Freddy Eugene Owens Requests New Scrutiny on Co-Defendant’s Testimony

Greenville, South Carolina – A death row inmate in South Carolina identified as Freddie Eugene Owens, 46, has urged the state supreme court to stall his forthcoming execution scheduled for September 20, on a plea that suggests that his co-defendant, who testified against him, falsely claimed that he had no agreement in place with the prosecutors.

Owens is due to be executed for the 1997 murder of store clerk Irene Graves, which was a part of a series of robberies that took place in Greenville. Additionally, Owens murdered his cellmate at the Greenville County Jail between 1999, the year of his conviction, and before his sentencing.

Recent Developments

In a recent turn of events, the defense team for Owens, based on court documents released on Friday, advances the argument concerning the plea deal contention. They also argue that a juror noticed Owens don an electronic stun device in the court tribunal to guarantee his good manners, a fact not addressed by the presiding judge, the Associated Press reports. This development arises as South Carolina is planning to implement the death penalty on Owens, which, if executed, will be the first in the state in the last 13 years amid a pause imposed involuntarily due to issues in obtaining lethal injection drugs in the recent past.

New Evidence Comes to Light

The counsel representing the state is required to respond to Owens’ request for an execution delay by Thursday, while he submits new pieces of evidence to a judge, also claiming a new trial. The benchmark is often high to grant new trials to prisoners on death row who’ve exhausted all their appeals. However, the defense team for Owens states that the initial attorneys on the case performed comprehensive scrutiny but the new evidence only surfaced during interviews as the impending execution of Owens neared.

Interestingly, co-defendant Steven Golden admitted 27 years ago that Owens shot Graves in the head as she failed to unlock the safe at her store. However, the store’s surveillance footage did not capture the shooting clearly. Moreover, the prosecution was not successful in finding the weapon used in the murder or to present any scientific proof associating Owens to the crime.

A Twist in the Plot: Co-defendant Admits to a Plea Deal

During the 1999 trial, Golden elucidated to the jurors that he was not part of any agreement with the prosecution and could possibly face a death or life imprisonment sentence despite his testimony. Contrary to this, a sworn affirmation signed by Golden on August 22 suggests that he had struck a clandestine deal with the prosecutors, a fact hidden from the jury. The defense for Owens believes that this revelation might have influenced the jurors’ decision if they were made aware of this information.

In his recent statement, Golden wrote, “My written plea agreement expressed that death penalty and life without parole were potential outcomes with no specific assurances about the sentence – That wasn’t true. We had a verbal agreement that neither the death penalty nor life without parole would be the result.”

In consequence to pleading guilty to a reduced charge of voluntary manslaughter, Golden was given a 28-year incarceration term, as verified by court records.