Connect with us

News

Firing Squad Execution Witness Recounts Experience: A Rifle Crack, Then Silence

Published

on

Firing Squad Execution Witness Recounts Experience: A Rifle Crack, Then Silence

I’ve now watched through glass and bars as 11 men were put to death at a South Carolina prison. None of the previous 10 prepared me for watching the firing squad death of Brad Sigmon on Friday night.

I might now be unique among U.S. reporters: I’ve witnessed three different methods, including nine lethal injections and an electric-chair execution. I can still hear the thunk of the breaker falling 21 years later.

As a journalist, you want to ready yourself for an assignment. You research a case. You read about the subject.

In the two weeks since I knew how Mr. Sigmon was going to die, I read up on firing squads and the damage that can be done by the bullets. I looked at the autopsy photos of the last man shot to death by the state, in Utah in 2010.

I also pored over the transcript of his trial, including how prosecutors said it took less than two minutes for Mr. Sigmon to strike his ex-girlfriend’s parents nine times each in the head with a baseball bat, going back and forth between them in different rooms of their Greenville County home in 2001 until they were dead.

Advertisement

But you don’t know everything when some of the execution protocols are kept secret, and it’s impossible to know what to expect when you’ve never seen someone shot at close range right in front of you.

The firing squad is certainly faster — and more violent — than lethal injection. It’s a lot more tense, too. My heart started pounding a little after Mr. Sigmon’s lawyer read his final statement. The hood was put over Mr. Sigmon’s head, and an employee opened the black pull shade that shielded where the three prison-system volunteer shooters were.

About two minutes later, they fired. There was no warning or countdown. The abrupt crack of the rifles startled me. And the white target with the red bull’s-eye that had been on his chest, standing out against his black prison jumpsuit, disappeared instantly as Mr. Sigmon’s whole body flinched.

It reminded me of what happened to the prisoner 21 years ago when electricity jolted his body.

I tried to keep track, all at once, of the digital clock on the wall to my right, Mr. Sigmon to my left, the small rectangular window with the shooters, and the witnesses in front of me.

Advertisement

A jagged red spot about the size of a small fist appeared where Mr. Sigmon was shot. His chest moved two or three times. Outside of the rifle crack, there was no sound.

A doctor came out in less than a minute, and his examination took about a minute more. Mr. Sigmon was declared dead at 6:08 p.m.

Then we left through the same door we came in.

The sun was setting. The sky was a pretty pink and purple, a stark contrast to the death chamber’s fluorescent lights, gray firing-squad chair and block walls that reminded me of a 1970s doctor’s office.

The death chamber is less than a five-minute drive from Correction Department headquarters along a busy suburban highway. I always look out the window on the drive back from each execution. There is a pasture with cows behind a fence on one side, and on the other, I can see in the distance the razor wire of the prison.

Advertisement

Armed prison employees were everywhere. We sat in vans outside the death chamber for what I guess was around 15 minutes, but I can’t say for certain because my watch, cellphone and everything else were taken away for security, save for a pad and a pen.

Over to my right, I saw the skinny barred windows of South Carolina’s death row. There were 28 inmates there earlier Friday, and now there are 27.

That’s down from 31 last August. After a 13-year pause while South Carolina struggled to obtain the drugs for lethal injections, the state has resumed executions. Inmates may choose among injection, electrocution or the firing squad.

I witnessed Freddie Owens being put to death Sept. 20. He locked eyes with every witness in the room.

I saw Richard Moore die Nov. 1, looking serenely at the ceiling as his lawyer, who became close to him while fighting for his life over a decade, wept.

Advertisement

And I was there, too, when Marion Bowman Jr. died Jan. 31, a small smile on his face as he turned to his lawyer, then closed his eyes and waited.

I remember other executions, too. I’ve seen family members of victims stare down a killer on the gurney. I’ve seen a mother shed tears as she watched her son die, almost close enough to touch if the glass and bars weren’t in the way.

Like that thunk of the breaker back in 2004, I won’t forget the crack of the rifles Friday and that target disappearing. Also etched in my mind: Mr. Sigmon talking or mouthing toward his lawyer, trying to let him know he was OK before the hood went on.

