Jennings-Wilson GOP primary expected to be hard-fought
An awkward moment surfaced inside the Berkeley County Courthouse last August when Blair Jennings and Scarlett Wilson were about to put three defendants in a murder case on trial.
Both prosecutors were tucked in their seats, waiting for the case to start. But neither was talking to each other.
Instead, the pair made small talk with others in the courtroom, gingerly stepping around their dueling political ambitions to become the next elected solicitor for Charleston and Berkeley counties. Only after the trial started did they seem to put their differences aside.
Mic Smith
The Post and Courier
In the hottest local race of the year, Wilson, a career prosecutor and Gov. Mark Sanford appointee, faces a GOP primary challenge in the 9th Circuit from Jennings, who she forced out of the Berkeley office after ruling he wasn't on board with her new administration. With no Democrat in the race, the next nine weeks will determine Berkeley's and Charleston's top prosecutor for the next four years. Political watchers say the race will play out all over town, from the lawyers of Broad Street to the ranks of the local GOP.
"It has all the makings of getting ugly, not only in terms of partisanship but also among friends and who is in tight with which faction of the legal community," said College of Charleston political scientist Jeri Cabot in analyzing the race.
Wilson, 40, traveled a round-about path to get to Charleston. Raised in Hemingway in Williamsburg County, she went to Clemson University and graduated from the University of South Carolina School of Law in 1992. In 1995 she was hired as a federal prosecutor in Columbia at the relatively young age of 26 and would become part of the U.S. Attorney's Office Violent Crimes Task Force. Along the way, she earned recognition for her work on all sorts of federal-level crimes, including drug probes, murder, murder-for-hire and armed robbery. She joined the solicitor's office in 2000 when former Solicitor Ralph Hoisington made her his second in command.
Scarlett Wilson
CURRENT JOB: 9th Circuit Solicitor, appointed by Gov. Mark Sanford following the death of Ralph Hoisington last June.
AGE: 40
EDUCATION: Clemson University undergraduate; USC School of Law 1992.
RESIDES: Mount Pleasant
Those who have faced Wilson in court describe her as a dedicated victims' advocate. "It was clear to me that she truly believed in what she was doing," said defense attorney Tim Kulp, who faced Wilson when she successfully prosecuted Jarod Wayne Tapp for murdering College of Charleston honors graduate Julie Jett in her West Ashley apartment in May 2003.
In one of her more personal cases, Wilson returned to her Williamsburg County roots in 1998 when she helped convict long-time Sheriff Theodore 'Big Mac' McFarlin of one count of participating in a crack and cocaine conspiracy, and two counts of perjury. McFarlin was the same sheriff who'd been in office in Williamsburg County since Wilson was a girl.
Jennings, 37, grew up in Charleston, attended Emory University and graduated from USC's law school in 1996. In 2000, Hoisington picked him as deputy solicitor in Berkeley County to run prosecutions in Moncks Corner, giving him oversight of an office that's not as large as Charleston's but sees cases just as problematic. Local attorneys describe Jennings as even-handed in a courtroom. "Blair was always fair with my clients and he's an excellent trial lawyer," said former Berkeley County public defender J. Mitchell Lanier.
One high-profile case from Jennings' career is the conviction of Jessie Sapp for the murder of South Carolina Highway Patrolman Jeff Johnson during a 2002 traffic stop. Sapp is now on Death Row. Another is the 2004 conviction of Derrick Grant for the 2002 Christmastime murder of former Atlanta Bread Co. employee Rachel Sottile.
Both Wilson and Jennings worked beside Hoisington until he passed away last June from pancreatic cancer. When Sanford chose Wilson as the successor, she became the first woman to hold the job. But it also sparked the current political rift. During a political forum last month at the Charleston School of Law, Wilson was asked to explain why she forced Jennings out of his Berkeley County post. Her answer: cohesion, commitment and competence, saying it was clear Jennings was not fully in her camp.
Blair Jennings
CURRENT JOB: Legal counsel to Berkeley County Sheriff Wayne DeWitt's office; part-time assistant solicitor in Dorchester County.
