UPDATE: The AP has posted a correction. It's via the Washingotn Post.
In a May 22 story about a lawsuit over witnessing executions in Idaho, The Associated Press erroneously reported, based on information provided by a Nevada Department of Corrections spokesman, that Nevada barred all witnesses from the first half of lethal injection executions. In fact, Nevada allowed witnesses to view its last execution in 2006 in its entirety.
The post title has been changed to reflect the correction.
That's the title of an AP report written by Rebecca Boone. It's via the Houston Chronicle and it begins today's lethal injection news. :
A U.S. appeals court ruled in 2002 that every aspect of an execution should be open to witnesses, from the moment the condemned enters the death chamber to his or her final heartbeat.
The ruling established what was expected of the nine Western states within the court's jurisdiction. A decade later, five of the states have kept part of each execution away from public view, according to an Associated Press review and death penalty experts.
Idaho, Arizona, Washington, Montana and Nevada have conducted 15 lethal injections since the ruling, and half of each procedure has been behind closed doors.
That means that a small group of witnesses, including members of news organizations who act as representatives of the public, do not see, for instance, the insertion of the IVs that deliver the fatal drug mixture.
The practice comes at a time when the method itself has drawn greater scrutiny, from whether the drugs are effective to whether the execution personnel are properly trained.
The states that limit access say they do so to protect the anonymity of the execution team, which may include emergency medical technicians, military medics or others trained to insert IVs. Open government and journalism groups argue that witnessing all aspects of an execution is the only way to determine if it is being properly carried out.
The AP and 16 other organizations on Tuesday sued the state of Idaho to force officials to open the entirety of their executions, arguing that the news media, and by extension the public, has a First Amendment right to view all steps of lethal injections.
"This lawsuit is really all about obtaining access to the entire execution process for viewing purposes," said Chuck Brown, the attorney representing the news organizations. "It's very important in a society such as ours to have full transparency in regards to the exercise of government authority."
And:
Several high-profile cases since 2006 have raised questions about the way states conduct lethal injections.
In two instances in Ohio, one of the few states that allow witnesses to see the entire process, corrections staff couldn't find a vein. In one of those cases, officials halted the execution and the inmate remains on death row. With news organizations present, the experiences of the inmate, Romell Broom, were widely reported.
In another case, in Florida in 2006, which does not allow viewing of the IV insertions, executioners pushed the needles through Angel Nieves Diaz's target veins and into the soft tissue beneath. He had to be given a second dose and took 34 minutes to die — more than twice the normal time.
Also:
In the 1990s, several news organizations attempted to get on the witness list for the lethal injection of William Bonin in California. Bonin was dubbed the "Freeway Killer" for the serial murders of 14 young men and boys.
Those who did witness the execution were unsure about what they saw.
Bonin was already strapped to a gurney with IV tubes attached when the death chamber's curtains were drawn open. He barely moved, and his eyes were closed. A few silent minutes passed, and then he was pronounced dead.
The California First Amendment Coalition sued, saying the limited access violated the public's First Amendment rights to view executions. California officials argued the restriction was necessary to preserve the execution team's anonymity.
In 2002, the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals rejected that argument, saying there were other ways to protect their identity. Execution team members could wear surgical masks, hats and gloves, the court noted.
"Independent public scrutiny — made possible by the public and media witnesses to an execution — plays a significant role in the proper functioning of capital punishment," the judges ruled.
The ruling applies to a region that stretches from Montana to Hawaii and Alaska. Alaska, Hawaii, Guam and the Northern Mariana Islands do not have the death penalty, and Oregon currently has a moratorium on executions. Only California has followed the ruling.
Boone has also written a sidebar AP article, "US executions go from town square to behind bars." There are photos at the link.
America's executions have changed dramatically over the years, morphing from daylong events in the town square to somber and tightly controlled affairs held deep inside prisons.
Driving the change was the quest for a less gruesome — even less painful — method of execution.
Along the way, the public saw less of what happens when the state puts an inmate to death.
Today, nearly all of the 34 states that use lethal injection restrict access to half of every execution, shielding from view the portion when the condemned enters the death chamber and the IV lines are inserted.
In early America, hanging was the standard.
Typically, hundreds of spectators would pack the town square or hanging ground, bringing picnics and listening to sermons, said Trina Seitz, a death penalty expert at Appalachian State University.
By the 1800s, politicians were growing concerned that the atmosphere had grown too festive.
Spectators sometimes got more violence than they bargained for. If the hanging rope was too short, the condemned would slowly suffocate. If it was too long, he would be beheaded.
Starting in the 1820s, states began moving hangings inside prison yards.
Over the following decades, another development began to affect the way people viewed pain: anesthesia.
Doctors were using it to keep their patients from feeling pain, and that made them used to the idea that pain was avoidable, said Stuart Banner, a legal historian and professor with UCLA's School of Law.
More on the Idaho lawsuit in the next post
Comments