Oklahoma Pulls Back the Relentless Pace of Planned Executions
A plan to put 25 inmates to death over two years is reconsidered.

Oklahoma's attorney general has gotten permission from the courts to slow down and push back the state's intense schedule of executions, spacing them at least two months apart.
Last June, then-Attorney General John O'Connor arranged for 25 of the state's death row inmates (more than half of the total number of people in the state facing capital punishment) to be executed over the course of 29 months.
But O'Connor was defeated by Gentner Drummond in last year's Republican primaries in Oklahoma, and Drummond took office earlier this month. He attended the first execution of the year, that of Scott Eizember, convicted of killing an elderly couple 20 years ago, and apparently came away concerned after meeting with Department of Corrections staff. He's not concerned about whether the state should be in the business of killing prisoners but rather how the tight schedule may negatively impact corrections staff.
"One aspect that has become clear over time is that the current pace of executions is unsustainable in the long run, as it is unduly burdening the (Department of Corrections) and its personnel," he wrote to the Oklahoma Court of Criminal Appeals. "This is especially true given the extensive and intensive nature of the training DOC personnel undergo to prepare for each execution."
And so, instead, he wants these executions to be 60 days apart instead of 30 days apart. The court agreed, and several executions that were planned for the winter and early spring have been pushed to summer and fall.
While providing corrections staff with more time to prepare for executions doesn't stop the state from ending the lives of prisoners, it may prevent death row inmates from needless suffering and botched executions.
For death row inmate Richard Glossip, this is the ninth time he has been given a date for execution. Glossip was last scheduled to be executed on February 16, but this new schedule moves his execution date to May 18.
Glossip's case has garnered attention from death penalty opponents, because he's on death row for a murder he did not commit. Glossip was convicted and sentenced to death for allegedly masterminding the murder of Barry Van Treese, the owner of a hotel where Glossip worked, in 1997. Glossip allegedly convinced Justin Sneed, a 19-year-old maintenance man at the hotel at the time, to kill Van Treese, and in exchange the two would split the victim's money.
Glossip has insisted on his innocence, and there is no corroborating evidence tying him to the crime. Once Sneed confessed to the killing and pointed the finger at Glossip, he was convicted and sentenced to death based upon the testimony of Sneed alone. Sneed avoided the death penalty. Since then, Glossip and his attorneys have been fighting to get the state to reconsider its plans to execute him.
Then in 2015, the state suspended executions entirely over problems with the procurement of the drugs they use. (One inmate, Charles Warner, was executed using the wrong drugs. The year before, Clayton Lockett's execution went awry, with the man writhing around and speaking long after the drugs were supposed to have knocked him out.) And so, Glossip was spared execution then.
In 2021, Oklahoma resumed its executions, and the very first of them went badly, with inmate John Marion Grant reportedly convulsing and vomiting as he was dying. Since the state has resumed the executions, it has put eight men to death via lethal injections.
Glossip has received support from a bipartisan pack of state lawmakers who are increasingly concerned the state may be about to execute an innocent man and have been pushing the attorney general's office and the courts to allow for new hearings to reconsider the evidence. Republican Gov. Kevin Stitt has ordered stays of execution for Glossip's team to try to get new evidentiary hearings, but the Oklahoma Court of Criminal Appeals rejected them.
Then on January 26, Drummond directed an independent counsel to review Glossip's conviction and sentencing, hiring former prosecutor Rex Duncan to "ensure that we are appropriately responding to all evidence that has been presented through Mr. Glossip's conviction and incarceration."
This isn't a promise of any particular outcome, but it is yet another chance for Glossip and council to try to convince the state that he didn't orchestrate Van Treese's death.
In any event, Drummond may not be slowing down the frequency of executions because he is concerned about the pain the state might inflict on death row prisoners. Nevertheless, making sure the corrections staff has enough time to prepare properly for each execution may reduce the likelihood of mishaps or unnecessary suffering. Contrast Oklahoma's move with Alabama's, where the state's Supreme Court has responded to the issue of corrections officials botching the execution process and actually failing to properly prepare inmates for lethal injection by giving staff wider latitude to prolong the process.
Editor's Note: As of February 29, 2024, commenting privileges on reason.com posts are limited to Reason Plus subscribers. Past commenters are grandfathered in for a temporary period. Subscribe here to preserve your ability to comment. Your Reason Plus subscription also gives you an ad-free version of reason.com, along with full access to the digital edition and archives of Reason magazine. We request that comments be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment and ban commenters for any reason at any time. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.
Please
to post comments
Sooners or later, Oklahoma was going to do this.
