(I only have time for a short post today. The botched Richard Glossip death penalty case continues to draw worldwide attention to Oklahoma in a negative way. Yet this attention could eventually lead to the end of the death penalty nationally by the U.S. Supreme Court as I’ve argued earlier.—Kurt Hochenauer)
I wish I had the time to collect every stupid, clichéd paragraph the editorial board of The Oklahoman has ever published arguing against reproductive rights for women. These oppressive, sexist gems would fill volumes.
When it comes to abortion, the sanctimonious drivel flows in torrents on the newspaper’s editorial page. One of the “historical” former editors of the page, Patrick McGuigan, made his opposition to abortion one of his all-time favorite harangues as he made Oklahoma the “conservative bastion” he so adores, which some amnesiac liberals here have forgotten. But when it comes to the death penalty or the execution of an innocent person by the state, well, it’s all just hiccups to The Oklahoman.
I’m referring to an editorial in the newspaper Friday that heralded the moves by Gov. Mary Fallin and Oklahoma Attorney General last week to halt the execution of Richard Glossip and the state’s other death-row inmates until they can refine the mixture of their killing brew of drugs and “protocols” and self-righteousness.
The newspaper is just fine with these moves because, as it notes, it’s all just “embarrassing hiccups.”
Here’s the key sentence in the editorial, which shows how just callous and cavalier the newspaper is about a person’s life as long as it isn’t a small speck of tissue inside a woman’s body:
As the spotlight only grows brighter, Oklahoma must prove that it can carry out this solemn duty without the sort of embarrassing hiccups that have dogged it of late.
It’s all just hiccups, right, not an indicator of some larger incompetence consistently and organically embedded in the death penalty itself? Killing someone violently is not easy because it’s not right. But, hey, folks, this violent and immoral act is a “solemn duty,” according to the newspaper. Pope Francis specifically asked Oklahoma to spare Glossip’s life on the very precepts upon which the foundation of his church is built. I wonder what some members of the newspaper’s editorial board think about that.
My overall point is that every bit of the Glossip case, all the little nooks and crannies, even the awful, mediocre corporate media coverage here and the pettiness of its smarmy, obsequious right-wingers, is filled with hypocrisy, mediocrity and mindless mendacity. The ignorant, morbid Okie mob smells death, and so it shall have it. It’s insufferable and incompetent and suffocating because the death penalty itself is barbaric and should be ended in the country.
It will end. The Glossip case is the beginning of the end. Lethal injection was invented in Oklahoma and passed into law first in all the land, and this, to quote T.S. Eliot, is how it will end: “Not with a bang but with a whimper . . .” or maybe with hiccups in the very same place the carnage began and continues.
Oklahoma was the place in which lethal injection to kill people was first legalized, and now it has become the ugly worldwide symbol of why the barbaric practice should end.
I’ll take it even further. The cruelty and incompetence of some Oklahoma state leaders, which has been dramatized on the world stage in recent weeks, will be a major part in abolishing the death penalty in the United States soon.
Oklahoma, so often a laughingstock of the nation in so many ways, just sealed the deal with its inhumane treatment of inmate Richard Glossip. Finally, an Oklahoma worldwide embarrassment might pay off big time.
The state’s typical slapstick mediocrity exposes the truth: Some states, in these decisively un-United States brutally kill innocent people by injecting painful fire into human veins as witnesses gather to watch and report the spectacle. Many self-righteous people here in the sticks of the world revel in the gore and suffering, but ALL civilized people in the world are appalled at the sheer brutality.
This week Glossip, who has never killed anyone in his life and has maintained his innocence of the crime for which he was convicted, was given a stay of execution when it was discovered that one of the drugs scheduled to be used to kill him was not part of what state leaders call “the protocol.” See, it was supposed to be potassium chloride not potassium acetate that sent him into cardiac arrest. (No pain there, right? Just as peaceful as can be.) But the anonymous provider of the drugs—someone needs to do an undercover video of this outfit—sent potassium acetate by mistake or, perhaps, by nonchalance over the death of a human being, an unintended “error” that morphs into an act of mercy that can make even agnostics like myself feel something spiritual for a second.
The response from state leaders went something like this: Well, the drugs are really similar so it probably would have been okay, but just to be sure we’re going to stop the execution.
I’m unsure what the late Rev. Bill Wiseman, a former colleague of mine and the man who pushed through the Oklahoma legislative bill that made lethal injection the main method of execution here and throughout the country if not the world, would have thought of all this. He later regretted his decision in a major way as a state legislator to write the lethal injection language into law. At the time, and this was back in the 1970s, he thought he was doing something humane by eliminating gas chambers and electric chairs. Now, “lethal injection” is how he’s mainly remembered by those people who didn’t know him personally. He died in a 2007 plane crash with this regret.
I digress. Gov. Mary Fallin stayed the execution of Glossip at the last minute Wednesday for 37 days after the drug mix up. Attorney General Scott Pruitt then ordered the halt of all executions in Oklahoma until “the protocol” is investigated and the state gets its killing drugs right. Oklahoma may well start killing people again, and Glossip may die soon, but, as I’ve written over and over, the Glossip case is the beginning of the end of the death penalty here and in the entire country.
