Texas judge halts execution of inmate who wants chaplain to pray while he gets lethal injection

A federal judge in Texas has halted the execution of an inmate who says state prison officials are violating his religious rights because they will not allow a chaplain to pray and have physical contact with him while he is put to death.

U.S. District Judge Kenneth Hoyt on Thursday stayed the execution of Stephen Barbee, who argued that the Texas Department of Criminal Justice was violating his religious rights as a Christian.

Barbee was sentenced to death in 2006 after being convicted of capital murder for killing his pregnant girlfriend and her 7-year-old son.

He is scheduled to receive a lethal injection on Oct. 12, but the judge ruled that the court needs more time to resolve “serious factual issues” surrounding his religious rights and the prison’s security concerns.

“This court cannot answer those questions in the short time remaining before the looming execution date,” the judge wrote.

In his lawsuit filed on Sept. 21, Barbee argued that he wants his spiritual adviser to be inside the execution chamber and to audibly pray and “physically touch” him “in order to confer ministrations and a spiritual blessing upon him at the time of his death.”

He filed the suit after the state prison system denied his request based on its “no speaking” and “no contact” policies.

Judge Hoyt, however, found that there is no reason to doubt Barbee’s religious beliefs and that he likely will be able to support the claim that the prison’s limitations in the execution chamber substantially burden his religious rights.

The prison argues a spiritual adviser could “’frustrate the execution’ by creating a disruption, may try to stop the execution by pulling IV lines, may hinder the execution team’s ability to see or hear the inmate as he dies, may block the witnesses’ view of the execution process, and may impede access to the inmate should something go awry with the execution.”

But Judge Hoyt said the prison provided little information for him to determine whether officials are using the least restrictive means to address the security concerns.

“The record now before the court is too [sparse] to explain why the background check, training and threat of criminal prosecution for a non-prison individual cannot adequately minimize risk, especially in comparison to the minimal execution-specific training formerly given to prison chaplains,” he wrote.