AGE: 37
EDUCATION: Emory University undergraduate; USC School of Law 1996.
RESIDES: Mount Pleasant
Jennings told the 35 students in the audience the issue was something else. "It was a political decision," he said.
The ouster came weeks after Jennings had picked up a major political boost from Hoisington's widow, Michele, who hosted a kickoff campaign fundraiser for him at her home.
The Ninth Circuit covers a two-county geographic area that's home to 510,000 people. In all, there's an estimated 115 employees in the Charleston and Berkeley county offices, including investigators, assistant solicitors and support staff to handle thousands of criminal cases a year. Since taking over, Wilson has launched several initiatives including creating a special criminal domestic violence court that local magistrates initially opposed, and pushing for bond revocations for repeat violent offenders. The current trend prosecutors must combat is the growth of multi-suspect crimes where more than one offender is involved, she said.
"There are not as many 'lone rangers' out there committing a crime," she said. She also stepped up the number of murder trials. At least seven have been called in Charleston County this year, as opposed to nine for all of last year.
Jennings said his work running the Berkeley office has already prepared him to run prosecutions for both counties. In Berkeley County, he assigned lawyers to cases, worked prosecution strategies, set budgets, dealt with County Council and installed a case docketing program.
The emerging trend that law enforcement must prepare for, he said, is that geographic boundaries between towns, cities and communities are becoming less meaningful. "There are no (jurisdiction) lines in the criminals' perception," he said.
Both candidates are relying on some big names to attract rank-and-file voters. North Charleston Mayor Keith Summey is backing Jennings, saying he would be progressive in getting criminals from his city "tried and convicted as soon as possible." But others who have worked at the ranking levels of prosecutions or as victim advocates are siding with Wilson, including Anne Lee, president and CEO of the sexual abuse awareness group Darkness to Light. "I think it's way beyond time someone in the solicitor's position take seriously special-victims' needs, specifically domestic violence and child abuse," she said.
Also in Wilson's camp is former Charleston solicitor and state attorney general Charlie Condon. "She's a very good trial attorney," he said. She's a complete package."
On the politically influential side, former Charleston County GOP Chairman Cyndi Mosteller is backing Jennings, saying he has a longer track record in Republican politics than Wilson does, and also because Hoisington put him solo in charge of running an entire county's prosecutions. "I know Ralph Hoisington had a lot of confidence in Blair," Mosteller said.
Beyond their debates, forums and other appearances, the solicitor's battle seems destined to be fought on TV, and Jennings goes into the airwaves fight with a built-in advantage. Shortly after losing his job as deputy solicitor, he was specially hired by Berkeley County Sheriff Wayne DeWitt — who this week confirmed he's endorsed Jennings — as both the legal counsel for the sheriff's office and as a press spokesman. The department already had a designated public information officer, former radio personality Dan Moon. But the move gave Jennings widespread exposure on nightly news reports, including this week at a methamphetamine lab bust. He's on a $5,000 monthly retainer working for the department and earns another $35,000 a year as a part-time prosecutor for 1st Circuit Solicitor David Pascoe in Dorchester County. In mid-May, Jennings will become a full-time assistant solicitor in Dorchester County, picking up the caseload of former deputy solicitor Don Sorensen, who resigned after being caught up in the recent Hanahan poker raid. But Wilson has the power of incumbency.
Left open as a potential wild card in the race is local voters' views of Wilson's prosecution of 10 Wando High School teens for their role in a high-profile case of armed robbery. Late last year, Wilson offered plea deals of 10 years in prison for the two leaders in a fall 2006 crime spree that included the armed robbery of a Mount Pleasant Food Lion. The two main players, Michael Anthony, 19, and Sean Shevlino, 17, pleaded guilty and were sent to the state Department of Corrections. It was in line with the same deal Hoisington crafted before he died.
The sentencings divided the community, with police saying Wilson applied the law neutrally, while some parents believed she went to the extreme, pursuing excessive adult jail time for teenagers. Some residents even pledged to use the sentencings to rally opposition against her.
Eight other students, who mostly acted as lookouts in the Food Lion case, are still waiting to be sentenced but won't have to face a judge until mid-July, well after the June 10 GOP primary vote.
