SLED begins probe
Agency claims tickets were mishandled in 10 different cases
By SEANNA ADCOX
Associated Press
Saturday, June 21, 2008
COLUMBIA — A spokeswoman for the state's top law enforcement agency said Friday that it is investigating allegations that 10 drunken driving tickets involving clients of a state senator, who is an attorney, were improperly dropped. The State Law Enforcement Division opened the case last week at the request of public safety officials, who wanted a more thorough look, said SLED spokeswoman Kathryn Richardson and Public Safety Department spokesman Sid Gaulden. In January, a Highway Patrol captain asked for an internal investigation into drunken driving arrests made by a trooper. In the request, Capt. C.N. Williamson said he was suspicious of tickets a trooper faxed to him that were "signed off not guilty." He noted Sen. Brad Hutto, D-Orangeburg, was the lawyer in each, according to documents provided by the Department of Public Safety. "This type of action by a trooper, finding Driving Under the Influence tickets not guilty without a trial is improper," Williamson wrote. However, each ticket was certified by the same Orangeburg magistrate and showed a trial date of Oct. 29, 2007. "I went to court in all of those cases, just like thousands of cases," he said Friday, adding he doesn't remember the specifics. Hutto said many old cases were resolved last fall as part of efforts to get rid of court backlogs and that the investigation could be a simple paperwork misunderstanding. He said no official has asked him any questions about the tickets. The trooper, not Hutto, is under investigation, and the trooper remains on duty, Gaulden said. According to the tickets, the arrests involved 12 people and 17 charges between September 2003 and August 2006. In several of the 10 DUI cases, the suspects refused a blood-alcohol test. Other suspects showed a blood-alcohol level up to 0.16 percent, or twice the legal limit. None of the 12 suspects could be reached Friday. According to the tickets, most lived in Orangeburg County, though other home addresses included Montmorenci, Summerville and Hartsville. Scrawling on the bottom of 12 of the pages included comments such as "DUI — Not Guilty." One read, "Prior DUI. Should have been 2nd offense." Whether the trooper wrote the comments and why is unclear. Spokespeople won't comment on the open investigation. The investigation was made public as legislators debated a proposal to toughen the state's DUI penalties. Gov. Mark Sanford signed the measure into law in April.
|
Posted by Mayor on June 21, 2008 at 5:38 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Follow the money!
Posted by tomtomdumdum on June 21, 2008 at 10:11 a.m. (Suggest removal)
It sickens me to keep reading about how bad the highway patroll is, If a trooper wants to drop a charge on someone then who cares! Some people make a big deal out of helping someone. If a highway patrolman is reading this i want you to know i thank you for what you do and could care less if you want to drop a case on someone...
Posted by drp7773 on June 21, 2008 at 10:20 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Wow a Senator who is a dui lawyer can you say conflict, corruption, and the same trooper mmmm same o same o who you know buddy system....
Posted by Siri on June 21, 2008 at 2:30 p.m. (Suggest removal)
I got a ticket 1 time up in Rock Hill. When I drove up for the court date I was called 1st. Without saying anything charges were basically dismissed. I went shopping with the money. I didn't KNOW anybody and no one spoke up. Just like that it was over. Just my lucky day,
Posted by DontSpamMeBro on June 21, 2008 at 4:08 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Unfortunately, magistrates and municipal routinely do this for attorneys. DUI's are either continued multiple times, until the officer eventually misses a court date and the case is dismissed. Or the judge allows the defendant to cop a plea to reckless driving. State law specifically prohibits this, but it's done all the time, in all jurisdictions.
Posted by jammer on June 23, 2008 at 7:49 a.m. (Suggest removal)
*yawn*
all this comes to light because their budget is tight, more dui's or any tickets means more revenue... they could care less who did what and got away with it, they just want to make sure they don't lose the money from it
it's always about money, the fiscal year ends at the end of this month and all govt's are broke right now until then... so they've been scrambling around dissecting their budgets trying to figure out where the money went and where they can squeeze more from, if not for that you wouldn't hear a word of this
and who cares