Tennessee reverses course, releases redacted execution manual with vague details
NASHVILLE, Tenn. — Tennessee released a redacted version of its program on Thursday newly completed implementation manualomitting sporadic titles and team names in the noticeably shortened document that now offers vague guidelines and omits previously detailed steps for carrying out the death penalty.
The Tennessee Department of Correction initially refused to hand over the manual under pressure from The Associated Press, arguing that the state needed to keep the entire manual secret to protect the identities of the executioner and others involved.
On Thursday, however, the agency abruptly changed course and provided the AP with a copy of the lethal injection protocol. Their only explanation for the change was that the state was reviewing its decision.
The 44-page manual is noticeably shorter than the 2018 version the state operated under, which contained nearly 100 pages, including 11 pages detailing how to obtain, store and administer lethal injection drugs. The state’s inability to follow these procedures forced Republican Gov. Bill Lee to make a last-minute decision in 2022 stop the execution of prisoner Oscar Smith and then post one moratorium about new executions while the trial was being reviewed.
A independent report later discovered that none of the drugs prepared for the seven prisoners executed since 2018 had been fully tested as required by the manual. Later, prosecutors admitted in court that two of the people most responsible for overseeing lethal injection drugs in Tennessee “wrongly testified” under oath that officials tested the chemicals as required.
The new manual contains only one page on the lethal injection chemicals with no specific directions for testing the drugs. It also removes the requirement that the medications come from a licensed pharmacist. Still, the new protocol includes a number of new additions, including now allowing the state to deviate from the protocol when the commissioner of the Department of Corrections deems it necessary.
In Tennessee, the 2018 lethal injection protocol required a series of three drugs administered in sequence. The new version unveiled last week only requires one single dose pentobarbital. Another change: the people most responsible for implementation will now be external contractors. The manual requires an IV team of at least two people and a physician who is not a Tennessee Department of Correction staff member.
In ordering the pause in 2022, Lee emphasized that it was his administration’s duty to ensure “continued transparency” for Tennesseans around the death penalty and that he expected “the Tennessee Department of Correction would leave no doubt that the procedures are followed correctly.”
Kelley Henry, head of the federal public defender’s habeas unit that represents many death row inmates in Tennessee, told the AP in an email that the new manual “fails to address the many concerns raised by the independent investigation has been brought forward.”
“At this time, we still do not know where the drugs are coming from, whether they have been compounded, or whether they have been diverted from the market to a gray market, and how they will be obtained, stored, tested and administered,” she said. “This level of secrecy is inconsistent with the promises of transparency the governor made two years ago.”
Across the US, executions have been at historically low levels for years, but the small group of states that still carry out the death penalty has only increased the secrecy surrounding the procedures, especially over how and where the state secures the drugs that are used for lethal injections.
Many states argue that secrecy is critical to protect the safety of those involved in the execution process. But in a 2018 report, the Washington DC-based nonprofit Death Penalty Information Center found that this argument often led to these states refusing to provide information about the qualifications of their execution teams. Meanwhile, some courts have rejected states’ claims that increased disclosure would result in threats against prison officials due to a lack of evidence.