Contact Schuyler Kropf at skropf@postandcourier.com or 937-5551.
E-mail this story 
Printer-friendly version
Notice about comments:
The Post and Courier is pleased to offer readers the ability to comment on stories. We expect our readers to engage in lively, yet civil discourse. The Post and Courier does not edit user submitted statements and we cannot promise that readers will not occasionally find offensive or inaccurate comments posted in the comments area. Responsibility for the statements posted lies with the person submitting the comment, not postandcourier.com. If you find a comment that is objectionable, please click "suggest removal" and we will review it for possible removal. Please be reminded, however, that in accordance with our Terms of Use and federal law, we are under no obligation to remove any third party comments posted on our Web site.
Full terms and conditions can be read here.
Comments
This article has 36 comment(s)
Posted by abitskeptical on April 10, 2008 at 1:21 a.m. (Suggest removal)
When asked what she looked for, or what she considered most important(I can't remember exactly) in assistant solicitors, Wilson said "loyalty". This strikes me as a rather peculiar answer & perspective.
Posted by moonpie on April 10, 2008 at 6 a.m. (Suggest removal)
How about a 3rd person run that way we don't have to have neither. If he wins she's gone and he's already gone when she won??
Posted by eyfigueroa on April 10, 2008 at 8:20 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Early: I'm wondering if Ms. Wilson fear some sort of 'racial' backlash occuring prior to the GOP primary in regards to the Gadsden Green incident. Frankly, I'm not understanding the delay in getting those kids to trial.
I smell a rat.
Posted by RTC on April 10, 2008 at 9:10 a.m. (Suggest removal)
ey: Good point. If she doesn't have the backbone to deal with these kids the same as she did the others, then she doesn't need to be in this position.
Posted by preachlove on April 10, 2008 at 9:38 a.m. (Suggest removal)
I personally know of a case where about 5 black men were arrested for a murder they didn't commit, (some detectives knew they were innocent and arrested them anyway) and these men had their lives ruined. All of them are free today because the charges were dropped. They had no evidence against these men, absolutely nothing, nada. Scarlett Wilson nor Ralph Hoisington did anything to help these men; they just let these men sit in jail for a long time. Some of these men had families they were supporting. That tells me she lacks morals and character. So, she definitely does not get my vote.
Posted by UrGatorbait on April 10, 2008 at 10:19 a.m. (Suggest removal)
I would say Ms. Wilson is brining some baggage to the table and doesn't seem to realize loyalty is a two way street.
Posted by DCartisan on April 10, 2008 at 10:41 a.m. (Suggest removal)
---"hired by Berkeley County Sheriff Wayne DeWitt — who this week confirmed he's endorsed Jennings — as both the legal counsel for the sheriff's office and as a press spokesman. The department already had a designated public information officer, former radio personality Dan Moon. But the move gave Jennings widespread exposure on nightly news reports, including this week at a methamphetamine lab bust. He's on a $5,000 monthly retainer working for the department"---
I guess it really is "who" you know. I didn't know Berkeley County had that kind of money to pay two people to do the same job. Did he hire Jennings for 2 positions he already had filled? (Didn't they already have legal representation too)
Posted by BillMan on April 10, 2008 at 10:52 a.m. (Suggest removal)
I will be voting for Jennings, do not believe Wilson is up to the job!
Posted by StraightStreet on April 10, 2008 at 11:08 a.m. (Suggest removal)
If Solicitor Hoisington wanted Mr. Jennings to be the number two in command of Berkeley and Charleston counties, why didn't he pick Mr. Jennings for that position? Why didn't Solicitor Hoisington publicaly say Mr. Jennings should be the next solicitor? Why didn't Solicitor Hoisington prior to his death, ask Governor Sanford to appoint Mr. Jennings to fill the vacancy upon his death. The answers are simple, Solicitor Hoisington had previously stated that if he ever vacated the office, Scarlett Wilson had the experience and leadership qualities to carry out the duties to help victims and to ensure that criminals are put behind bars. Governor Sanford and his staff reviewed the qualifications of all the candidates. The Governor's Office clearly found Scarlett Wilson was the most qualified and appointed to her to the position of solicitor. The Senate Judiciary Committee carefully reviewed Ms. Wilson's experience and qualifications and approved her nomination to the full Senate. Ms. Wilson received unanimous vote of approval by the Senate.
