The public was riveted by the film Dead Man Walking, the real-life drama of a spiritual adviser counseling a condemned man on the day of his death. Yet when California prison officials sought to ban a spiritual adviser from counseling Keith Daniel Williams during the last six hours of his life, the news media ignored it. They were far more interested in detailing their own role in the drama than in detailing the struggles of the condemned. PNS associate editor Michael Kroll writes widely on issues of criminal justice. He is former director of the Washington, D.C.-based Death Penalty Information Center.

SAN FRANCISCO -- While the real life drama of California's latest execution moved toward its post-midnight climax, the media focused on what, to them, was the essence of the story: themselves.

Ironically, the media had filed-- and won -- a law suit to widen public access to the execution process, on the grounds that the public have a right to know the entire nature of the condemned's encounter with death. But rather than seizing the opportunity to probe the legal and personal struggles of Keith Daniel Williams, the media preferred to highlight their own battle with the law. On talk shows, in news reports, in editorials, the issue of media access was the overriding issue of the day.

Lost in this self-absorption were several vital stories. The first had to do with a vindictive battle by the California Department of Corrections to prevent Williams from having access to his own spiritual advisor during the last six hours of his life.

The rationale, CDC lawyers argued, was to protect the identity of the execution team. However, Marin County Superior Court Judge Gary Thomas ruled against the Department, noting that the proposed restrictions " would deny the plaintiff the presence of his chosen spiritual advisor..." He also ordered the spiritual adviser never to identify any member of the execution team.

Unsatisfied with that ruling, the Department sought a "clarification" by the judge on the morning of the mid-night execution. Not a single media representative attended the hearing -- much less opined about the issue raised.

This time round, the CDC sought to ban the spiritual adviser -- a woman -- for her own protection. "If there is any resistance by the inmate," the Deputy Attorney General argued, "she could be in line and in danger."

Judge Thomas was not impressed. At stake in the issue, he pointed out, was nothing less than "the salvation of (Mr. Williams') immortal soul, which is the foundation of religion, his belief that he has an immortal soul, something to be redeemed." Once again, Judge Thomas ordered the CDC "up until the time he enters the execution chamber" not to disturb the intimate, mysterious spiritual process designed to permit the dying man to leave the world in a state of grace.

With just hours left in Williams' life, the CDC appealed Judge Thomas' ruling to the state Supreme Court, no doubt hoping that the pro-death tribunal would rule in its favor and ban the adviser from the procedure. Instead, the Court ruled she could remain with Williams until 11:15 p.m., or until the physical preparations for the execution began if that were later than 11:15. The CDC took this as permission to separate Mr. Williams and his minister at precisely 11:15, which they did.

This was not the only spiritual battle the news media ignored in its apparent preoccupation with ensuring themselves the widest possible access to the execution process. A second battle raged around the communion wafer Williams was entitled -- or not -- to receive. The CDC had prohibited his spiritual adviser from bringing in consecrated host for communion on the grounds that it might have been adulterated with drugs (i.e. dipped in LSD). The court ordered the prison to supply the host. Once inside, however, the spiritual adviser was informed by the prison's Legal Affairs Coordinator that only Matzoh would be available because since she was "not a Catholic."

The media's fixation on the access issue began when William Bonin was put to death two months ago. Then public scrutiny was limited to viewing a comatose man lying on a gurney as lethal fluids were pumped into his veins. This time, federal court judge Vaughn Walker ruled that witnesses must be allowed to view Danny Williams' execution from at least the point where the needle is inserted into the prisoner. But Judge Walker went out of his way to let the state know it was under no obligation, Constitutional or otherwise, to admit even a single reporter to cover an execution. It is the public, not the media per se, which has the right to bear witness. And it is up to the Warden (along with the condemned, who is allowed to select five witnesses) to determine just who the public witnesses should be.

Here, too, media coverage missed the point, never mentioning (let alone protesting) the way their own law suit paved the way for their potential exclusion.

Perhaps the public would be better informed were the media banned as official witnesses of public executions. Denied a central role, they might pay more attention to the process itself, let alone the struggles of the condemned.