South Carolina Completes Preparations for Firing-Squad Executions

South Carolina has com­plet­ed prepa­ra­tions to exe­cute the state’s death-row pris­on­ers by firing squad. 

In a news release issued on March 18, 2022, the South Carolina Department of Corrections (SCDC) announced that it had noti­fied the state attor­ney general’s office that SCDC ​“is now able to car­ry out an exe­cu­tion by fir­ing squad as required by law.” The announce­ment removed a major hur­dle in South Carolina’s efforts to restart exe­cu­tions. The state has not car­ried out any exe­cu­tions since 2011, say­ing that it had been unable to obtain the drugs required under its pri­or lethal-injec­tion execution protocol. 

In May 2021, Governor Henry McMaster signed into law a bill that made the elec­tric chair the state’s default method of exe­cu­tion and added the fir­ing squad as an alter­na­tive method. The law gives death-row pris­on­ers the right to des­ig­nate which of the three meth­ods will be used. If lethal injec­tion is deemed unavail­able, the pris­on­ers must des­ig­nate death by fir­ing squad or be electrocuted.

Previously, South Carolina law autho­rized exe­cu­tions by lethal injec­tion or the elec­tric chair, with lethal injec­tion the default unless a pris­on­er specif­i­cal­ly chose elec­tro­cu­tion. The bill as orig­i­nal­ly draft­ed made the elec­tric chair the default method. However, State Sen. Dick Harpootlian, who as a for­mer pros­e­cu­tor wit­nessed an elec­tric-chair exe­cu­tion, intro­duced an amend­ment to make the fir­ing squad avail­able as a less painful alter­na­tive. Prisoners exe­cut­ed in the elec­tric chair ​“are burned to death,” Harpootlian said. ​“It’s trag­ic that a civ­i­lized soci­ety should elim­i­nate any­body, … [but i]f you’ve got to do it, this is a bet­ter way,” he said.

Electrocution and fir­ing squad ​“are exe­cu­tion meth­ods that pre­vi­ous­ly were replaced by lethal injec­tion, which is con­sid­ered more humane,” said Lindsey Vann, Executive Director of the non­prof­it legal ser­vices orga­ni­za­tion, Justice 360, which rep­re­sents South Carolina death-row pris­on­ers. The new law, she said, ​“makes South Carolina the only state going back to the less humane execution methods.”

South Carolina has repeat­ed­ly used failed death war­rants over the past five years as a device to pres­sure the state leg­is­la­ture to change state law to facilitate executions. 

In November 2017, Governor Henry McMaster and Department of Corrections Director Bryan Stirling held a press con­fer­ence out­side barbed-wire fences at the Broad River Capital Punishment Facility in Columbia, South Carolina, false­ly claim­ing that the lack of lethal-injec­tion drugs was pre­vent­ing the state from exe­cut­ing death-row pris­on­er Bobby Wayne Stone. At the press con­fer­ence, McMaster urged the leg­is­la­ture to act quick­ly to adopt a secre­cy statute to pre­vent the pub­lic from learn­ing the iden­ti­ty of exe­cu­tion-drug sup­pli­ers. In fact, Stone’s case was still in the courts and the death war­rant was nev­er going to be carried out. 

A secre­cy bill and a bill to make the elec­tric chair the default method of exe­cu­tion were intro­duced in the state leg­is­la­ture in January 2018 and again in the 2019 – 2020 leg­isla­tive ses­sion but failed to pass. 

On November 6, 2020, the state sched­uled the exe­cu­tion of Richard Moore for December 4, 2020. SCDC, how­ev­er, refused to tell Moore how it intend­ed to car­ry it out the exe­cu­tion. ​“Never before has SCDC denied a con­demned inmate and his coun­sel access to the exe­cu­tion pro­to­cols in advance of an immi­nent exe­cu­tion,” Moore’s lawyers wrote in his appli­ca­tion for stay of exe­cu­tion. ​“Indeed, no oth­er state in the coun­try has exe­cut­ed some­one under such an extreme veil of secrecy.” 