I am making $162/hour telecommuting. I never imagined that it was honest to goodness yet my closest companion is earning $21 thousand a month by working on the web, that was truly shocking for me, she prescribed me to attempt it simply
COPY AND OPEN THIS SITE________ http://Www.Salaryapp1.com
I am making a good salary from home $6580-$7065/week , which is amazing under a year ago I was jobless in a horrible economy. I thank God every day I was blessed with these instructions and now it’s my duty to pay it forward and share it with Everyone,
🙂 AND GOOD LUCK. 🙂
Here is I started.……......>> http://WWW.SALARYBEZ.COM
Only government could prepare two months for one little job and still fuck it up.
Great article, Mike. I appreciate your work, I’m now creating over $35,000 dollars each month simply by doing a simple job online! I do know You currently making a lot of greenbacks online from $28,000 dollars, its simple online operating jobs.
.
.
Just open the link—————————————>>> http://Www.SmartJob1.Com
it is absolutely insane to trust that the government would somehow be able to administrate justice fairly, accurately, and honestly and especially capital punishment. It cant even run the DMV or dog catcher without massive foulups.
Complete disgrace to grant this power to the state.
^ Agree with the exception that it should still be available for agents of the state.
it is absolutely insane to trust that the government would somehow be able to administrate justice fairly, accurately, and honestly and especially capital punishment.
The statement is itself an insane, animistic refutation of the facts. Tell me, is a government more or less competent, or evil, than the 12 individuals who make up a jury? At what number of jurors would the issue resolve? 14? 10? 1? Then government would only as competent or evil as the single would-be juror/executioner? 0? Society should never recognize anyone’s right to take another person’s life? Only then will government be competent and good?
Disgrace to whom? We grant this power to Kyle Rittenhouse, Travis Jeffrey Reinking, and most everyone in between. I hardly see it as complete, let alone as reflective of anyone else’s, (dis)grace.
I know the argument you think you’re making, do better at making it.
25 over 2 years? Have these guys not seen the hanging scene in Blazing Saddles?
A plan to put 25 inmates to death over two years is reconsidered.
How about 50 over 3 years?
COME ON, WE'RE NEGOTIATING HERE, DON'T BE LIKE THAT!
Considering there are 300 million guns, why not simply call for volunteers or call out the National Guard for target practice next week? Maybe they could take this on the road and clean up other long long overdue administration of simple Justice in other venues.
Comments were closed for a while. Shrike post again?
Maybe he'll finally go to prison.
So, the anti-punishment crowd lobbies hard for decades to make sure executing the death penalty is as delayed, expensive, complicated, difficult, and painful as possible, then screams about how unjust it is because it is so delayed, expensive, complicated, difficult, and painful. Putting the condemned to death could easily be made quick and painless, were it not for their interference. Which side of this debate is more humane?
Which side of this debate is more humane?
I know which side I wish would stop torturing *me* about it.
Glossip was convicted and sentenced to death...in 1997.
26 years from sentencing to execution is a "relentless pace"?
According to a small chart I just googled, between the two world wars somewhere in the range 75-150 people a year were executed in the US.
So skipping along at a dozen a year just in Oklahoma does seem quite brisk by historicall standards.
But that's after they created a backlog by keeping people on death row for decades.
correct
But how much of that is the release of deferred executions held up by activist actions?
Free fentanyl for anyone on death row. The problem will take care of itself.
I worked part-time from my apartment and earned $30,030. After losing my previous business, I quickly became exhausted. Fortunately, I discovered this jobs online, and as a result, I was able to start earning money from home right away. Anyone can accomplish this elite career and increase their internet income by….
After reading this article...............>>> http://www.jobsrevenue.com
I would not be confident that Glossip is the only innocent one on OK's Death Row, either.
Innocent? That is the impression he tried to give, but I'd say planning the murder makes him guilty regardless of whether he touched the instrument used to do the deed.
On what evidence did he plan the murder?
You mean, "On what evidence, other than the testimony of his accomplice, the trigger man, did he plan the murder?"
Or, in your "better" or "more humane" justice system, is first hand testimony just excluded because you don't like it or you think it might implicate people?
If the only evidence that someone is guilty is an account from the person who actually committed the murder who can avoid the DP if he implicates someone else, even you might question the reliability of such evidence - in one of your more lucid moments.
even you might question the reliability of such evidence – in one of your more lucid moments
So, reliability aside, you agree that it is evidence.
Now the question becomes, "Were you prejudicially ignoring it and, if so, why?"
The evidence is of guilt, not innocence, as confirmed by all the judicial opinions,
Pay attention to the judicial opinions, not anti-death penalty warriors.
Next we'll hear, "but the jury heard all the evidence and they know better than you!"
