，并撤销了第六巡回上诉法院的暂缓执行令。该命令并未最终解决是否重启此前联邦诉讼程序的所有争议。 ⁶⁸¹⁰⁴

**两剂戊巴比妥，一场失败的死刑执行。**2026年9月30日，田纳西州试图处死克丽斯塔·盖尔·派克。然而，当晚最终以救护车将这名50岁的囚犯从纳什维尔的里弗本德最高戒备级监狱送往院外医疗机构告终。她的法律团队最新一份已确认的说明发布于10月1日，称她仍然活着，病情危重，正在接受救命治疗。¹ ²

州长比尔·李暂停了2026年剩余时间内的死刑执行，并下令进行独立的第三方审查。这项暂停意味着原定于12月3日执行加里·韦恩·萨顿死刑的计划不会照常进行。但这并未减免任何一名囚犯的刑罚，也未确定新的执行日期，或保证死刑执行会在1月恢复。⁴ ²⁹

关键事实

2一次失败的死刑执行中使用的戊巴比妥剂量 1
7媒体见证者，视线多次受阻 119
2026死刑执行暂停至今年年底 4 29

9月30日，HeyDay News曾报道称，第六巡回上诉法院暂缓执行派克的死刑，田纳西州已请求美国最高法院撤销该暂缓令，当时尚无已确认的裁决。此后情况已有变化：最高法院当天晚些时候撤销了暂缓令，田纳西州当晚继续执行死刑，派克幸存。⁶⁵ ⁶⁸ ¹

如今，区别在于：失败无人争议，但其原因无人曾公开确认。官员确认执行未成功，派克被转送接受医疗救治。记者描述了他们能够看到和听到的情况。律师提供了医疗状况更新。专家提出的解释仍是假设，并非已完成调查的结论。

见证者实际能够确认的情况

见证者称，注射后派克仍在呼吸，有时呼吸有规律，有时则呼吸困难。他们看到她抬起头，并听见她说疼痛。NBC新闻报道了她的话：“我的手臂感觉快要胀裂了。”后来，见证者听到了鼾声。窗帘或百叶窗多次挡住了他们的视线。³ ⁷ ¹²⁴

打鼾是对声音的观察，并不能证明她睡得安稳、没有疼痛或始终保持清醒。她说话和移动只能证明特定时刻出现了这些情况，不能证明她在整个过程中一直有意识。

时间线仍不完整。WBIR的见证者约翰·诺思称，晚上8:05第二次放下百叶窗时，派克仍在呼吸。福克斯新闻称她在晚上8:26仍活着并发出鼾声；福克斯和ITV报道称，晚上8:53见证者被带离现场时，仍能听到呼吸声或鼾声。这些关于离场的说法无法确定救护车何时离开或抵达医院。¹³ ¹² ⁷

关于所经过时间的说法也不一致。《卫报》10月1日报道称，两剂药物注射约40分钟后还能听到鼾声；福克斯新闻10月1日报道称，第二剂药物注射约一小时后还能听到鼾声。CNN另行报道称，两剂之间相隔40分钟。由于缺少完整且带时间戳的给药记录，不能将这些不同的起算点拼成一条可靠的临床时间线。¹ ²⁸ ⁶

派克的律师兰迪·斯皮维和她的法律团队称，医护人员曾尝试约一小时建立静脉通路，并至少在她左臂扎了七针。他们还描述了烧伤和起泡情况。没有公开的检查结果能够确定该伤势的范围或严重程度。⁸ ¹³⁶ ²

有关她医疗状况的说法是发生了变化，而不是出现了相互竞争的诊断。《卫报》10月1日报道称，她的状况不明，律师尚未收到通知；ABC News Australia随后于10月1日报道称，她病情危重，正在接受救命治疗，并注明消息来自她的法律团队。没有经核实的10月2日临床更新能够证明她已康复、病情恶化或会有何种长期结局。可能存在脑损伤的说法仍未得到证实。²⁹ ² ¹¹¹ ¹⁵

美联社报道的一种麻醉学解释认为，静脉通路或静脉本身发生故障，可能导致戊巴比妥积聚在注射部位附近，而未能按预期在血液中循环。这或许能解释疼痛和化学性灼伤。埃默里大学麻醉学教授乔尔·佐伊沃特受聘于派克的法律团队；他也在BBC报道中提出静脉注射出现问题的解释。这两种说法都不能确立已获确认的诊断或作用机制。⁵ ¹⁵ ³¹

