 |
After working a 12-hour day, Thomas Anderson went straight to the courtroom of the Eutawville Town Hall for his trial. The Holly Hill resident had received a ticket for having an elevated vehicle in the town of Eutawville and requested a jury trial.
“It was the day after Martin Luther King Day,” he recalled.
His was the only case being heard that day. It was 6 p.m.
Some months earlier, Anderson purchased a older-model Crown Victoria and decided to fix it up a bit. He painted it a bright blue color, one that once seen is hard to forget. It almost sparkles, had some flash to it. He added 22-inch tires. It was his leisure car. He didn’t drive it much, just once in a while.
Anderson says he was coming from his mother’s house in Eutawville when he was stopped and told his car was elevated too high.
“I’d been riding through the city for six months with no problem and suddenly the car is too high?” he said. “They gave me a ticket and I said I wanted a jury trial.”
On the day of the trial, Anderson lost, in more ways than one. The jury found him guilty of driving an elevated vehicle and the presiding judge, Warren C. “Carlton” Connor, sentenced him to three days in jail. The offense is a misdemeanor punishable by a $25-$50 fine, according to the South Carolina Code of Laws.
He was taken to jail immediately to serve the time.
“I never been in jail before, never been in trouble,” he said. “I had to go to jail and sleep on the floor.”
Ask certain members of the Eutawville community, and they will say this type of behavior is the norm.
Complaints cut across racial lines, with three white men coming forward with claims of being strip searched in Eutawville Town Hall even as the national NAACP is planning legal action.
Jean Davis-Capers, Eutawville NAACP branch president, says the organization has received numerous complaints of unfair treatment from the town’s police department.
“We have an attorney appointed from nationals,” Capers said. “What we are focusing on doing is trying to remove Connor from his seat and get certified police officers in Eutawville.”
The chief there denies the strip search claims and says he has an open-door policy. If anyone has an issue, they are welcome to come talk to him. Connor says Anderson’s sentence was a mistake but is no reflection on the fairness of the town’s judicial system.
Still, the allegations bring about questions of what is real in the town’s judicial system, what is rumor and what is commonplace.
Riding high
Anderson says he had never been in trouble and he’s not a trouble man. That all changed when he spent three days in jail for having his car raised too high – a misdemeanor punishable by a fine, no more.
“I got three days in jail and a $175 fine because I requested a jury trial,” Anderson said.
Anderson contends his wish to have a jury trial is what caused his jail time. He received the jury trial, and in the days leading up to the trial, received a letter notifying him of the jury selection. Anderson did not attend the jury strike. In that letter he was advised of the penalty he could get if convicted.
“Your date of trial has been set for 01-16-07 at 6 p.m. at the town hall in Eutawville,” the letter read. “Please be advised that if you do not appear for this date, the trial will continue in your absence and warrants may be signed for your arrest for failure to appear. Should you be found guilty by the jury, the judge will pass sentence at that time. The maximum sentence you could receive is a $200 fine or up to 30 days in jail or both. If you wish to change your mind and plead guilty in order to receive a reduced fine, this must be done before the jurors are called in because the town is required to pay any jurors who are subpoenaed. The officer will not agree to a reduced fine once the subpoenas are mailed.”
Anderson appeared before Connor and defended himself in the trial.
“I was the only person who had court that day,” he said. “They sentenced me to three days in jail and a $200 fine.”
According to court documents, signed by Connor, Anderson did not deny the violation in his defense, rather said he did not know about the law against elevated vehicles and only drove the vehicle in question occasionally, and “therefore did not think he should be charged.”
“He noted that there were no signs about the law at entry to town limits,” the trial documents state. “Prosecution was handled by the arresting officer. Prosecution noted that since this is a state statu(t)e, and not a town ordinance, signs are not required.”
The prosecuting officer was Jerry Reynolds, who presented testimony regarding the height of the vehicle. “Defense did not dispute the testimony,” the document states. In closing statements, Anderson again said he was not aware of the statute while Reynolds pointed out the allowable height of a vehicle and noted safety issues involved with an elevated vehicle, describing possible consequences of a collision between a standard vehicle and an elevated one.
The jury found Anderson guilty by unanimous verdict and was dismissed. Connor sentenced Anderson to 30 days in jail, suspended to three days and a $175 fine. On the sentencing sheet, in all caps, he wrote, “TOTAL OF 3 DAYS MUST BE SERVED.”
