Sign up for The Media Today, CJRâs daily newsletter.
In 2014, Chris McDaniel was investigating whether Missouri was injecting inmates with a particular sedative, midazolam, before executing them. While under oath, the state had previously said it would not use the drug in its executions. McDaniel, a death-penalty reporter, needed to find out crucial details for his story, so he applied to be a witness of executions in the state. On his application, he wrote that he wanted to âensure that this solemn task is carried out constitutionally.â More than four years and 17 executions later, he has published multiple high-impact investigations uncovering Missouriâs lethal-injection secrets. He has never been allowed to witness an execution, however, and has yet to hear back about his application.
In the same year in which McDaniel submitted his application, the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) sued the Missouri Department of Corrections to obtain copies of witness applications. After a judge ordered the department to release the documents in 2016, the ACLU found that the agency had not approved dozens of applications from people wanting to witness executions to make sure they were carried out constitutionally. McDaniel was one of them, and the ACLU, which had worked with him on a previous case, asked if he would join a federal lawsuit.
ICYMI:Â âConveyor belt of killingâ: Covering Arkansasâ rush of executions
McDanielâa BuzzFeed investigative reporter who formerly worked for St. Louis Public Radioâand the ACLU filed a lawsuit against the Missouri Department of Corrections in 2016 alleging that the state is barring him from being an execution witness because of his critical coverage of the stateâs lethal-injection protocol. This is a violation of his constitutional rights, his attorney argues, because the witness-selection policy allows for discrimination based on reporting protected by the First Amendment. The suit demanded that Missouri come up with a policy for how witnesses are selected. The Department of Corrections moved to dismiss the case, but on July 28 of this year, a federal appellate court ruled that McDaniel may proceed with the suit.
âI think itâs a very important press-access issue,â McDaniel tells CJR. âPrisons are notoriously difficult to report on because we donât get access.⌠the biggest power a government can have is taking the life of someone, and itâs also the thing thatâs carried out with the most secrecy at the state level.â
In active death-penalty states, secrecy around executions is the normâand botched executions are far from rare. As pharmaceutical companies increasingly refuse to sell their drugs for the purposes of killing people, states have begun exploring new, sometimes dangerous avenues to procure drugs, some of which have never been used in executions before. These untested methods, and other issues, can result in botched executions that may violate the Eighth Amendmentâs prohibition of cruel and unusual punishment. By witnessing and reporting on executions, reporters act as an important link between the execution chamber and the public, relaying information that few have access to.
The biggest power a government can have is taking the life of someone, and itâs also the thing thatâs carried out with the most secrecy at the state level.
In 1982, there were no journalists present to witness Virginiaâs execution of Frank J. Coppola by electric chair. According to an attorney who was there, Coppola was jolted for nearly two minutes with electricity, which eventually set his head and leg on fire. And in March 2018, journalists looked on in horror as executioners tried for hours to locate a vein of Doyle Lee Hammâs to pump lethal injection drugs into, stabbing him a dozen times. By the time they gave up, Hamm was soaked with blood, and he urinated blood the next day, his attorney said. And even when journalists are present, that doesnât mean they are able to see the entire execution.. States have been known to close the curtains when something has gone wrong.
Hammâs case is just one of many that have shown the importance of journalists being present for executions. Their presence holds states accountable, an important task as death row inmates continue to fight their cases and cite botched executions as proof of cruel and unusual punishment to do so. After Hammâs execution attempt made headlines across the country, Alabama agreed that it would not try to kill him again.
But stories often do not go deep enough to provide the public with a clear picture of whatâs happening when someone is executed, McDaniel says, attributing the issue to several factors, including secrecy and the complexity of the death penalty. A June Washington Post article on the Texas execution of Danny Bible, who was likely to experience a botched execution due to several medical issues, his attorneys argued, reported that it had âoccurred without complicationsâ despite revealing that âafter the drugs were administered, he muttered that it was âburningâ and that it âhurt.ââ
âI sort of view my reporting on this as a government-accountability reporting position and this is like the biggest responsibility that the government has,â McDaniel says. âAnd itâs kind of of a weird thing where this is the biggest power that the government has, but itâs also a thing that they receive shockingly little press oversight for.â
In Missouri, the power to select at least âeight reputable citizensâ to be witnesses, a requirement for every execution, lies with just one person: the director of the Missouri Department of Corrections. At least one media witness is chosen from in-state, according to a corrections department spokeswoman. Missouriâs legislature grants this discretion, but doesnât provide any criteria for how they will be chosen, according to Anthony Rothert, who is McDanielâs attorney and the legal director of the ACLU of Missouri. This is highly unusual, he says; every other death-penalty state has a procedure for choosing witnesses.
