South Carolina Inmate Delegates to Lawyer to Choose Execution Method Due to Religious Beliefs
In an unprecedented twist within capital punishment protocols of the United States, an inmate on death row in South Carolina has left the task of selecting his method of execution to his lawyer. Citing that his strict Muslim faith precludes him from participating in his death actively, Freddie Owens, 46, asked his attorney to decide on the method, a decision that comes with its unique ethical dilemmas for those involved.
Religious Tenet Prevents Active Role in Execution
Owens, in court documents, expressed his inability to choose the mode of his execution due to religious reasons. As per his Muslim faith, suicide is a sin, and taking an active role in his execution would equate to the same. Therefore, his attorney, Emily Paavola, had to step in and reluctantly elected lethal injection as the method of execution over the electric chair or a firing squad.
Paavola went on record expressing her uncertainty about the specifics of the drug used in lethal injection and the anguish that Owens might undergo. She highlighted her apprehension about the pain that her client may endure, that could potentially touch upon the threshold of cruel and unusual punishment.
The Crime and Conviction
Owens was convicted for the murder of store clerk, Irene Graves, that took place during a series of robberies in Greenville in 1997. Scheduled for execution on Sept. 20, it would be the first occurrence of capital punishment in South Carolina in over 13 years. The state had to pause its execution routine due to difficulties in obtaining lethal injection drugs over the years.
Owens’ legal team contested his conviction on several grounds, chiefly arguing about the possibility of a secret plea deal between a co-defendant and the prosecution. Despite all efforts, no delay in Owens’ execution has been authorized to date.
South Carolina’s Capital Punishment Scenario
Once known for its frequent carry out of capital punishment, South Carolina found itself impeded to conduct executions since 2011. The reason for this involuntary hiatus was a supply constraint of lethal injection drugs. Concerns grew among pharmaceutical companies about the requirement to reveal their engagement in supplying the state with lethal drugs.
In response, the state legislature approved a shield law that protects such companies, with the South Carolina Supreme Court adding that the electric chair and firing squad would also be available for executions.
The Only Recourse Left
As it stands, Owens’ only hope for survival hinges on possible clemency from the governor that would alter his death sentence to life imprisonment. But the state, with the weight of its historical record weighing heavy, has not seen a single instance of death penalty conversion since the reinstatement of capital punishment in the U.S. in 1976.
Thus, the fate of Freddie Owens lies in the policies and perspectives of the South Carolina justice system, marking yet another episode in the country’s complex relationship with capital punishment.
