Arkansas judge halts executions as inmates challenge law
CLAUDIA LAUER, Associated Press

LITTLE ROCK, Arkansas (AP) — An Arkansas judge on Friday halted the upcoming executions of eight death row inmates, dealing a blow to the central U.S. state's efforts to begin putting prisoners to death for the first time in a decade.

The ruling came in a case in which the inmates were challenging a new Arkansas law allowing the state to withhold any information that could publicly identify the manufacturers or sellers of its execution drugs.

A lawyer for the inmates argued that the new secrecy law put them at risk of enduring unconstitutional pain and suffering during their executions because the drugs' safety and effectiveness couldn't be vetted. He also said the state agreed in a prior settlement to reveal the drug information to the inmates before their executions.

The state argued that the secrecy law is constitutional and that it wasn't bound by the settlement terms because of the law's subsequent passage. The first two executions had been set for Oct. 21.

"Proceeding with Plaintiffs' executions as scheduled, without allowing parties adequate time to conduct discovery, respond to all outstanding claims and motions, and proceed to a trial on the merits on Plaintiffs' challenges to the Method of Execution Statute and the ADC's execution protocol, will rob Plaintiffs of an opportunity to litigate their rights under the Arkansas Constitution," Pulaski County Circuit Court Judge Wendell Griffen wrote in his order.

On Thursday, an attorney for the inmates submitted a court filing citing troubles in neighboring Oklahoma as reason to stop the executions. Like Arkansas, Oklahoma has a secrecy law protecting the source of its execution drugs. A newly released autopsy report showed that Oklahoma used the wrong drug when it executed inmate Charles Warner in January.

-- (c) Associated Press 2015-10-10

We will teach the people that killing is wrong, by killing people !

" the inmates were challenging a new Arkansas law allowing the state to withhold any information that could publicly identify the manufacturers or sellers of its execution drugs"

What a frivolous, time wasting, last minute save my rotten skins antics those crimeless are

using now days, why? because the bleeding hearts , morns liberals judges all it to happened,

No doubts that their victims never had the chance to hide behind such tricks and manipulations

of the law,

We will teach the people that killing is wrong, by killing people !

Granted, that's a clever line. But it's actually a punishment, not a teaching.

We will teach the people that killing is wrong, by killing people !

An eye for an eye. May they all suffer in their dying.

We will teach the people that killing is wrong, by killing people !

Granted, that's a clever line. But it's actually a punishment, not a teaching.

By that logic they should forget the pharmaceuticals and just hang 'em!

The moral component of execution aside, given the precepts of US and State statutes and Common law in the US which is an open democracy as we are told, I am curious to know how a secrecy law, not associated with national security (and many of those should not exist), is in fact, constitutional, even Arkansas's Constitution?

We will teach the people that killing is wrong, by killing people !

An eye for an eye. May they all suffer in their dying.

I disagree.

We have advanced beyond that.

The death penalty has been shown to not be a deterrent.

An execution should be swift, painless and without ado.

The death penalty is the ultimate deterrent.

They don't offend again.

The community is now safe from them.

We will teach the people that killing is wrong, by killing people !

Granted, that's a clever line. But it's actually a punishment, not a teaching.

I thought it was to make an example

"An eye for an eye", what a can of horse shot. Quoting from the same book which teaches forgiveness. ugh!

We will teach the people that killing is wrong, by killing people !

An eye for an eye. May they all suffer in their dying.

Does that include the ones that were framed/railroaded by overzealous/corrupt cops and DAs? Or set up and "informed" on by other prisoners who were promised a get out of jail free card in exchange for lying in court?

That,s what happens when you live in a country that has laws for laws, and laws and laws, when on death row i think they should be given a liste like a menu on the different ways then can be killed and pick one, and even throw in death by victims family members,

We humanely put rabid dogs to sleep, but reserve torture for lethal injection. The doctor that made the last formula put a paralytic in the mix, so the executed were aware of dying but unable to cry out or convulse. He was asked why he put a paralytic in the mix. He said, "I don't know."

Really? An accomplished physician didn't know why he calculatingly added a drug, and one of three.

Rubbish. The executioners are worse than the executed in these cases.

We will teach the people that killing is wrong, by killing people !

Granted, that's a clever line. But it's actually a punishment, not a teaching.

By that logic they should forget the pharmaceuticals and just hang 'em!

Firing squad, hanging, however I heard that there is a shortage of drugs for executions and now that is turned into a legal circus for lawyers, drug companies and political bludgers.

We will teach the people that killing is wrong, by killing people !

Granted, that's a clever line. But it's actually a punishment, not a teaching.

Silly me. I thought it was supposed to be a deterrent even if not an effective one.

Better to ban gun ownership, that would save more lives.

We will teach the people that killing is wrong, by killing people !

An eye for an eye. May they all suffer in their dying.

An eye for an eye?????????????? Where is a "death for a death" or a "limb for a limb" etc?

How many people around the world do you want to maim?

We will teach the people that killing is wrong, by killing people !

Granted, that's a clever line. But it's actually a punishment, not a teaching.

What does it teach to the young? that killing is ok, when the government does it? Execution does not work as a deterrent, it merely makes the righteous feel better about themselves.

We will teach the people that killing is wrong, by killing people !

Nooooo. The vast majority of people already know that murdering innocent victims is wrong. The problem isn't uneducated people here, as you seem to think. What we will actually be doing is preventing killers from killing again by killing them instead. When you get to the fourth grade maybe they'll teach you that bit - 'might still be a bit early for that though.

DP opponents keep trying to any monkey wrench they can find into capital prosecutions and executions hoping they can just make it so complex, so time-consuming and so expensive that everyone will finally just throw up their hands. I have a better solution - go back to the rope. A single bullet in the brain would work equally well - I'm prepared to be flexible about this.

So Oklahoma botched one. The guy was a murderer FPS. Cry me a river.

We will teach the people that killing is wrong, by killing people !

Granted, that's a clever line. But it's actually a punishment, not a teaching.

By that logic they should forget the pharmaceuticals and just hang 'em!

works for me

We will teach the people that killing is wrong, by killing people !

An eye for an eye. May they all suffer in their dying.

Yup....let's use principles from a brutal Middle Eastern society of 3000 years ago to guide our 21st-century judicial system. Because it's worked out so well for them.

Even Jesus made clear that "an eye for an eye" was outdated and needed to be rejected....and that was 2000 years ago.

But keep on keeping on...because something that has worked out terribly for brutal societies for 3000 years and counting must just not have been tried hard enough yet, right?

We will teach the people that killing is wrong, by killing people !

An eye for an eye. May they all suffer in their dying.

Yup....let's use principles from a brutal Middle Eastern society of 3000 years ago to guide our 21st-century judicial system. Because it's worked out so well for them.

Even Jesus made clear that "an eye for an eye" was outdated and needed to be rejected....and that was 2000 years ago.

But keep on keeping on...because something that has worked out terribly for brutal societies for 3000 years and counting must just not have been tried hard enough yet, right?

Life offers very few guarantees, but one of the definites is that a murderer who's been put to death for his crime isn't going to do it again. You can keep your eye-for-an-eye talking point.

Perhaps if there were a couple of public beheadings and then the names of the pharmaceutical companies that won't supply the drugs were made public, they might want to re-think their position.

Just hang 'em. Not that the guillotine or a bullet to the brain aren't equally acceptable. We're talking about somebody who's brutally taken a life here. Save the "nice ways to die" for the terminal, pain-ridden, cancer victims who today have to battle government for a merciful death.