Itâs important for members of the press to be there to honestly and accurately tell the public what is going on at this very secret thing.
The director of Missouriâs corrections department, George Lombardi, was choosing people who would be favorable to his agency, such as detectives, students, or former corrections department employees, to be witnesses, Rothert says. The media witnesses were from outlets who were generally on the stateâs good side, according to Rothert.
âPeople who do more in-depth reporting on the various aspects of the death penalty and how itâs carried out and have made the Department of Corrections look bad are not selected,â Rothert says.
Rothert argues that regardless of McDanielâs coverage, denying him the opportunity to witness executions because of his stories violates the due process clause of the Fourteenth Amendment.
âThis case is about whether or not the policy, the complete discretion given to choose witnesses, is allowing the government to engage in viewpoint discrimination and punish those who might report critically on how the death penalty is carried out,â Rothert says.
Prior to applying to become a press witness, McDaniel revealed in a 2013 investigation for St. Louis Public Radio that Missouriâs execution-drug supplier was not licensed to sell in Missouri. As a result, the pharmacy supplying the drugs agreed to no longer sell them in the state, a huge blow to the corrections department, which then had to find a new supplier, no easy task. But the hurdles McDaniel created through his reporting should not be a reason for the corrections department to shut him, and the public, out, he argues. âI donât think their dislike of me making their job more difficult should impact my ability to reportâthe publicâs ability to know about what is taking place,â he says.
As McDaniel continued to report on the use of a controversial sedative, midazolam, in executions without being able to actually witness the executions themselves, he relied on accounts from people who were there. By speaking to press witnesses, he was able to find out that inmates being executed were likely sedated, but these witnesses didnât have the detailed notes McDaniel needed to create a timeline of specifics such as when a personâs eyes were open. He depended heavily on chemical logs of drugs in the stateâs possession he had obtained via public records requests to find out which drugs were being used.
After his story was published in September 2014, McDaniel wrote two more pieces critical of lethal injection in Missouri. A 2016 BuzzFeed investigation revealed that an Oklahoma pharmacy supplying lethal injection drugs to Missouri had committed nearly 1,900 pharmacy regulation violations. And in March 2018, another BuzzFeed investigation found the compounding pharmacy the Missouri had been using for its lethal injection drugs was deemed âhigh riskâ by the Food and Drug Administration. In light of these facts, the US Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit ruled in his favor in July, finding it probable enough that McDaniel had been harmed by the lack of protocol for selecting witnesses that the case could move forward.
âMcDanielâs allegations that the Directorâs policies provide an opportunity to exclude McDaniel based on his viewpoint and that the Director has excluded McDaniel and all applicants sharing his particular viewpoint are sufficient to give him standing to press the claim,â the court wrote.
Now that the appeals court has ruled, the case will likely return to the trial court, Rothert says. He expects it to be decided in about a year.
Ideally, the corrections department wouldnât be able to decide who gets to be a witness, and reporters would choose among themselves, McDaniel says, noting that the reporting on an execution can have an impact that extends far beyond the time in the witness gallery.
âItâs important for members of the press to be there to honestly and accurately tell the public what is going on at this very secret thing,â he says. âItâs important for that specific execution, and itâs important for things that could be difficult to understand at the time but could be relevant in a longer investigation.â Â
A spokeswoman for the Missouri Department of Corrections declined to comment, citing the litigation.
RELATED:Â Why one reporter is suing Missouri over death-penalty secrecyâagain
Lauren Gill is a New York-based journalist covering criminal justice. Follow her on Twitter @laurenk_gill.