According to the South Carolina Code of Laws, a vehicle must not be elevated or lowered either in the front or back more that 6 inches by a modification, alteration, or change in the physical structure of the vehicle. “Any person violating the provisions of this section shall be deemed guilty of a misdemeanor and upon conviction shall be fined not less than twenty-five dollars nor more than fifty dollars,” according to the state statute.
Anderson served his days and sought legal advice. He said he was told the sentence wasn’t right. He wrote a letter of complaint to the Disciplinary Council of the South Carolina Supreme Court.
“I asked for a jury trial and the judge became very upset that I requested the same,” Anderson said in the letter. “The jury found me guilty. Judge Connor gave me 30 days in jail suspended to 3 days and payment of $175. I was given no right to appeal and was taken straight to jail and served 3 days. I ended up losing 2 days from work without pay. ... I do not contest being found guilty. I object to the judge sentencing me in excess of what the statute requires.”
Anderson and Attorney Glenn Walters did appeal the decision and the case was remanded and the sentence thrown out, but Anderson has already served three days in jail, days that he will never get back.
“Where else is this going?” he asked. “There’s money lost, time in jail – what about my pride?
“He don’t like that I didn’t do what they say. Those days are gone, at least I thought so. They said guilty and told the jurors all y’all can go. They probably don’t even know I went to jail. Three days in jail. I went to jail for that. They hurt me.
“They don’t care, seems to me. I had just worked 12 hours. ... You want to feel safe around town. It was harassment, I thought I’d fight it but it didn’t work out.”
It was a mistake
Ask 200 people who have had their case handled by municipal Judge Warren C. (Carlton) Connor, and he said 210 will tell you he’s been fair.
The suggestion that he didn’t want Anderson to have a jury trial is simply not true, he said. A jury trial is every man’s freedom. The sentence levied upon Anderson was due to his apathy, and his seemingly not having any intention of correcting the height of his elevated vehicle. That same sentence, he admits, was a mistake.
“Ninety percent of the traffic violations, the penalty is a certain fee, say $100 and assessment fees bring it up, and 30 days in jail or both.” Connor said. “Most all of the traffic violations are that way. When they found him guilty, I mistakenly sentenced him to $175 because in my mind as a judge, he had no earthly intention to correct the problem with the vehicle. I sentenced him to three days in Orangeburg and that is where the rub is. That is my mistake. This law doesn’t give any time. This has gone into appeal and Attorney (Glenn) Walters won the appeal. Not the guilty part, but based on the sentence, they threw it out. He still got his vehicle like that.
“This has been an ordeal based on my failure to bring up the exact law. I took for granted that it was the same as any violation.”
Connor said he has had to answer to two Supreme Court disciplinary inquiries on the matter. A decision has not been made as far as what will be done about giving Anderson the wrong sentence. But he said the sentence was not given with malicious intent. He explained that any time an infraction such as a taillight or parking light being out comes to his court, he’ll usually throw it out if it has been corrected. Elevated vehicles are dangerous, he said, and in accidents, can cause severe damage to the vehicles and passengers.
“He came to court without an attorney,” Connor said. “He asked for a jury trial. I had never met the man before the night of the trial. If he would have said he would correct the vehicle, the case probably would have been thrown out. The man showed no remorse, didn’t care, didn’t say ‘I will correct it’ or nothing.”
As a municipal judge, Connor said many of the thousands of cases never actually come across his bench. But they all have a right to, as people have the right to choose a jury trial. Judgeship in a municipality is hard, he said. Everybody wants to know the judge and talk about cases, but Connor said he knows nothing about a case until the court date.
“I had no connection with this case until it came before me,” Connor reiterated. “When he said I wanted not to have a case, that’s not true. The only problem was the sentence. Judges can’t make that mistake or there’ll be trouble. I’m paying the price for it, definitely paying the price for that.
“It was his apathy and his whole attitude. ... you had to be there. He would not even had to stand trial if he would have said I’ll correct this. He didn’t care and he wasn’t going to do anything. The 30 or both rule, it was a mistake made. I comply with the law with every sentencing.”
Connor said he knows the law and knows what sentences to give. But in Anderson’s case, he assumed the sentence would be the same as other traffic violations, and because of that mistake, he said he has learned a valuable lesson.