How can the U.S. Supreme Court continue to allow such violations of “cruel” and “unusual punishments” forbidden by the Eighth Amendment in the U.S. Constitution now that the Glossip case has shone the light on the random application of the death penalty and the barbaric and unsettled practice of lethal injection itself?
Glossip was given the death penalty in the 1997 murder of his boss Barry Van Treese at an Oklahoma City motel. Here’s the major catch: No one, no police officer, no prosecutor, has ever accused Glossip of actually killing Van Treese. The man who killed him by beating him to death with a baseball bat is Justin Sneed, who testified that Glossip asked him to kill Van Treese. Sneed got life in prison instead of the death penalty for his testimony that changed in details throughout the initial investigation and in Glossip’s two trials. There is no physical evidence linking Glossip to the murder or to asking Sneed to kill Van Treese. Without Sneed’s testimony, Oklahoma has no case.
Prominent people throughout the world, including Pope Francis, actress Susan Sarandon, Dead Man Walking author Sister Helen Prejean, British businessman Richard Branson, former University of Oklahoma football coach Barry Switzer and former U.S. Sen. Tom Coburn, have tried to stop the execution. Glossip’s attorneys even have new evidence that Sneed was lying, evidence that a court and prosecutors dismiss as heresy as if Sneed’s testimony isn’t the very same thing.
On the same day that Glossip was scheduled to die, a man in Colorado was given life in prison for stabbing five people to death at a bar. The sheer randomness of how the death penalty is applied in this country is breathtaking and numbing.
Oklahoma, of course, has had its recent and infamous problems with lethal injection killings. One inmate writhed around in misery on the gurney for 45 minutes or so before he could be declared dead. Another lethally injected inmate said, “My body is on fire,” as the spectators looked on after the blinds were opened to show the death chamber. So far a divided U.S. Supreme Court sanctions all this, but for how long?
Kill five people in Colorado, you get life. Kill no one in Oklahoma, you get death by body fire. That’s just too much disparity for any rational person to ignore or endure, even someone like conservative U.S. Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia.
Here’s a link to a recent article in The New Yorker that does a more thorough job of what I’ve been arguing for weeks now, which is this: The Glossip case resonates worldwide and could help end the death penalty soon on a national level by the high court. It’s worth noting in this regard that even Nebraska recently abolished the death penalty. The tide is shifting.
The drug mishap/serendipity in the Glossip case has raised a lot of questions that have gone unanswered by state leaders and left people throughout the world baffled. These questions will undoubtedly be answered eventually and display basic incompetence and the overreach of right-wing ideology in Oklahoma. It’s the same old story.
The right-wingers here in the days to come will want to obfuscate by talking about potassium chloride versus potassium acetate, but the real issue is the death penalty itself. More than 150 people sentenced to death have been exonerated since 1973. The death penalty in this country is applied unevenly on a state-by-state basis. Glossip is white, but racial prejudice clearly is a factor in death penalty cases as is our entire corrections and judicial system in this country.
What happened in 1997 to Van Treese, a husband and father, was horrific and tragic, and his family deserves closure and our heartfelt sympathies, but the Glossip case has been extended and become symbolic of glaring government errors, unfair prosecutorial treatment and conservative law-and-order overreach.
There’s no denying that the beating death of husband and father Barry Van Treese at an Oklahoma City motel in 1997 was a horrific travesty that deserved legal retributive justice.
Yet there’s also no denying that the state-sanctioned killing of Richard Glossip, who was implicated in the case, is also a horrific travesty perpetuated by death-penalty zealots and myopic law-and-order conservatives.
No one has ever claimed Glossip killed his employer Van Treese. The actual killer, Justin Sneed, testified that Glossip asked him to kill Van Treese, but there’s no substantial physical evidence linking Glossip to that act. Without Sneed’s testimony, the state didn’t have a case against Glossip, who has maintained his innocence.
So here’s the illogical element of the case: Sneed received life in prison in exchange for his testimony against Glossip, who went through two trials and was given the death penalty. The actual killer lives. Glossip, who didn’t physically kill Van Treese, is scheduled to die by lethal injection this afternoon.
As I write this, Glossip has new appeals pending before the Oklahoma Court of Criminal Appeals and the U.S. Supreme Courts. Both courts have previously denied Glossip a stay of execution so it seems likely, again, that the execution will go through.
Those state officials who wish to kill Glossip today make the repeated argument that it was Van Treese and his family who are the real victims in the case, but that’s a given. Glossip’s execution will not change that, and there are very real questions over how much involvement, if any, Glossip had in the case.
If Glossip is killed by the state today it will the beginning of the end for the death penalty here. As others have written as well the Glossip case shows the absurdity of how the death penalty gets applied. A confessed killer lives based on his testimony implicating another person in his gruesome act; a man maintaining his innocence, whom everyone agrees didn’t kill anyone, dies for a crime he probably didn’t commit.
This absurdity, this travesty of the death penalty, will live long after Glossip.