I'm glad Ms. Wilson is our solicitor, she's tough on crime and she is good for our communities. Ms. Wilson not only do you have my vote, but you have my vote of my friends and neighbors. Thank you for what you do.
Posted by StraightStreet on April 10, 2008 at 11:20 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Something's fishy... Berkeley County Sheriff DeWitt has Dan Moon as a spokeman and Blair Jennings. How convenient! Blair is also the DUI prosecutor for Democratic Solicitor Pascoe. I wonder how many DUI cases Jennings has been assigned and if he even knows where the Dorchester County Courthouse is.
Blair's dad, David Jennings is one of the biggest Democrats in Charleston County and now Blair works for the top deomocrat in Dorchester County. We don't need anymore RINO's (Republican In Name Only) in government. If you raised a democrat and you work for democrat, you must be a democrat. There's nothing wrong with being a democrat but don't run as a republican out of convenience, run as a democrat. This is just another example of bad politics and why as citizens we get so frustrated with political candidates like Blair Jennings.
Posted by djennings on April 10, 2008 at 12:03 p.m. (Suggest removal)
StraightStreet. I am surprised that you think that you know so much about me. I'm not sure why it matters, but if you want to check the voting rolls, you will find that I have voted in at least the last 3 Republican primaries. Did you miss the endorsements of Blair by Republican leadership in this article? With regard to Blair's job, you must have missed all of the news reports of the deaths and meth lab busts in Berkeley County. Blair was there on rainy afternoons and in the middle of the night. As for the Dorchester job, you must not remember that when Scarlett fired him for political reasons, he still had to feed his wife and 3 children. If you can't work in Charleston or Berkeley until you are elected, don't you go to Dorchester?
Posted by kiteboarder on April 10, 2008 at 12:11 p.m. (Suggest removal)
I agree with DCartisan... Berkeley County must be flushed with money to hire two spokesmen for the Sheriff. I did't realize crime was so widespread that Sheriff DeWitt needed two people to handle all those media calls. Since water rates just went up, I wonder if Blair is going to be their spokesman as well.
Posted by StraightStreet on April 10, 2008 at 12:28 p.m. (Suggest removal)
I laughed when I read your post. You're a funny guy. Ms. Wilson did't fire your son for political reasons, Blair was not in agreement with Solicitor Wilson. Regarding employment, why doesn't Blair do what so many attorneys do -like you, and hang a shingle. Why didn't you hire him? Jennings and Jennings Law Firm.
Posted by abitskeptical on April 10, 2008 at 1:32 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Wilson is actually a distant cousin of mine & I will not be voting for her.
She & her office dismissed 2 stalking charges for which there is ample evidence(along with evidence of a laundry list of other crime):
Sheriff's deputies arrested the man on 2 separate occasions for stalking.
His 1st bond was set high & the 2nd time it was doubled.
I am puzzled as to why bond was set after a 2nd arrest which was a violation of the 1st bond conditions, especially since both cases of stalking also were violations of a family court no contact order given to this man, but at least it was doubled on the 2nd go round.
After the stalking arrests an additional order of protection for the wife was granted. There IS a history of 911 domestic calls prior to the separation & divorce proceedings.
There are many other facts of the case & sources of info/witnesses to this man's stalking behavior, YET
the solicitor told the wife that though his behavior is "ANNOYING"-there is no evidence of stalking & she should call her civil attorney instead of calling the police when she feels threatened!!!!!--that his behavior is a family court issue (altho stalking is a criminal matter)
Never mind that a family court judge had concerns.
Never mind that 2 sheriff's deputies & 2 magistrates/judges saw probable cause & evidence for stalking. Never mind that neither the police investigator nor the solicitor's office interviewed 3rd party witnesses to the stalking behavior (so OF COURSE they found "no" evidence.)
