Just days before inmate Freddie Owens is set to die by lethal injection in South Carolina, the friend whose testimony helped send Owens to prison is saying he lied to save himself from the death chamber.

Owens is set to die at 6 p.m. Friday at a Columbia prison for the killing of a Greenville convenience store clerk in 1997.

But Owens’ lawyers on Wednesday filed a sworn statement from his co-defendant Steven Golden late Wednesday to try to stop South Carolina from carrying out its first execution in more than a decade.

Prosecutors reiterated that several other witnesses testified that Owens told them he pulled the trigger. And the state Supreme Court refused to stop Owens’ execution last week after Golden, in a sworn statement, said that he had a secret deal with prosecutors that he never told the jury about.

    • @thesohoriots
      link
      English
      45 hours ago

      In South Carolina? First on-the-books in nearly 10 years.

    • macniel
      link
      fedilink
      289 hours ago

      still bloodthirsty that they refuse that execution even though new information have come to light.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        -208 hours ago

        Anybody can say anything. They held a trial. Testimonies were given under oath. Other witnesses testified.

        You can’t throw out every conviction after-the-fact because somebody says something new. It would be trivial to overturn sentences and lock up the courts for decades.

        • macniel
          link
          fedilink
          18
          edit-2
          7 hours ago

          they fucking LIED UNDER OATH. The entire case needs to be reevaluated.

          • @Tyfud
            link
            English
            106 hours ago

            This is the correct answer. It sounds like they’re admitting to perjury. So the case needs to be re-evaluated or set for a mistrial if it was a critical witness testimony that’s been proven to be lying under oath.

            • @[email protected]
              link
              fedilink
              English
              -34 hours ago

              that’s been proven to be lying under oath.

              That’s a very big assumption you’re making. They could be lying now.

          • @[email protected]
            link
            fedilink
            English
            -44 hours ago

            Or are they lying now? You can’t know. Do you reevaluate every case when somebody says something other than their sworn testimony?

            • Krzd
              link
              73 hours ago

              Yes??? What kinda bullshit take is that?
              The whole issue with capital punishment is that you can’t ever be sure, and you have to do your best to make sure you’re punishing the correct person.

        • snooggums
          link
          English
          30
          edit-2
          8 hours ago

          Guess innocence isn’t as important as the death penalty. They should have known that someone lied under oath at the time, right?

          Or maybe they could not execute him and take the time to find out if the new information is true or not.

          • @NotMyOldRedditName
            link
            26
            edit-2
            8 hours ago

            Or you know… just don’t execute people ever because they can’t ever be 100% sure.

          • @[email protected]
            link
            fedilink
            English
            -137 hours ago

            Guess innocence isn’t as important as the death penalty. They should have known that someone lied under oath at the time, right?

            Don’t be obtuse. Multiple lines of evidence were presented to convince 12 people that he was guilty.

            Guess we should just release everybody from prison because we can never know with 100% certainty that anyone ever did anything.

            • @[email protected]
              link
              fedilink
              English
              136 hours ago

              There are a lot of options between release and execution. Maybe we should consider those.

            • @[email protected]
              link
              fedilink
              English
              14
              edit-2
              6 hours ago

              Don’t be obtuse. Multiple lines of evidence were presented to convince 12 people that he was guilty.

              No matter how many people believe that Haitian immigrants are eating cats, it doesn’t become true just because it is believed by many.

            • @[email protected]
              link
              fedilink
              English
              46 hours ago

              I hope, if your life ever ends up on the line, you’re met with more sympathy and care than you are willing to show others. You’re being non-chalant about killing someone. Maybe you’re young and will develop empathy, but if this is you and always will be you then frankly I’d make the trade here.

              • @[email protected]
                link
                fedilink
                English
                -4
                edit-2
                4 hours ago

                You’re being non-chalant about killing someone.

                I’m absolutely not. I don’t believe in the death penalty - and I’m not defending it. But you can’t throw out every case because somebody makes a new claim. Everybody in this thread is believing the new information unquestionably. The trial would have presented other corroborating evidence as well.

                It’s like how you still need to determine if somebody committed a crime even if they confess.

            • pupupipi
              link
              46 hours ago

              but the cheap labor?? the us wouldn’t survive without the prison system, don’t know why they’re wasting good drugs on the guy though, why waste a life unless we get to make some burgers out of him or something, right? god bless

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          66 hours ago

          Do you think that if the prosecution made a secret deal with the witness, a deal that the jury didn’t know about, would that make another trial or reexamination of evidence necessary? Because that’s what happened.

          And the state Supreme Court refused to stop Owens’ execution last week after Golden, in a sworn statement, said that he had a secret deal with prosecutors that he never told the jury about.

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          English
          46 hours ago

          Anybody can say anything.

          Anybody can say anything to convict someone of a crime.
          But, once the convenience of finding someone guilty has been done, it doesn’t matter what anybody says.

          In the end, the human world works on fabricating answers more than it does on finding more truthful ones.

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          26 hours ago

          One of these outcomes is irreversible. Preventing that outcome should take precedence over any other factor in the case.