The Execution Dilemma: Who Chooses the Final Fate?
Lawyer Chooses Execution Method in a Landmark Case
In a case that has sparked significant discussion on ethics and justice, South Carolina recently carried out its first execution in 14 years, using lethal injection. The background: Freddie Owens, sentenced to death for a 1997 murder, faced a dilemma when it came to choosing his method of execution. As a Muslim, Owens viewed selecting the method himself as a moral conflict, likening it to suicide, which led him to request his lawyer, Emily Paavola, to make the choice on his behalf.
After careful consideration, Paavola opted for lethal injection—the state’s only available option other than electrocution or firing squad under a 2021 law. This choice underscored a broader legal and ethical debate as the state recently secured all three methods to circumvent drug shortages for lethal injections.
However, Owens’ story did not end quietly. His legal team made last-minute appeals based on new testimony from a co-defendant claiming Owens’ innocence, appeals which ultimately failed. This complex and tragic case not only brings South Carolina’s death penalty system into the spotlight but also raises challenging questions on religious beliefs, the power of attorney, and the implications of allowing choice within a system of finality.
