South Carolina Supreme Court Gives Death Row Inmate’s Lawyer Authority to Choose Method of Execution

South Carolina Supreme Court Allows Death Row Inmate’s Attorney to Choose Method of Execution

In an unprecedented ruling, the South Carolina Supreme Court has resolved that the attorney representing a death row inmate will be permitted to select the method for his execution. Convicted criminal Freddie Owens, who is scheduled for execution on September 20, willingly delegated this decisive authority to his lawyer, Emily Paavola.

Owens’ Unique Predicament

Owens is faced with three enforcement methods for his death sentence – lethal injection, firing squad, or electrocution, as sanctioned by state law. However, due to his religious beliefs, Owens expressed his reluctance to choose his own manner of execution. In his view, making such a decision implies a form of suicide, which he considered a sin as per his Muslim faith.

Owens’ apprehensions drove him to sign over his powers of decision-making to Paavola before the state finalized his execution date. This move enabled her to make the crucial choice. As per the newly authorized ruling announced on Tuesday, the Department of Corrections is obliged to respect Paavola’s decision on Owens’ behalf.

An Appeal for Transparency

In addition to this development, Owens’ legal team seeks further clarification on the lethal injection drugs to be used in the event of this method being chosen for the execution. The attorneys have insisted on receiving comprehensive information regarding the storage, handling and testing of these drugs, stating that this information is crucial for Paavola to make a well-informed selection.

Shield Law

The defense counsel contends that the requested details can be disclosed without infringing on the state’s ‘shield law’, which provides legal protection for the drugs and their acquisition. The state was able to procure lethal drugs last year, after the legislative body expanded the secrecy provisions applicable to them.

Intense Legal Scrutiny

This case has received intense scrutiny on various fronts. Critics argue that the absence of specific details about when and how the State Law Enforcement Division conducted purity tests for the lethal drugs, along with questions related to their storage and expiry dates, have resulted in Stirling’s testimonial falling short of providing an accurate picture of the state’s readiness.

According to Michaela Almgren, a professor at the University of South Carolina, it is critical to understand these factors to ensure the effectiveness of the drugs. If they prove ineffective, Owens could be subjected to extreme pain during his execution, or even survive, only to be left grappling with severe health complications thereafter.

The Journey Ahead

Owens’ execution, if it proceeds, will be the first to take place in the state since 2011. His lawyers have recently filed a plea to put a hold on his execution citing the emergence of new evidence that could potentially warrant a fresh trial. Owens was convicted in 1999 for gunning down a gas station clerk, Irene Graves, during a spree of robberies.

In the meantime, the state Supreme Court has stipulated that there will be a minimum interlude of five weeks between scheduled executions. In the grand scheme of things, Owens is one among 32 men currently on death row.

The Road to Execution

In the event that Paavola does not indicate her chosen method – lethal injection or firing squad – in writing by Friday night, Owens’ execution will default to electrocution, which has been the standard method since 2021. Nevertheless, it is acknowledged that Owens harbors a strong aversion towards dying in the electric chair.

The proceedings of this case are offbeat and are expected to set a precedent for how the criminal justice system handles similar cases in the future.