派克此前曾以血小板增多症（一种血小板疾病）为由，对采用外周静脉通路提出异议；她的律师认为可能有必要使用中心静脉导管。我们此前的报道介绍了这项未获成功的法律挑战。注射尝试失败使这一担忧与事件直接相关，但不能证明失败是由血小板增多症造成的，也不能证明医学上必须使用中心静脉导管。⁵³ ⁹⁶

报道中提到的注射器容量尚未经过独立核实，也没有已确认的药物浓度可据以可靠计算药物总量。检测也尚未证明戊巴比妥存在缺陷。完整的操作应急条款仍未得到核实：公开报道未提及后续致死程序，并不能证明所有紧急应对措施都被禁止。³⁹ ³⁰ ¹⁸

法院为执行死刑扫清道路

最高法院在9月30日就 Nelsen v. Pike（案号26A428）作出的命令，批准了监狱长肯尼思·尼尔森的申请，并撤销了第六巡回上诉法院的暂缓执行令。该申请交由大法官布雷特·卡瓦诺处理；他将申请提交全院审议，并非由他单独批准。索尼娅·索托马约尔提出异议，埃琳娜·卡根和凯坦吉·布朗·杰克逊加入异议。报道将表决结果描述为6比3。⁶⁸ ¹⁰⁴ ¹⁰⁹

《卫报》10月1日的报道准确指出，是美国最高法院撤销了联邦暂缓执行令。《独立报》10月1日的报道则将此归功于田纳西州最高法院。生效命令澄清了这一分歧：采取行动的是联邦最高法院。田纳西州最高法院此前于9月23日驳回了另一项暂缓执行申请。¹ ⁹ ⁶⁸ ⁹⁴

这场联邦争议涉及派克的申请是否应发回地区法院，以重启此前的诉讼程序，其中包括考虑她关于童年遭受虐待的指控是否应在量刑时纳入考量。这不是一次新审判，也不是裁定注射死刑违宪。撤销暂缓执行令本身并未解决所有重启诉讼程序的争议。注射尝试失败后，律师寻求紧急救济，但目前无法确认此后相关请求的完整清单或处理结果。⁶⁵ ¹⁰⁵ ⁶⁰ ¹ ³³

1995年，科琳·斯莱默19岁时，派克与当时的男友塔达里尔·希普在诺克斯维尔袭击、折磨并杀害了她。派克当时18岁，并于1996年被判处死刑。执行失败既不会推翻该项定罪，也不会减轻被害者失去生命这一事实。派克的辩护方认为，量刑时未充分考虑她童年遭受的严重性虐待以及心理健康史；最高法院的命令并未重新裁定这些主张属实。¹⁴ ⁹

联合国特别报告员莫里斯·蒂德博尔德-宾茨敦促给予宽赦，并提出酷刑方面的担忧。围绕这一讨论引用的一项历史尸检统计数据需要谨慎界定：对NPR分析的总结称，在1990—2019年间九个州进行的200多例注射死刑尸检中，84%发现肺水肿。没有证据表明该样本仅包括使用戊巴比妥的案例；这一发现也不能诊断派克的状况，或证明她当时是否清醒。³² ¹⁴⁵ ¹⁴⁷

暂停并不能回答问题

李下令进行“一项全面的第三方审查，以确定究竟发生了什么”。截至10月1日的报道，调查人员尚未选定；此后是否任命调查人员、是否设定完成期限或承诺公布结果，目前也无从确认。暂停执行至年底是一项日程安排决定，并不意味着承诺调查会在12月31日前完成。²⁹ ¹¹⁶

派克的律师寻求减刑，并打算对任何重新启动的死刑执行行动提出挑战。法律学者奥斯汀·萨拉特告诉天空新闻，死刑执行尝试后仍然活着，并不自动阻止再次执行死刑。田纳西州是否会再次尝试，尚无定论。¹⁰ ⁸

遵循规程，与证明该规程能安全完成预定任务，是两回事。田纳西州称自己做到了前者。两剂药物未能完成死刑执行，派克则需要接受救命治疗。审查必须解释这一结果，而不能只是重申遵守规程的说法。

