ACLU challenges Oklahoma over first amendment violation in execution

[alp227]

Source: The Guardian

The secrecy imposed by the state of Oklahoma over the botched execution of Clayton Lockett is being challenged in a federal court as a violation of first amendment press freedoms.

In a lawsuit lodged with the US district court for the western district of Oklahoma on Monday, the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) argues the state acted unconstitutionally by drawing a screen between the death chamber and the observation room before he was declared dead.

The ACLU is joined as plaintiffs in the lawsuit by the Guardian, the Oklahoma Observer and journalist Katie Fretland, who was one of the reporters in the observation room for the Lockett execution and filed for both outlets. The lawsuit calls on the court to ban Oklahoma from denying reporters “meaningful, uninterrupted and unedited access to the entire execution procedure”.

“The state of Oklahoma violated the first amendment, which guarantees the right of the press to witness executions so the public can be informed about the government’s actions and hold it accountable. The death penalty represents the most powerful exercise of government authority – the need for public oversight is as critical at the execution stage as it is during trial,” said the ACLU’s staff attorney Lee Rowland.

Read more: http://www.theguardian.com/law/2014/aug/25/guardian-challenges-oklahoma-first-amendment-botched-execution

[No Vested Interest]

1. I'm of the opinion that state executions should be filmed and recorded.

In fact, I can't understand why this has not been standard practice up to this time.

There would be far less equivocating about what occurred were videos, etc. of executions as routine as the executions themselves.

[cstanleytech]

2. Also the jury should be required to attend. nt

[No Vested Interest]

3. I've never understood the satisfaction some members of victim's

families say they have afterwards, especially since it's so many years after the act that a execution takes place.

By not finding a way to get beyond a heinous act for many years, family members are keeping themselves hostage to another person's acts.

I believe that for many jury members the details of what is entailed in the execution of a human being is not fully realized.

[Blue_Tires]

5. Because we're conditioned to believe that *someone* has to pay...

It's even more painful to see gleeful 'pull the switch' cheerleaders in cases where everyone knows it was a very flimsy and/or wrongful conviction...

[Nye Bevan]

7. If I was a victim's family member, I would ask for life without parole.

And no way in hell would I ever attend an execution.

[No Vested Interest]

8. I agree re preferring life without parole, but

I'm not sure how much input a victim's family has in that decision.

I believe the decision what to ask for is the prosecutor's, and the decision of what penalty one determined guilty is given is either mandated according to the law, or, if there is discretion, the jury and/or the judge.

I have noticed lately a trend to let the victim's family address a guilty party in court, regarding the impact the crime has had on the family. Not sure how long this has been going on. I'm not against this happening, though perhaps the judge should be given the opportunity to look ver the statement before it is delivered, in case the statement is beyond reason.

[redruddyred]

4. god bless the aclu

doing much-needed social work since the 60s.

[Nye Bevan]

6. What the hell is the point of allowing "witnesses"

if you are going to quickly draw the shades the second anything the slightest bit unpleasant or unexpected happens? I support the ACLU 100% in this.