In an order issued November 30, 2020, the South Carolina Supreme Court stayed Moore’s exe­cu­tion, writ­ing that it had ​“been advised the South Carolina Department of Corrections does not have, and will not be able to obtain, the drugs required for exe­cu­tion by lethal injec­tion.” Because of that, the court said, it stayed Moore’s exe­cu­tion ​“until the South Carolina Department of Corrections advis­es the Court it has the abil­i­ty to per­form the exe­cu­tion as required by the law.” 

With a new meth­ods-of-exe­cu­tion bill pre­filed in the state sen­ate, pros­e­cu­tors sought an exe­cu­tion date for Brad Sigmon even though they still had no drugs to car­ry out an exe­cu­tion. On January 21, 2021, the Clerk of the South Carolina Supreme Court issued a notice of exe­cu­tion that sched­uled Sigmon’s exe­cu­tion for February 12. The court vacat­ed that notice on February 4, find­ing that ​“the exe­cu­tion is cur­rent­ly impos­si­ble” because South Carolina had no lethal injec­tion drugs on hand. It then direct­ed the clerk ​“not to issue anoth­er exe­cu­tion notice in this case until the State noti­fies this Court that the Department of Corrections has the abil­i­ty to car­ry out the exe­cu­tion by lethal injec­tion, that the peti­tion­er has made an elec­tion to be elec­tro­cut­ed, or that there has been some change in the law which will allow the exe­cu­tion to take place.” 

Then on April 22, as the bill was advanc­ing in the state leg­is­la­ture, the clerk issued a notice sched­ul­ing the exe­cu­tion of Freddie Owens for May 14. Owens elect­ed lethal injec­tion as the method of exe­cu­tion, and on May 4, 2021, the court stayed the exe­cu­tion on sim­i­lar grounds. It wrote: ​“Because the South Carolina Department of Corrections (SCDC) lacks the means to con­duct an exe­cu­tion by lethal injec­tion at this time, we … stay Petitioner’s exe­cu­tion until SCDC advis­es the Court it has the abil­i­ty to per­form the exe­cu­tion as required by the law.” 

The leg­is­la­ture gave final approval to the bill on May 5 and Governor McMaster signed it on the day Owens was to be executed. 

Shortly there­after, South Carolina noti­fied the state court that the law had changed and the exe­cu­tions could move for­ward, prompt­ing the clerk to issue two new death war­rants. However, after Sigmon filed a motion to stay his June 18 exe­cu­tion, SCDC sub­mit­ted an affi­davit to the court ​“cer­ti­fy­ing that, as of June 3, 2021, the only statu­to­ri­ly approved method of exe­cu­tion avail­able in South Carolina is elec­tro­cu­tion.” It sub­mit­ted a sim­i­lar cer­ti­fi­ca­tion in response to Owens’ motion to stay his sched­uled June 25 exe­cu­tion. Questioned by the clerk, SCDC advised the court that lethal injec­tion was ​“unavail­able due to cir­cum­stances out­side of the con­trol of the Department of Corrections, and fir­ing squad is cur­rent­ly unavail­able due to the Department of Corrections hav­ing yet to com­plete its devel­op­ment and imple­men­ta­tion of nec­es­sary pro­to­cols and policies.” 

In sep­a­rate orders issued on June 16, 2021, the court again halt­ed Sigmon’s and Owens’ exe­cu­tions, rul­ing that SCDC’s attempt to exe­cute the men by elec­tro­cu­tion with­out offer­ing them the alter­na­tive of lethal injec­tion or fir­ing squad vio­lat­ed the ​“statu­to­ry right of inmates to elect the man­ner of their exe­cu­tion.” Both orders also direct­ed the court’s clerk ​“not to issue anoth­er exe­cu­tion notice until the State noti­fies the Court that the Department of Corrections, in addi­tion to main­tain­ing the avail­abil­i­ty of elec­tro­cu­tion, has devel­oped and imple­ment­ed appro­pri­ate pro­to­cols and poli­cies to car­ry out exe­cu­tions by firing squad.” 

SCDC’s announce­ment March 18, 2022 sug­gests that the depart­ment is close to doing so.