来源与支持材料

初步报道与广播：¹ ² ³ ⁴ ⁵ ⁶ ⁷ ⁸ ⁹ ¹⁰ ¹¹ ¹² ¹³ ¹⁴ ¹⁵ ¹⁶ ¹⁷ ¹⁸ ¹⁹ ²⁰ ²¹ ²² ²³ ²⁴ ²⁵ ²⁶ ²⁷ ²⁸ ²⁹ ³⁰ ³¹ ³² ³³ ³⁴ ³⁵ ³⁶ ³⁷ ³⁸ ³⁹ ⁴⁰ ⁴¹ ⁴² ⁴³ ⁴⁴ ⁴⁵ ⁴⁶ ⁴⁷ ⁴⁸ ⁴⁹ ⁵⁰ ⁵¹ ⁵² ⁵³ ⁵⁴ ⁵⁵ ⁵⁶ ⁵⁷ ⁵⁸ ⁵⁹ ⁶⁰ ⁶¹ ⁶² ⁶³ ⁶⁴

法院记录、此前报道与案件背景：⁶⁵ ⁶⁶ ⁶⁷ ⁶⁸ ⁶⁹ ⁷⁰ ⁷¹ ⁷² ⁷³ ⁷⁴ ⁷⁵ ⁷⁶ ⁷⁷ ⁷⁸ ⁷⁹ ⁸⁰ ⁸¹ ⁸² ⁸³ ⁸⁴ ⁸⁵ ⁸⁶ ⁸⁷ ⁸⁸ ⁸⁹ ⁹⁰ ⁹¹ ⁹² ⁹³ ⁹⁴ ⁹⁵ ⁹⁶ ⁹⁷ ⁹⁸ ⁹⁹ ¹⁰⁰ ¹⁰¹ ¹⁰² ¹⁰³ ¹⁰⁴ ¹⁰⁵ ¹⁰⁶ ¹⁰⁷ ¹⁰⁸ ¹⁰⁹

医疗状况、见证者、审查与后续法律进展报道：¹¹⁰ ¹¹¹ ¹¹² ¹¹³ ¹¹⁴ ¹¹⁵ ¹¹⁶ ¹¹⁷ ¹¹⁸ ¹¹⁹ ¹²⁰ ¹²¹ ¹²² ¹²³ ¹²⁴ ¹²⁵ ¹²⁶ ¹²⁷ ¹²⁸ ¹²⁹ ¹³⁰ ¹³¹ ¹³² ¹³³ ¹³⁴ ¹³⁵ ¹³⁶ ¹³⁷ ¹³⁸ ¹³⁹ ¹⁴⁰