My friend (the wife) told the assistant solicitor who told her they were not going to prosecute the man for stalking "What does he have to do to merit your attention? Get close enough to attack or kill me, as he has threatened to do? I hope you remember my face if I end up on the front page of the paper."
Posted by ChrisPia on April 10, 2008 at 2:28 p.m. (Suggest removal)
South Carolina law defines stalking as engaging in a pattern (two or more incidentswithin a 90-day period) of words and conduct intended to cause and does cause the targetedperson to fear•Assault upon the person or a member of his family•Death of the person or a member of his family•Bodily injury to the person or a member of his family•Criminal sexual conduct on the person or a member of his family•Kidnapping of the person or a member of his family•Damage to the property of the person or a member of his family (South Carolina
Code Annotated §16-3-1720-1730).A person who engages in stalking is guilty of a misdemeanor and upon conviction, mustbe fined not more than $1,000, or imprisoned not more than one year, or both. When aninjunction or restraining order is in effect, stalking and criminal domestic violence are stillmisdemeanors. A person is guilty of a felony when it is aggravated stalking or if a person isconvicted twice within seven years. However, an officer must make an arrest without a warrantwhen probable cause exists. Mutual restraining orders are strongly discouraged since a stalkercan use such an order as a tool to harass the victim.
Posted by DreamMom on April 10, 2008 at 2:29 p.m. (Suggest removal)
I believe Scarlett Wilson is the best person for solicitor, as did Solicitor Hoisington, Governor Sanford, Senator McConnell and all of the Senate. Her credentials and her perseverence to keep criminals off the streets is refreshing, and critical as a Mom of 4 children.
Posted by abitskeptical on April 10, 2008 at 3 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Thanks for citing the stalking statute but I am well aware of what it says & this man is quite guilty of this & much much more.
My friend did not call the police to report stalking. She called because her estranged husband who lives across 2 rivers from her house was parked on a side street watching her house & because of many other factors she was quite alarmed. The sheriff's deputies, who are familiar with this man are the ones who told her she was being stalked.
There was another incident of stalking 4 weeks after the 1st. These are only 2 of many incidents.
Posted by OhGee on April 10, 2008 at 3:16 p.m. (Suggest removal)
DJennings ^5 to you ....Some people think they know all asspects to everyones lives... especially if you are a political figure....I commend you for taking your stand...Blair will be getting my vote
Posted by BlueMercedesS on April 10, 2008 at 3:26 p.m. (Suggest removal)
of course the race is going to be hard fought. i heard jennings has a high power political smear firm out of columbia to help him run a negative campaign. hmm politics as usual from former assistant deputy #3 solicitor jennings. the website the boys in columbia made for him says leadership but i didnt expect a former assistant deputy solicitor to take slick advice and hire some columbia political smearhouse to help him win. i hope his contributors know that he is using their money to fund slick columbia consultants to help trick us. cant teach an old dog new tricks i guess. does this mean when hes solicitor he will rely on the advise of political consultants too? looks like the "political calculation" he accuses current solicitor wilson of is actually just a line of spin that the power suits in columbia gave him.
Posted by djennings on April 10, 2008 at 3:48 p.m. (Suggest removal)
StraightStreet: Your reply didn't make sense. Since Blair will be sworn in as Solicitor next January, why would he set up an office for such a short period?
Posted by kiteboarder on April 10, 2008 at 4:02 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Hey BlueMercedesS did he really hire one of those Columbia firms? If its true, it explains a lot. He's in bed with the devil and it will be nasty politics as usual. What's the name of the firm?
Posted by SCgal on April 10, 2008 at 4:24 p.m. (Suggest removal)
I'm voting for the one who is fair to the kids in our community and seeks FAIR justice!!!! In my opinion, fair justice in NOT 10 yrs for teens!
What will the other 8 kids involved in this receive?
http://www.thepetitionsite.com/1/seans-b...
http://www.helpingsean.com/
Posted by BlueMercedesS on April 10, 2008 at 4:53 p.m. (Suggest removal)
kiteboarder i am not sure what the name of the slick lobbying firm is but does it matter? hes paying someone in columbia and nothing good has ever come outta there.
i heard whoever it is made something like $100,000 dollars to help mitt romney (loser) and also was responsible for creating some phoney fred thompson website and got themselves in a heap of trouble.
looks like "benchwarmer blair" is already making bad decisions.
