Today's Arizona Republic reports, "Motion denied to watch executions by injection." It's by Michael Kiefer.
Despite strong language from the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals and a 2002 appeals-court ruling, a federal judge in Phoenix on Wednesday denied motions to allow attorneys and reporters to watch as executioners insert the catheters that carry the drugs used in lethal injections for condemned prisoners.
The Federal Public Defender's Office in Phoenix and other defense attorneys have complained about the practices of the Arizona Department of Corrections in carrying out executions by lethal injection. Among the concerns are the qualifications of those who insert IV lines into the condemned prisoners and why they repeatedly fail to find suitable veins in the prisoner's arms and must resort to a surgically installed catheter in the groin area.
On May 15, the day before death-row prisoner Samuel Lopez was to be executed for the 1986 murder of a Phoenix woman, his attorneys filed a motion with U.S. District Judge Neil Wake, asking to be allowed to witness the catheterization. Wake did not rule on the motion. But the subject had come up in oral arguments on May 14 in a last-ditch appeal to the 9th Circuit.
Of concern in that appeal was a March execution in which the condemned man was not allowed to speak to his attorney when prison staff was unable to find a suitable vein in his arm and instead inserted the catheter in his groin.
The appeals court refused to stop Lopez's execution, but one of the judges questioned why the media had not insisted on being present when the lines were inserted. The state of Ohio and California allow such witnessing, and a 2002 9th Circuit opinion ruled that the public has a First Amendment right to witness all aspects of an execution.
Lopez subsequently received a reprieve from the Arizona Supreme Court until June 27 because of problems with the state clemency board.
A coalition of Arizona journalism groups took up the challenge and asked to become part of the lawsuit over the Corrections Department policies.
That same day, another group of journalists in Idaho filed its own lawsuit asking to witness the preparation process on First Amendment grounds.
But Wake denied the Arizona motions Wednesday, citing technicalities in the timing of the motion and saying that a First Amendment violation had not been properly claimed.
From Idaho, "State: Privacy of executioners trumps media access," is the AP report by Todd Dvorak. It's via the Idaho Statesman.
Idaho prison officials said their efforts to protect the identity of execution team members and the privacy of the condemned inmate outweigh any reason to allow witnesses to view lethal injections from start to finish.Officials defended the policy in a court filing late Tuesday, responding to a federal lawsuit filed this month by more than a dozen Idaho news groups challenging the limitations on viewing executions.
Like most states with lethal injection, Idaho pulls the curtain back during the first few steps of an execution, including the insertion of IV needles into the condemned inmate.
The Associated Press and 16 other news organizations say reporters — and by extension the public — should view all phases of the execution to accurately report the events or any complications that emerge.
Prison officials say expanding access simply invites too many risks.
Even if executioners are covered in surgical gear and masks, a chance remains they could be identified, making it even more difficult to recruit and retain team members, according to the brief.
The state Department of Correction also has an interest in "shielding the medical team from possible anxiety and stress of performing an ordinary medical procedure before an audience knowing that a delay or mishap will be reported," Deputy Attorney General Michael Gilmore wrote.
The chance of complications arising is a primary reason the news groups are pressing for expanded access, arguing the First Amendment gives media and the public the right to view executions in their entirety.
In recent years, several high-profile cases have raised questions about how states conduct lethal injections, including two cases in Ohio — a state that allows full access — when execution staff couldn't immediately find the inmate's vein. In one of those cases, officials halted the execution and the inmate remains on death row.
The lawsuit filed by the news groups relies heavily on a 9th U.S. Court of Appeals ruling on a 2002 California case. The court rejected the state's argument that allowing witnesses throughout the execution would compromise efforts to keep secret the identity of the execution team.
Earlier coverage of the Arizona and Idaho open government lawsuits at the links.
Comments