“I’m not the perfect judge, I know,” he said. “He’s still guilty and needs to take care of his problem he’s got (with the elevated vehicle). I’ll answer to the board I have to answer to.”
Then, in a show of remorse for the sentence he levied, Connor said, “He lost three days wages because of my mistake.”
National involvement
For some time, the Eutawville branch of the NAACP has received complaints, some verbal, some written and signed, of mistreatment in the town. Capers and the NAACP members did not take them lightly, sending them up the ladder of the branch system, all the way to nationals.
The Anderson case is what sparked the NAACP’s national involvement, and an attorney has been appointed to look into him wrongfully serving time in jail for the elevated vehicle. Peter Wilborn of Derfner, Altmann and Wilborn of Charleston has been appointed to the Eutawville case. He is not representing all complaints the NAACP has, just the one involving Anderson’s jail sentence.
“I was brought into this on the suggestion by the national NAACP, who I have represented before,” Wilborn said. He also represented the NAACP in the Biker Week cases in Myrtle Beach, where suits were brought to ensure those attending the black biker week receive the same treatment as the white biker week attendees. “I know the NAACP real well. It’s a wonderful organization and I am proud to do some work in South Carolina. The NAACP is based upon a branch system and its strength is based upon the director’s strength on the branch level. They (Eutawville) have a good leader of the branch who had the wherewithal to take it up to the national level.”
Incensed, Wilborn said Anderson’s serving jail time for an elevated vehicle is unjust.
“From what I understand about the case, here I have a situation in which a man was given a ticket, no different from a parking ticket, and was thrown in jail,” he said. “I think we as a society should be very conscious of discounting throwing people in jail. Throwing a person in jail for one minute unwarranted, it is an absolute abuse of justice. We do not give the judicial system the power to take away a person’s liberty. It is the mark of bad government.”
While the case was remanded, Wilborn said that doesn’t forgive what has happened. He questioned why the town is focusing so heavily on elevated vehicles.
“We have a law and allow pickup trucks to be sky high, people driving on wheels that should be on a monster truck. Mr. Anderson is a working-class African-American, not a kid, a solid working guy, throws tires on his car and gets arrested for it. If it is a violation of law, we can handle that. We can go through the Legislature. It’s not the judge’s job. Why is law enforcement enforcing this so strongly. There are a lot of laws on the books. Why is the police cracking down on a guy’s wheels. That’s suspect. It pales in comparison to this man having a jury trial, being found guilty and being thrown in jail.”
Having just received the case, Wilborn said he doesn’t know what direction or action they will take. But, he guaranteed, some sort of action will be taken.
“I don’t know what we’re going to do yet,” he said. “I can tell you we’re not going to let it go away, not going to allow it to be minimized. How do you minimize going to jail – do not pass go, do not collect $200 – it’s an unjust miscarriage of justice of the greatest sense that I’ve seen in my 12 years. This one is big time. This one sticks in your craw. I am a proud, absolutely beamingly proud lawyer to be representing the NAACP. This proves why. ... I don’t know what we’re doing yet, but we’re doing.”
Wilborn applauded Anderson for coming forward, having the courage to right a wrongdoing, and sticking with having justice served in his case.
“I think it takes courage that does not exist in the everyday person,” he said. “That’s what injustice relies on, that people aren’t going to call it.”
’I felt violated’
Three friends were accustomed to going on fishing trips just outside of Eutawville. They had traveled through the city with boat in tow on many occasions, usually four to five times a summer. But not anymore.
This past Good Friday, the men had the day off and were out fishing near Eutawville most of the day. It was dusk, about 8 p.m. – not quite night, not quite day – when the three were pulled over traveling on S.C. Highway 6 in Eutawville. They were told they were stopped because the taillight was out on the back of the boat they were pulling.
According to the men, a routine traffic stop turned into their being violated as the men claim Eutawville police officers took them into the town hall and strip searched them.
“They took us inside a room, it was a courtroom, and locked the door,” said Johnny Pippen, who was traveling that day with friends Ashley Fulmer and Justin Hooker. Handcuffed, Pippen said he and Fulmer were taken to the town hall together while Hooker remained at the scene with another officer. “They got Ashley and told him to sit down. Then they told me to take off my shirt. Take off my shoes. Take off my pants. And then my boxers and bend over. Ashley was sitting there waiting. They told me to put my clothes back on and did the same thing to him.” Hooker would later go through the same ordeal.