Posted by SCgal on April 10, 2008 at 5:32 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Here's some great and refreshing reading~~
http://blairjennings.com/
Posted by Charlestonguy on April 10, 2008 at 6:35 p.m. (Suggest removal)
SCARLETT WILSON--YOU HAVE MY VOTE!
This is article is full of bias. Everyone knows that Jennings South of Broad crowd runs the post and courier. And as expected, words and facts are stealthily twisted to make Jennings appear as the front runner.
Scarlett Wilson is a tough prosecutor. But that's exactly what Charleston and Berkley Counties need!!! Not a guy who gets his pals to get him a couple of high profile jobs so that he can get his name in the paper and legitimize his candidacy.
His poor dad has to come to his rescue?
Posted by abitskeptical on April 10, 2008 at 7:20 p.m. (Suggest removal)
My concern with Wilson is that loyalty within the ranks & pride seems to take precedence over all else.
In the situation I described in a couple of posts above it appears this is the problem.
Things were not done that should have been done, & instead of acknowledging this & correcting it, she arrogantly dug in her heals.
From the FAQ section of the solicitor's web page:
Q; "I have a complaint against your office. How do I contact you and will you respond?
A: Write to the Solicitor’s Office. I assure you that someone in authority, will contact you in writing, by telephone, or schedule an appointment.
She might respond, but you will be quite aware that she does not like to be questioned.
Posted by preachlove on April 10, 2008 at 7:32 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Worth posting again:
I personally know of a case where about 5 black men were arrested for a murder they didn't commit, (some detectives knew they were innocent and arrested them anyway) and these men had their lives ruined. All of them are free today because the charges were dropped. They had no evidence against these men, absolutely nothing, nada. Scarlett Wilson nor Ralph Hoisington did anything to help these men; they just let these men sit in jail for a long time. Some of these men had families they were supporting. That tells me she lacks morals and character. So, she definitely does not get my vote.
To all of you Wilson supporters - Many others will be told about this incident and some of us will be fighting to keep her from getting elected. The above situation can only be described as pure evil and uncaring for other human beings.
Posted by Charlestonguy on April 10, 2008 at 8:03 p.m. (Suggest removal)
preachlove:
Wilson is not the one that arrested these "5 black men." While Wilson has the authority to dismiss cases, she cannot control how long it takes the respective police dept. to investigate the case. Often times it takes months before all the evidence, statements and incident reports are complete. It would be unfair to your loved ones if Wilson or any other solicitor jumped the gun and made conclusions on the case before having a complete picture of the case. Therefore, while it may seem unfair from your limited angle, your story (not even questioning the facts/credibility) has nothing to do with her lack of morals and character.
Posted by preachlove on April 10, 2008 at 8:24 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Charlestonguy - If you don't know anything about this case, please keep your comments to yourself. Wilson and Hoisington received information that these men were innocent and let them sit in jail for a LONG time. That means, to me, they have very questionable morals and character traits that are severely lacking. She should be thankful these men are not vindictive. The detectives that arrested them knew they were innocent - they should be arrested and thrown in jail.
Posted by preachlove on April 10, 2008 at 8:28 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Charlestonguy - I will clarify: Wilson and Hoisington recieved EVIDENCE that these men were innocent. Is that better for you?
Posted by Charlestonguy on April 10, 2008 at 8:29 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Wilson for Solicitor!!!
Posted by carolinabeachgirl on April 10, 2008 at 8:40 p.m. (Suggest removal)
I love reading the comments on certain stories. I find it interesting that Wilson supporters have come out swinging when this is probably the first article written by the P&C that doesn't really promote either candidate. However, there was one poster that couldn't seem to use the word "slick" enough in his/her comment and was utterly incapable of capitalization and punctuation. Here's a tip, if you want to promote Wilson, do so in a manner that is not so juvenile. Why can't a candidate hire whomever he/she wants to promote themselves? Anyone who donates to a campaign does so with the understanding that money will be spent to WIN a campaign. I've seen a list of Wilson's donors, have you? I am quite certain she is covered in the area of campaign promotion as well.