人权与历史医学材料，包括一篇2022年的预印本；本文未采用其研究结果：¹⁴¹ ¹⁴² ¹⁴³ ¹⁴⁴ ¹⁴⁵ ¹⁴⁶ ¹⁴⁷ ¹⁴⁸ ¹⁴⁹ ¹⁵⁰

播出原貌 34 行

On September 30 we reported Christa Pike’s execution was stayed. The Court lifted that stay; she survived the execution attempt. Tennessee has now suspended executions for the remainder of 2026, and the latest established medical account describes Pike in critical condition, receiving lifesaving care. What is known about the failure, and what does the pause actually settle?
Two doses of pentobarbital did not complete the execution. Instead, an ambulance took the 50-year-old prisoner from Riverbend Maximum Security Institution in Nashville to an off-site medical facility. This happened on September 30: one scheduled execution attempt, with two rounds of drug administration—not two separately scheduled executions.
Critical condition and lifesaving care replaced the earlier description of an unknown condition. That medical update is dated October 1. There is no verified subsequent October 2 clinical update establishing recovery, deterioration, death or a long-term outcome. An article published early October 2 still described Thursday’s condition; its publication date does not establish a new examination. The absence of a medical update in the governor’s possession that morning does not contradict the later account.
No detailed statement from a treating clinician establishes Pike’s injuries, organ function, neurological condition or prognosis. Possible brain damage remains a concern, not a confirmed diagnosis. Survival is established; the extent of injury and her eventual outcome are not.
Pike spoke about arm pain after the injections. Seven journalists witnessed the attempt. Their observations included continued breathing, sometimes rhythmic and sometimes laboured, her raising her head, speaking, and later making audible snoring sounds. Curtains or blinds repeatedly blocked their view, leaving intervals they could not see.
Snoring establishes a sound. It does not establish comfortable sleep, freedom from pain or continuous consciousness. Descriptions of speaking and descriptions of snoring cannot be combined into a clinical finding about her awareness throughout the procedure.
At least seven needles and approximately an hour of IV-placement attempts are described in the account of the procedure. Burns and blistering are also described. But public examination findings do not establish the extent or severity of tissue injury. A separate assertion that the IV came out several times has not been confirmed by an execution log or clinical record.
The elapsed-time accounts do not form a reconciled clinical timeline. One places snoring about forty minutes after the two doses; another places it about an hour after the second dose. A further account puts forty minutes between the first and second doses. Other durations begin at a curtain closure, or describe survival more than an hour after administration. Breathing difficulty is described as lasting well over an hour, possibly an hour and a half. Those are different starting points, not interchangeable measurements.
The clock-time descriptions also leave gaps. Pike was strapped to a gurney around 7:30 p.m.; that does not establish when the first drug entered her body. Other descriptions place the procedure proceeding around eight. Continued breathing was observed when blinds were lowered for a second time at 8:05. Another account places her alive and snoring at 8:26. Witnesses were escorted out at 8:53 while breathing or snoring could still be heard. Their departure time is not the ambulance’s departure or arrival time.
Without a complete, time-stamped drug-administration record, those fragments cannot establish a definitive minute-by-minute reconstruction. The consistent finding is consequential enough: Pike remained alive after both doses.
Even the syringe description has limits. Two syringes of pentobarbital are described, with one account specifying fifty millilitres each. That volume has not been independently verified. No established concentration permits a reliable conversion into a total drug mass.
A failed IV could have allowed pentobarbital to collect in forearm tissue rather than circulate as intended. That could explain pain and a chemical burn. It remains a hypothesis—not a confirmed diagnosis of infiltration, extravasation, a dislodged catheter or a particular degree of tissue damage. Abnormal breathing does not establish that Pike simply fell asleep. Questions about drug quality remain unresolved too: no test result establishes defective pentobarbital, and no evidence establishes resistance to the drug or confirms that a particular dose entered a vein.
Protocol compliance is asserted, but the intended execution did not occur. The described procedure calls for two intravenous catheters and provides for two doses. The public account describes no specified next lethal procedure if the prisoner remains alive afterward, and a limitation permitting no further lethal procedure.
That is not proof that every conceivable emergency response was prohibited. The complete operative protocol and its post-second-dose authority have not been independently verified against readable text. Following a protocol and demonstrating that it safely accomplishes its intended task are different things.
Pike had already challenged the safety of peripheral IV access because of thrombocytosis, a platelet disorder. A central line was proposed as potentially necessary. Special Master W. Mark Ward was appointed July 10 and filed findings in August; the earlier legal outcome was that Pike had not met the standard for that challenge. The Tennessee Supreme Court denied a stay on September 23.
The failed attempt makes that prior access concern directly relevant. It does not retroactively prove that a central line was medically required, or that thrombocytosis caused the failure. Her platelet count, disorder subtype, individualized clotting or bleeding findings and a detailed medical explanation remain unavailable.
The U.S. Supreme Court—not Tennessee’s high court—lifted the federal stay. The operative order settles that discrepancy. The state Supreme Court’s September 23 denial was an earlier, separate event. The U.S. Supreme Court’s September 29 denial of an earlier stay request and refusal to hear another appeal were separate as well.