Police Chief Russell Parker says he’s been in Eutawville for 30 years, and he knows everybody and everybody knows him.
While not going into great detail about the allegations of either case, Parker denies that anyone from his department strip-searched anyone.
“We don’t strip-search people, ma’am,” he said. Connor also denied the likelihood of that having happened there.
However, Pippen, Fulmer and Hooker tell a different story. “We were pulled about a mile out of Eutawville,” said Pippen, who was driving. He went on to explain the details of that day. A Eutawville city police officer came to the driver’s side window and said he had a taillight out. He asked for Pippen’s license. He went back to the patrol car and came back saying he smelled marijuana.
“I said I don’t smoke marijuana,” Pippen said. “He said you’re lying.”
The three men were ordered out of the vehicle while officers searched the car for nearly two hours. They were then told that a marijuana stem was found in the truck and they were under arrest. The men said the officers did not show them the stem that was allegedly found. Handcuffed, Pippen and Fulmer were taken to the town hall while Hooker remained at the scene with another officer.
“They said they were going to search us further and if they didn’t find anything, we were free to go,” Pippen said.
“I didn’t know what to think,” Fulmer said.
The two say they were strip searched inside the courtroom of the town hall. Nothing was found. Then they were taken back to the scene, where Hooker, the other police officer and the truck and boat were. Pippen was ordered to drive his truck back to town hall. All three men were taken back inside the courtroom, where Hooker was strip searched.
According to the men’s account, the officers say they found a white seed in Hooker’s pocket and debated whether to take them to jail. Hooker insists it was not marijuana. In the end, Pippen was given a ticket for the taillight and Hooker received a ticket for simple possession of marijuana. Fulmer did not receive a ticket for anything. All three men were then allowed to leave.
“I drive everywhere I go to work. I can’t lose my license,” Pippen said he thought at the time. “The way they were talking, I was going to lose my license and my boat, everything. I felt intimidated.”
The three say they are telling their story because they feel the officers should have to pay some sort of penalty for what they did to them. They too have hired a lawyer and are planning to sue.
“I feel violated,” Pippen said. “Something has to be done. I have kids. I don’t want them to go through that. They may have kids that they teach to treat people like that too.”
“Do you trust cops any more?” Fulmer added. “Every time I see a badge, it’s like you just don’t know what the deal is. Makes you think officers can do whatever they want to, whenever they want to. I think they should have some type of penalty they have to pay.”
While the men in this case are white, there are also complaints from African-Americans. Capers said the NAACP has received at least two complaints from people saying they were strip searched.
“I wish I had thought out there and realized that what they were doing wasn’t right,” Pippen said.
In the coming weeks, Connor will hear another case involving an elevated vehicle in his courtroom. He said there won’t be a problem because, if the person is found guilty, he knows what sentence to give.
Wilborn and the NAACP have every intention of forging ahead with getting justice for Anderson.
QUOTABLES
“I asked for a jury trial and the judge became very upset that I requested the same. The jury found me guilty. Judge Connor gave me 30 days in jail suspended to three days and payment of $175. I was given no right to appeal and was taken straight to jail and served three days. I ended up losing two days from work without pay. ... I do not contest being found guilty. I object to the judge sentencing me in excess of what the statute requires.” – Thomas Anderson
“He came to court without an attorney. He asked for a jury trial. I had never met the man before the night of the trial. If he would have said he would correct the vehicle, the case probably would have been thrown out. The man showed no remorse, didn’t care, didn’t say ‘I will correct it’ or nothing.” – Eutawville Judge Warren C. “Carlton” Connor
“They took us inside a room, it was a courtroom, and locked the door. They got Ashley and told him to sit down. Then they told me to take off my shirt. Take off my shoes. Take off my pants. And then my boxers and bend over. Ashley was sitting there waiting. They told me to put my clothes back on and did the same thing to him.” – Johnny Pippen
“We don’t strip search people, ma’am.” – Police Chief Russell Parker
T&D Special Assignments Writer Charlene Slaughter can be reached at cslaughter@ timesanddemocrat.com and 803-533-5529. Discuss this and other stories online at www.TheTandD.com