South Carolina Death Row Inmate Seeks Execution Delay, Alleges Co-Defendant Misrepresented Plea Deal

September 1, 2024 – South Carolina death row inmate Freddie Eugene Owens has urged for a delay in his execution scheduled for September 20. Owens alleges that his co-defendant, who testified against him during the trial, lied about not having entered into a plea deal with the prosecution.

Murder Convictions, Death Sentence, and Impending Execution

Owens, 46, was convicted and sentenced to death for the killing of store clerk Irene Graves during a series of robberies that occurred in Greenville in 1997. Following his conviction, Owens also killed his cellmate at the Greenville County Jail prior to his sentencing.

Owen’s execution, if it proceeds, will mark the first for South Carolina in 13 years. The state has struggled to obtain lethal injection drugs over the years, resulting in an involuntary pause of executions.

Accusations Against Co-Defendant and Appeal for New Trial

In court papers filed recently, attorneys for Owens argue that his co-defendant, Steven Golden, had lied about not entering into a plea deal with the prosecution in exchange for his testimony. According to a signed sworn statement from Golden, dated August 22, there was actually a verbal agreement in place that he would not be given the death penalty or life without parole if he testified against Owens.

This new evidence, say the defense attorneys, may have influenced the jury’s decision, and possibly even the outcome of Owens’ trial. Therefore, Owens has requested a delay in his execution to allow for a thorough examination of this newly revealed evidence and to pursue a new trial.

Doubts Over Fair Trial Proceedings

Further doubts have been thrown over the fairness of Owen’s trial by the fact that he was required to wear an electronic stun device during court sessions. Owen’s lawyers argue that the judge failed in his duty to explain to the jury why Owens was made to wear the device, a blatant disregard for the balance of courtroom security versus the likely impact the device could have on the fairness of the trial.

Changes in Execution Methods

South Carolina has taken steps to overcome its lethal injection drug scarcity issue. It passed a law the previous year allowing officials to maintain the anonymity of suppliers of these drugs. The state has also made changes to its lethal injection protocols, switching from a three-drug combination to a single sedative, pentobarbital.

In addition to lethal injection, electrocution, and a newly adopted firing squad method are also available as execution options. Owens, who has until September 6 to decide, has handed over his power of attorney to his lawyer, Emily Paavola, to make this decision on his behalf.

Alarmingly, if Owens does not make a decision, he will be executed via the electric chair, a method he explicitly does not want. The state’s lawyers have petitioned the South Carolina Supreme Court to rule on whether Owen’s lawyer can legally make the execution method decision for him.

Awaiting Court Decisions

South Carolina currently houses 32 inmates on death row. As lawyers and the condemned wait for the court’s rulings, it remains undetermined whether Owens’ execution will proceed as scheduled or whether the revelation of new evidence will warrant a new trial.

The outcomes of these legal arguments hold significant implications for the future prospects of the state’s death row inmates and the execution methods deemed suitable and allowable by law. For now, all eyes eagerly await the court’s decisions.