Yup. But who winds up saying it about which jury may surprise you.
Another meeting of Libertarians For Big-Government Killing, convened at a spot that attracts a bunch of deplorable, faux libertarian hypocrites.
Rev.
Well, no:
These are, all, libertarian sources:
Murder is, therefore, the greatest violation of libertarianism, with execution representing justice for that violation.’
” . . . (killing) is not impermissible in self-defense, nor is it to kill those who no longer have entitlement to their own lives. Let the message go out, loud and clear: If you murder, you give up the right to your own life.” (1)
“What the murderer has done, essentially, to his victim is, in effect, steal his life away.” ” . . . the murderer’s life is forfeit now, for justice is timeless.” (1)
” . . . an individual’s most important and primary property right consists of his ownership over his own person. To interfere with that right is to engage in an illicit taking . . . in effect murder is the theft of a life . . .” (2).
” . . .the murderer loses precisely the right of which he has deprived another human being: the right to have one’s life preserved from the violence of another person. The murderer therefore deserves to be killed in return.” (3)
” . . . the instincts of the public are correct on this issue: namely, that the punishment should fit the crime; i.e., that punishment should be proportional to the crime involved. The theoretical justification for this is that an aggressor loses his rights to the extent that he has violated the rights of another human being.” (3)
Victim survivors show 95% death penalty support. When the question to the public is “Do you support the death penalty for murder?” and the responses are – sometimes – always – or never – death penalty support is 80% or above (8).
“The libertarian takes his stand for individual rights not merely on the basis of social consequences, but more emphatically on the justice that is due to every individual.” (3)
” . . . the libertarian theory of punishment is one of compensation for the victim; that is, the perpetrator is punished by forcing him to compensate the injured party to the extent of the rights violation perpetrated upon him.” “The reason for this is that libertarianism is predicated on an attempt to attain justice . . . ” (4)
” . . . while it is impossible to place the victim back on the plane of life he was following before the outrage, justice consists of at least attempting to do so as far as possible.” (5)
“Each libertarian has his own foundation – or none – for private property and non-aggression. What we have in common are just these two axiom.” (6) “If (libertarianism) has any one principle, it is that no one should initiate force against non-aggressors.” (6)
“It is a crime and a disgrace that such criminals now enjoy air conditioning, television, exercise rooms, etc. They owe a debt to their victims’ heirs, who are now, to add insult to injury, forced to pay again, through taxes, to maintain these miscreants in a relatively luxurious life, compared to what they richly deserve.” (1)
1) “Death Penalty Essential for Social Justice”, Block, Walter E., The Maroon, 10/10/03, Loyola University (New Orleans)
2) p, 245, Whitehead, Roy and Walter E. Block. 2003. “Taking the assets of the criminal to compensate victims of violence: a legal and philosophical approach,” Wayne State University Law School Journal of Law in Society Vol. 5, No. 1, Fall, 2003, pp.229-254; (death penalty justified)
3) The Libertarian Position on Capital Punishment, Murray N. Rothbard, 07/13/2010 originally appeared as “The Plumb Line: The Capital Punishment Question” in the Libertarian Review, Vol. 7, No. 5 (June 1978), pp. 13–14.
4) p 243, ibid footnote 2
5) p 244, ibid, footnote 2
6) “Libertarianism vs Objectivism; A Response to Peter Schwartz”, Walter Block, pg 41, 42, Reason Papers Vol. 26 39, Loyola University, New Orleans
It is one thing to say that someone deserves to die, quite another to say that the state has or should have the power to execute.
Further, as usual the libertarian idealists take no account of the messy reality that humans make mistakes, or act maliciously, such that there is a genuine risk of innocents being executed.
Though fwiw I suspect that these people are (inadequately) rationalising their instinctive approval of the DP.
Oh my goodness is everyone all right? Apparently we have survived the comments are down crisis. Unless….there was a culling? Nah, unherd off. Still, roll call please!
jfc, just shoot them all. You could be done with the entire country's execution backlog in an afternoon. How much time does it really take to "prepare" for an execution? We know the state can kill people expediently when it wants to. What's the average survival time of a homeowner from the moment a cop decides "exigent circumstances" demand they start shooting at a house randomly?
I understand and share the concerns people have regarding the death penalty. I don't trust the government to do a decent job discerning the truth and holding the power to kill.
Ultimately, I'm just not against the death penalty in certain circumstances. If the evidence is irrefutable (like the person caught red-handed in the act) and the act is egregious then the murderer should be summarily taken behind the court room after sentencing and shot. The purpose of the death penalty is the same as putting down a rabid dog. Justice isn't served by keeping these people alive for decades on the public dime while they tie up the court's time with appeals. It doesn't serve the victims or the public to keep these people alive for decades while costing us millions of dollars each.