I’ll likely be back at Broad River Correctional Institution on April 11. Two more men on death row are out of appeals, and the State Supreme Court appears ready to schedule their deaths at five-week intervals.

They would be the 12th and 13th men I’ve seen killed by the state of South Carolina. And when it is over, I will have witnessed more than a quarter of the state’s executions since the death penalty was reinstated.

Advertisement

News

Multiple people shot near Brown University, police say

Published

on

Multiple people shot near Brown University, police say

In this image from video, law enforcement officials gather outside the Brown University campus in Providence, R.I., on Saturday, Dec. 13, 2025.

Kimberlee Kruesi/AP


hide caption

toggle caption

Advertisement

Kimberlee Kruesi/AP

Multiple people have been shot near Brown University in Providence, R.I., on Saturday, police said.

The Providence Police Department said it is actively investigating the situation and is encouraging the public to shelter in place until further notice.

There is no suspect in custody, the university said on X, adding that it’s coordinating with multiple law enforcement agencies to search for a suspect.

Advertisement

The university  issued an alert Saturday afternoon that the shooter was spotted near the Barus and Holley building, which houses the School of Engineering and Physics Department.

“Continue to shelter in place. Remain away from Barus & Holley area. Police do not have a suspect in custody and continue to search for suspect(s). Brown coordinating with multiple law enforcement agencies on site,” the university said.

This is a developing story and will be updated.

Continue Reading

News

What to know about Kilmar Abrego Garcia’s release from immigration custody

Published

on

What to know about Kilmar Abrego Garcia’s release from immigration custody

BALTIMORE — Kilmar Abrego Garcia, whose mistaken deportation helped galvanize opposition to President Donald Trump’s immigration policies, was released from immigration detention on Thursday, and a judge has temporarily blocked any further efforts to detain him.

Abrego Garcia currently can’t be deported to his home country of El Salvador thanks to a 2019 immigration court order that found he had a “well founded fear” of danger there. However, the Trump administration has said he cannot stay in the U.S. Over the past few months, government officials have said they would deport him to Uganda, Eswatini, Ghana and, most recently, Liberia.

Abrego Garcia is fighting his deportation in federal court in Maryland, where his attorneys claim the administration is manipulating the immigration system to punish him for successfully challenging his earlier deportation.

Here’s what to know about the latest developments in the case:

Abrego Garcia is a Salvadoran citizen with an American wife and child who has lived in Maryland for years. He immigrated to the U.S. illegally as a teenager to join his brother, who had become a U.S. citizen. In 2019, an immigration judge granted him protection from being deported back to his home country.

Advertisement

While he was allowed to live and work in the U.S. under Immigration and Customs Enforcement supervision, he was not given residency status. Earlier this year, he was mistakenly deported to El Salvador, despite the earlier court ruling.

When Abrego Garcia was deported in March, he was held in a notoriously brutal Salvadoran prison despite having no criminal record.

The Trump administration initially fought efforts to bring him back to the U.S. but eventually complied after the U.S. Supreme Court weighed in. He returned to the U.S. in June, only to face an arrest warrant on human smuggling charges in Tennessee. Abrego Garcia was held in a Tennessee jail for more than two months before he was released on Friday, Aug. 22, to await trial in Maryland under home detention.

His freedom lasted a weekend. On the following Monday, he reported to the Baltimore immigration office for a check-in and was immediately taken into immigration custody. Officials announced plans to deport him to a series of African countries, but they were blocked by an order from U.S. District Judge Paula Xinis in Maryland.

On Thursday, after months of legal filings and hearings, Xinis ruled that Abrego Garcia should be released immediately. Her ruling hinged on what was likely a procedural error by the immigration judge who heard his case in 2019.

Advertisement

Normally, in a case like this, an immigration judge will first issue an order of removal. Then the judge will essentially freeze that order by issuing a “withholding of removal” order, according to Memphis immigration attorney Andrew Rankin.