Posted by abitskeptical on April 10, 2008 at 8:50 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Yes, Charlestonguy, it IS unfair for Wilson to make a conclusion about a case before having a complete picture of the case.
And by the way, my angle on the case I described above is not limited.
Posted by SCgal on April 10, 2008 at 9:37 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Don't forget this one!!
http://www.charleston.net/news/2008/feb/...
Acquittal amplifies conflict
By Schuyler Kropf (Contact)
The Post and Courier
Tuesday, February 19, 2008
MONCKS CORNER — The case of an accused murderer acquitted last week after less than 25 minutes of jury deliberation has led to finger-pointing between the two leading political candidates for top prosecutor over how it happened.
Ninth Circuit Solicitor Scarlett Wilson and former Berkeley County prosecutor Blair Jennings have differing views over how the "not guilty" verdict was given to Reginald Ricardo Hamilton in the two-year-old case.
The duel has political overtones as both are vying for the GOP nomination for solicitor in the June primary. The crux of their disagreement is Wilson's opinion that Jennings didn't properly handle the case when he was in charge.
The sparks also come as Wilson is scheduled to meet today with Berkeley County Sheriff's Office representatives to discuss how the trial was handled.
Last week, a jury acquitted Hamilton, 21, in the shooting death of rookie taxicab driver Nelcena "Muffin" Jenkins. The Summerville woman, who feared her job, was shot in the back of the head in January 2006 by one of two men who wanted to rob her, authorities contend. The acquittal came after less than two days of testimony in which co-defendant Oliver William Hicks pegged Hamilton as the shooter.
On Monday, Wilson said the previous deputy solicitor in Berkeley County — Jennings — was partially responsible for the evidence prosecutors had to deal with. He had managed the case before Wilson asked him to leave his post in September.
Wilson said that a key witness' testimony wasn't properly secured "and we were left with no leverage when he recanted and refused to testify" as well as that Jennings "cut a deal" with the wrong defendant. She pointed to Hicks, "against whom we had the most evidence."
Hicks was the highlight witness called by Wilson's new lead Berkeley prosecutor, Bryan Alfaro. Hicks testified the two men plotted to lure a cabbie to the Carnes Crossing Mobile Home Park but blamed Hamilton for the shooting.
"These things made a case where there was no forensic evidence a tough case to win," Wilson said Monday. "Because we strongly believed that defendant Hamilton was involved in the murder, we elected to go forward with what we had."
Jennings on Monday said Wilson's comments are off-base, saying she is the one in charge of all management of the office, including how and when to prosecute murder trials in Charleston and Berkeley counties. Holding him responsible five months after he was forced out of his job was grasping at straws, he said.
"She's the solicitor, she's responsible for all the prosecutions," he said. "I don't agree that it's laid at my doorstep.
"At the time I left, no deal was in place with Oliver Hicks," he added.
Posted by lillycollette on April 11, 2008 at 5:03 a.m. (Suggest removal)
If I were interested in a particular candidate I would check their record and background. Voting is a serious responsibility that should not be influenced by the tabloid mentality of anonymous unverifiable comments.
While members of the public rightfully call for public official to clean up their act they would do well to remember they have the same responsibility.
If you do not want a dirty campaign, do not contribute dirt to the campaign.
Posted by abitskeptical on April 11, 2008 at 7:04 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Of course folks should do as much research about a candidate as is possible.
However, you can do all the background checking you want, but the reality of what happened, in regard to the solicitor's office, in the case I described above will not be there.
The facts of the case I have reported are verifiable & people with more influence than I (such as the AG's office in Columbia, League of Women voters etc. have been made aware of this situation & are interested & concerned about what happened.However, as you probably know, the AG's office does not have oversight of the solicitor here.
I have not made names involved public in this forum because a minor child is involved & I have no intention of inciting more wrath & vengence than is already there in the "stalker".