Final words of death row inmate who died in South Carolina’s first ever execution by firing squadOn March 7, 2025, Brad Sigmon, a death row inmate convicted of a double murder, was executed by firing squad in South Carolina—a method not used in the state for 15 years and only the fourth such execution in the United States since capital punishment resumed in 1976. Sigmon’s execution marks a rare and somber moment in the nation’s penal history, drawing attention both to the evolving methods of execution and the ongoing debates regarding capital punishment in America.

I. Background of the Case
A. The Crime and Its Aftermath
In 2002, Brad Sigmon was convicted for the brutal murder of David and Gladys Larke, the parents of his ex-girlfriend. The crime was characterized by extreme violence: Sigmon, in a fit of rage and despair following his breakup, attacked the couple with a baseball bat. The violent nature of the assault, which left little doubt about the premeditation and cruelty involved, ultimately led to a conviction that would result in a death sentence.

Following his conviction, Sigmon was sentenced not only to death but also received two consecutive life sentences and an additional 30-year term for first-degree burglary. Despite his legal team’s efforts to have his sentence commuted to life imprisonment, the jury’s verdict upheld the death penalty. This decision underscored the gravity with which the court viewed his actions and the corresponding need for a punishment deemed commensurate with the severity of his crimes.B. Legal and Procedural Developments
During the more than two decades Sigmon spent on death row, the legal system in South Carolina evolved, and the debate over execution methods gained new dimensions. In a state where condemned inmates are afforded the choice of execution method, Sigmon’s eventual decision to select the firing squad was both a personal and symbolic statement. His choice emerged in an era marked by concerns over the painful and prolonged nature of lethal injection and the potential for botched executions using other methods such as electrocution.

South Carolina had not used the firing squad as a method of execution for 15 years. Prior to Sigmon’s execution, only three other inmates in the United States had been executed by this method since 1976—a fact that places his case in a very exclusive and historically significant category. His execution, therefore, not only ended his life but also reintroduced a controversial method of capital punishment into the modern discourse.

II. The Execution Process
A. Preparation and Protocol
On the day of his execution, Sigmon was escorted into the death chamber at the Broad River Correctional Institution in Columbia, South Carolina. The facility’s procedures for a firing squad execution are stringent and highly structured. Sigmon was first hooded and dressed in a standard-issue black jumpsuit. A target was affixed over his heart—a detail that underscores the clinical precision of the process.

In accordance with South Carolina’s execution protocols, Sigmon was securely strapped into a metal chair that rested upon a catch basin designed to contain bodily fluids, a measure intended to ensure both safety and procedural order. This setup, while efficient from an administrative standpoint, also served as a stark reminder of the finality of the state’s decision and the mechanistic nature of capital punishment.B. The Role of the Execution Team
Three state corrections department volunteers were designated as the executioners for this solemn duty. Armed with .308-caliber Winchester rifles loaded with 100-grain TAP Urban bullets, these volunteers stood at a distance of 15 feet from the death chamber’s target area. Their position, carefully concealed from the viewing area by a barrier, ensured that the execution was carried out with a level of detachment and professionalism deemed necessary by state officials.

At precisely 6:05 p.m., the executioners simultaneously discharged their rifles. This coordinated firing was intended to deliver a fatal blow with maximum efficiency. In the seconds following the shots, a medical officer promptly entered the chamber to verify Sigmon’s vital signs. After an examination lasting approximately ninety seconds, the doctor declared him dead at 6:08 p.m.

III. Sigmon’s Final Statement
One of the most striking aspects of this case was Sigmon’s final statement—a series of remarks that not only reflected his personal transformation during his time on death row but also conveyed a broader philosophical and religious message. In his last words, Sigmon invoked several Bible verses to challenge the notion that retribution should be meted out in kind.

A. A Call for Mercy and Reform
According to court records and reports read aloud by his attorney, Sigmon’s final statement was intended to serve as both a farewell and a public appeal. He declared, “I want my closing statement to be one of love and a calling to my fellow Christians to help us end the death penalty.” With these words, he sought to underline the perceived moral inconsistency of executing human beings—a practice that, he argued, runs contrary to the compassionate teachings of the New Testament.

B. Biblical Justifications and Rejections
Sigmon explained that the traditional “an eye for an eye” philosophy, once used to justify the death penalty, was based on Old Testament law. In his view, this form of retribution was obsolete. “At that time, I was too ignorant to know how wrong that was. Why? Because we no longer live under the Old Testament law but now live under the New Testament,” he stated. His words were a direct challenge to those who argue that the death penalty is a just form of punishment, suggesting instead that mercy and forgiveness should guide modern justice.

Concluding his remarks, Sigmon stated, “We are not under God’s grace and mercy.” This paradoxical conclusion—asserting both the absence of divine sanction for human execution and the need for mercy—reflected a complex internal struggle over his own culpability and the broader ethics of capital punishment.gathered to witness the procedure. While the death chamber is typically designed to be a controlled environment devoid of personal sentiment, the gravity of the occasion was palpable. The facility, maintained with strict adherence to security and operational protocols, provided a stark backdrop to what was to become the final moment of Brad Sigmon’s life.

Prior to entering the death chamber, Sigmon was escorted through a series of secured corridors and briefed on the execution process. This final walk, a symbolic journey from incarceration to execution, was conducted under heavy guard and in the presence of both legal and correctional personnel.

B. Execution Setup and Process
Inside the chamber, every detail had been meticulously planned. Sigmon was positioned in the center of the room, strapped securely into the specially designed metal chair. The chair itself, positioned atop a catch basin, was a stark reminder of the clinical precision involved in the process.

A large, circular target was affixed to Sigmon’s chest—an image designed to ensure that the executioners could aim with lethal precision. The executioners, three corrections department volunteers, were stationed 15 feet away. Their rifles, loaded with .308-caliber ammunition specifically designed to disintegrate upon impact, were aimed at the target. The deliberate spacing between the executioners and the inmate was not arbitrary; it was calculated to provide both accuracy and safety.

At 6:05 p.m., with all legal clearances confirmed by phone from the Governor’s office and the Attorney General’s Office, the firing squad executed the order. In a synchronized act, all three volunteers discharged their rifles simultaneously. The sound of the rifles—a sharp, decisive report—filled the chamber, marking the irreversible end of Sigmon’s life.