The Court granted Warden Kenneth Nelsen’s application to vacate the stay. This was not a denial of an application by Pike. The application went to Justice Brett Kavanaugh, who referred it to the Court; that referral was not a unilateral grant. Sonia Sotomayor dissented, joined by Elena Kagan and Ketanji Brown Jackson. The division is described as six to three, but the available operative order identifies the dissenters without a separate named roster of affirmative votes. The exact issuance hour is not established.
The federal appeals court had blocked the execution at a reported 8:17 a.m. Central Daylight Time, before the scheduled ten o’clock execution. Its panel consisted of Judges Moore, Griffin and Stranch. The stay was described as two to one; the individual vote assignments are not established.
The underlying proceeding concerned whether a filing should return to district court to reopen an earlier federal case, including consideration of childhood-abuse allegations at sentencing. The Sixth Circuit matter, number 26-5864, was transferred as an application for a second or successive habeas petition in a capital case and involved a motion to remand. It originated in the Eastern District of Tennessee at Chattanooga before Judge Clifton Leland Corker.
This was not a new trial, a commutation or a ruling that lethal injection was unconstitutional. The full appeals-court analysis and substantive dissent are not established in the available material. The Supreme Court’s operative paragraph removed the stay; it did not itself provide a final resolution of every argument for reopening the federal proceeding.
Emergency judicial relief was sought after the failed procedure, alleging unnecessary agony and violations of Pike’s rights. Those requests involved the U.S. and Tennessee Supreme Courts, but their complete docket inventory and dispositions are not established. A requested stay is not a granted stay. Those later requests must not be confused with application 26A428, which removed the pre-execution stay.
Governor Bill Lee suspended executions for the remainder of 2026 and ordered an independent review of the failed attempt and Tennessee’s execution processes. The pause means Gary Wayne Sutton’s previously scheduled December 3 execution will not proceed as planned. No replacement date is established.
The review has no established completion deadline. No investigator had been selected in the available October 1 account, and no later appointment, detailed terms of reference or commitment to publish findings is established. The suspension through year-end is not a promise that the investigation will finish by December 31, or that executions will restart automatically in January.
The announcement was publicly reported on October 1, but a publication timestamp places an announcement account at 11:52 p.m. Central Daylight Time on September 30. That is October 1 in UTC. It does not establish that the policy was first announced during daylight on October 1.
Lee had denied Pike clemency on September 28. The subsequent suspension acknowledges a failure to carry out the sentence while leaving the state’s support for capital punishment intact. It does not abolish Sutton’s sentence or commute Pike’s.
Colleen Slemmer was nineteen when she was murdered in Knoxville in 1995. Pike was eighteen. Pike and her then-boyfriend, Tadaryl Shipp, attacked, beat, tortured and killed their fellow student. Pike was sentenced to death in 1996 and has been on death row since 1997. The failed execution does not undo that conviction or the life taken.
The mitigation argument concerns severe childhood sexual abuse beginning when Pike was a toddler, and rapes at ages eleven and seventeen. Reported diagnoses include bipolar disorder and post-traumatic stress disorder. Their clinical documentation and precise treatment at trial are not established here. The contention is that this history and her mental health were inadequately considered at sentencing—not that the Supreme Court newly found those allegations true. More than twenty years of solitary confinement is also described, but that duration has not been independently corroborated.
Before the attempt, Pike’s execution was described as potentially Tennessee’s first execution of a woman in more than two hundred years. Because she survived, that historical first did not occur.
The human-rights case for clemency raises torture concerns about pentobarbital and other execution methods, inadequate consideration of abuse and mental health, and possible gender bias. Those are assessments and mitigation arguments, not a judicial finding of torture or proof of gender discrimination in Pike’s prosecution.
Pulmonary edema was described in eighty-four percent of more than two hundred lethal-injection autopsies across nine states, covering 1990 through 2019. That historical figure requires a correction of scope: the sample is not established as pentobarbital-only. It is also not established as identical to separate work involving more than two hundred autopsies. The exact numerator and denominator, drug-specific rates and protocol breakdowns remain unavailable.
The historical edema finding does not diagnose Pike, establish her consciousness or prove the mechanism of this failed injection. No verified results from the related preprint establish a medical finding in her case.
Pike’s lawyers seek commutation, potentially to life imprisonment, and intend to pursue clemency and challenge any renewed execution effort. Surviving the attempt does not automatically remove the possibility of another execution. Possible torture, double-jeopardy and competency arguments are not established successful claims or automatic bars.
The pause settles the immediate scheduling question: Tennessee executions are suspended for the announced remainder of 2026. It does not settle what caused the failure, Pike’s long-term medical outcome, the review’s findings or the underlying federal reopening effort. Whether Tennessee will seek another attempt remains undecided, and no new execution date is established.