In Abrego Garcia’s case, the judge granted withholding of removal to El Salvador because he found Abrego Garcia’s life could be in danger there. However, the judge never took the first step of issuing the order of removal. The government argued in Xinis’ court that the order of removal could be inferred, but the judge disagreed.

Without a final order of removal, Abrego Garcia can’t be deported, Xinis ruled.

The only way to get an order of removal is to go back to immigration court and ask for one, Rankin said. But reopening the immigration case is a gamble because Abrego Garcia’s attorneys would likely seek protection from deportation in the form of asylum or some other type of relief.

One wrinkle is that immigration courts are officially part of the executive branch, and the judges there are not generally viewed as being as independent as federal judges.

Advertisement

“There might be independence in some areas, but if the administration wants a certain result, by all accounts it seems they’re going to exert the pressure on the individuals to get that result,” Rankin said. “I hope he gets a fair shake, and two lawyers make arguments — somebody wins, somebody loses — instead of giving it to an immigration judge with a 95% denial rate, where everybody in the world knows how it’s gonna go down.”

Alternatively, the government could appeal Xinis’ order to the 4th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals and try to get her ruling overturned, Rankin said. If the appeals court agreed with the government that the final order of removal was implied, there could be no need to reopen the immigration case.

In compliance with Xinis’ order, Abrego Garcia was released from immigration detention in Pennsylvania on Thursday evening and allowed to return home for the first time in months. However, he was also told to report to an immigration officer in Baltimore early the next morning.

Fearing that he would be detained again, his attorneys asked Xinis for a temporary restraining order. Xinis filed that order early Friday morning. It prohibits immigration officials from taking Abrego Garcia back into custody, at least for the time being. A hearing on the issue could happen as early as next week.

Meanwhile, in Tennessee, Abrego Garcia has pleaded not guilty in the criminal case where he is charged with human smuggling and conspiracy to commit human smuggling.

Advertisement

Prosecutors claim he accepted money to transport, within the United States, people who were in the country illegally. The charges stem from a 2022 traffic stop in Tennessee for speeding. Body camera footage from a Tennessee Highway Patrol officer shows a calm exchange with Abrego Garcia. There were nine passengers in the car, and the officers discussed among themselves their suspicions of smuggling. However, Abrego Garcia was eventually allowed to continue driving with only a warning.

Abrego Garcia has asked U.S. District Court Judge Waverly Crenshaw to dismiss the smuggling charges on the grounds of “selective or vindictive prosecution.”

Crenshaw earlier found “some evidence that the prosecution against him may be vindictive” and said many statements by Trump administration officials “raise cause for concern.” Crenshaw specifically cited a statement by Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche on a Fox News Channel program that seemed to suggest the Justice Department charged Abrego Garcia because he won his wrongful-deportation case.

The two sides have been sparring over whether senior Justice Department officials, including Blanche, can be required to testify in the case.

Advertisement
Continue Reading

News

Afghan CIA fighters face stark reality in the U.S. : Consider This from NPR

Published

on

Afghan CIA fighters face stark reality in the U.S. : Consider This from NPR

A makeshift memorial stands outside the Farragut West Metro station on December 01, 2025 in Washington, DC. Two West Virginia National Guard troops were shot blocks from the White House on November 26.

Heather Diehl/Getty Images


hide caption

toggle caption

Advertisement

Heather Diehl/Getty Images

They survived some of the Afghanistan War’s most grueling and treacherous missions. 

But once they evacuated to the U.S., many Afghan fighters who served in “Zero Units” found themselves spiraling. 

Among their ranks was Rahmanullah Lakanwal, the man charged with killing one National Guard member and seriously injuring a second after opening fire on them in Washington, D.C. on Thanksgiving Eve.

Advertisement

NPR’s Brian Mann spoke to people involved in Zero Units and learned some have struggled with mental health since coming to the U.S. At least four soldiers have died by suicide. 

For sponsor-free episodes of Consider This, sign up for Consider This+ via Apple Podcasts or at plus.npr.org. Email us at considerthis@npr.org.

This episode was produced by Erika Ryan and Karen Zamora. It was edited by Alina Hartounian and Courtney Dorning.

Our executive producer is Sami Yenigun.

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Trending