That's a perfectly valid position take. I have no problems with people debating whether the state should kill people and whether it can do so fairly, but that's not what's being discussed here. It's disgusting how anti-capital-punishment demagogues have completely abandoned any debate about whether capital punishment should be used to focus entirely upon creating a ridiculous environment where executing people is as difficult as possible and then pointing to the resulting procedural snafus as proof that executions need to be stopped altogether. It's the same page taken from the anti-abortion, anti-immigration, gun-control, and eco-activism playbooks. It's disgusting and it's wrong and those people should be rightly cast out for their abuses.
I don’t trust the government to do a decent job discerning the truth and holding the power to kill.
Again, outside military and LEOs 'in the field', we don't trust the government to do this. We provide public defenders, but no one is under any obligation to use one and you can get your own private attorney to defend you and, even then, *they* don't determine fact or truth or hold the power to punish. Juries 'determine truth' and/or 'hold the power to kill' and they distinctly aren't agents of the State.
Further, if you view juries as agents of the local public, the anti-death penalty position is, essentially an anti-2A position.
The whole notion, as presented, is just bizarre. It's like watching one horror movie full of jump scares where someone dies at each and every one of the scares and a second horror movie where they slowly and methodically figure out who wasn't there when the lights came on and execute them for everyone else's safety and then saying, "The second horror movie is objectively worse than the first."
Juries ‘determine truth’ and/or ‘hold the power to kill’ and they distinctly aren’t agents of the State.
No, but they are reliant on the good faith of those who are agents of the state.
No, but they are reliant on the good faith of those who are agents of the state.
No they aren't. Or, at least not any more than any other human interaction, singular or collective, isn't based on the good faith of moralism and/or rational thought. They have pretty massive leeway in asking questions or seeking information as part of their decision-making process and the decision is pretty decidedly/definitively unfettered with regard to the agents of the state. If they feel they've been lied to or under informed or the evidence has been manipulated, they're free to decide on that as they see fit.
Your world sounds nice. Can I come live there? That's how juries are supposed to work, but it's not how they work in the real world. Juries have been so thoroughly neutered that they rarely function as anything more than a rubber stamp. They're kept as ignorant as possible, and generally limited to hearing mostly what the prosecution wants them to hear.
The court agreed, and several executions that were planned for the winter and early spring have been pushed to summer and fall.
Weddings in The Spring, executions in The Fall, it's just good social calendar common sense.
Scott:
No person, knowledgeable of the death penalty, inclusive of you, believed that the 25 executions would take place, as scheduled.
Stays/delays of execution are the rule, with executions the exception.
And there will be, additional appeals, presented, in many of the remaining cases, even though, appeals are, allegedly exhausted.
Often it seems, appeals are, never, exhausted. Fortunately, judges, eventually, reject the hearings.
Having a Republican AG slow down the process, is, very, unusual, but I understand his reasoning.
I am not sure the loved ones of the innocents murdered will. Some may.
Executions are a very somber, serious event, wherein we should focus on the innocents murdered and their loved ones and what they all lost.
Scott:
You write:
"Oklahoma resumed its executions, and the very first of them went badly, with inmate John Marion Grant reportedly convulsing and vomiting as he was dying. "
The side effect of the NORMAL dosage include vomiting, which is a convulsion.
Drug overdoes, also, often, have such issues, in addition to death. Lehtal injections are a drug overdose.
Not "badly", but expected, if you fact check and vet, which it, appears, that you did not.
I am sending you:
Rebuttal: Botched Executions
Please read it. Fact checking/vetting done by me, but happy to have yours as well.
FWIW, this appears to be a fairly balanced story about the Richard Glossip case: https://www.readfrontier.org/stories/two-truths-and-a-lie-what-records-interviews-reveal-about-richard-glossips-murder-conviction/
Moral of the story: Don't talk to the cops and, if you can't manage that, then FFS don't LIE to them!
"Republican Gov. Kevin Stitt has ordered stays of execution for Glossip's team to try to get new evidentiary hearings, but the Oklahoma Court of Criminal Appeals rejected them."
Does the Oklahoma governor not have commutation power? He could just take care of this if he thinks there's a problem.
The death penalty is like ranked-choice voting - I like the idea, but I'm not quite sure I trust the government to carry it out.
I get paid over 190$ per hour working from home with 2 kids at home. I never thought I’d be able to do it but my best friend earns over 10k a month doing this and she convinced me to try. The potential with this is endless. Heres what I’ve been doing..
HERE====)> http://WWW.NETPAYFAST.COM