Drudge Retort: The Other Side of the News
Saturday, October 03, 2026

When the Empire State conducted barbaric prisoner executions by electric chair until 1963, the terminator was euphemistically titled New York State Electrician. Famous victims of Thomas Edison's rocking chair included railroaded immigrants Sacco and Vanzetti (1927) and atomic spies Julius and Ethel Rosenberg (1953). The first woman electrocuted in New York was Ruth Snyder (1928), whose insurance murder scheme was the genesis of the classic 1944 film Double Indemnity. Besides the inhumanity of executing convicts, when spies or serial murderers are liquidated, their secrets go to the grave with them. Such villains may wish an improvement in their hellish conditions, such as a newer cell, more time in the prison yard under the sun, or an increase in cigarette rations. In exchange, these malefactors would provide information to investigators on a cold case or other national security secrets they purloined. The lives of three of the five NYS "electricians" did not unfold well.

More

Comments

Admin's note: Participants in this discussion must follow the site's moderation policy. Profanity will be filtered. Abusive conduct is not allowed.

On 12 January 1928, a tabloid photographer snuck a camera into Sing Sing Prison and surreptitiously snapped this ghoulish photo of Ruth Snyder the moment 2,000 volts of electricity painfully stripped the soul from her body.

Within twenty minutes, her ill-fated lover, the feckless Judd Gray, would then follow suit in "Old Sparky" and be thunderstruck into this next plane by New York State Electrician Robert Greene Elliott.

#1 | Posted by C0RI0LANUS at 2026-10-03 11:11 AM | Reply

Have a seat, Mr. President

#2 | Posted by LegallyYourDead at 2026-10-03 11:13 AM | Reply

Lots of executions in the Empire State involved principals whose names ended in vowels and aren't necessarily recorded.

I knew a guy who was killed whose murderer visited Old Sparky in Jackson, GA. Case made the news for a lot of weird reasons.

A friend who had some influence at the time spoke with the cops who arrived on the scene. They told him they'd never seen such horror.

A few years ago, I managed to find the case file and went all the way to the bottom to the report on the apartment. If they hadn't described what they found there, I'd say it was indescribable. Certainly imaginative.

Yeah, peace, love, understanding, and all that.

But I don't understand why we can't just take someone like this--caught with his bloody hands all over the scene, having done what he just did--put a bullet in his head, throw him in the hazmat truck or the dumpster, and be done with it.

There. I've said it. More or less anonymous forum. Feels good.

#3 | Posted by Dbt2 at 2026-10-03 11:37 AM | Reply

Taking the life of the murderer does not return the victim to his or her loved ones.

State-run executions are political theater to terrorize the population to behave better, using the ancient "eye for an eye, tooth for a tooth" concept as the underpinning of their moral authority.

This is vengeance or wrath, one of the so-called Seven Deadly Sins.

But innocent people have been executed because of kangaroo courts, race-based misidentification, or the need for vengeance.

The Innocence Project has exonerated hundreds of death row inmates who were falsely convicted, an issue that affects poor people, not the wealthy elites.

Moreover, once the murderer has been executed, criminal investigators lose a vital source of information for other crimes the perpetrator may have committed.

Sidenote: The British aristocracy were appalled at the decapitations of French noblemen during the Reign of Terror (~est 17,000) following the French Revolution. But 57,000 executions occured under King Henry VIII's Reign of Terror. William Shakespeare lived at a time (the Elizabethan Age) when just one state executioner himself was responsible for an estimated 3,000 decapitations. That gruesome terminator was a man named Thomas Derrick.

And how many other executioners were employed under Queen Elizabeth I throughout England, Scotland, and Wales?

"Gentle Will" was appalled by state-run violence and war and cleverly steered clear of offending Elizabeth I and her Privy Council, even while cleverly barbing her in some of his plays.

Below, Mary, Queen of Scots, at her brutal and unnecessary execution (8 February 1587):

#4 | Posted by C0RI0LANUS at 2026-10-03 05:47 PM | Reply

I acknowledge your first three sentences and am not necessarily proud of my occasional defense of a quick execution of the obviously guilty in a gruesome one-time crime -- or, in the case of a John Wayne Gacy or Ted Bundy, something more extended.

Had my acquaintance been exterminated with a quick decapitation, that would have been immensely preferable to what happened to him.

And if he was already dead first, the killer's subsequent actions revealed quite a bit more that "that boy ain't [or wern't] right."

If the killer's punishment involved rehabilitation and trying to return him to society to give something back, I'd go for that. But that's never the case.

Why allow a human soul to rot for 50 years or more, with an hour a day or a week of sunshine? That's not another version of wrath?

#5 | Posted by Dbt2 at 2026-10-03 07:27 PM | Reply

The following HTML tags are allowed in comments: a href, b, i, p, br, ul, ol, li and blockquote. Others will be stripped out. Participants in this discussion must follow the site's moderation policy. Profanity will be filtered. Abusive conduct is not allowed.

Anyone can join this site and make comments. To post this comment, you must sign it with your Drudge Retort username. If you can't remember your username or password, use the lost password form to request it.
Username:
Password:

Home | Breaking News | Comments | User Blogs | Stats | Back Page | RSS Feed | RSS Spec | DMCA Compliance | Privacy

Drudge Retort