| Edgefield
County's Documented #1
Source for Daily Online Information! |
|
Sections Opinion Dr. Skip Myers The INsider Dining Wandering Minds Classifieds Archives Crime Blotter Off The Wall Registered Sex Offenders for Edgefield County Video
& Audio Updates
Contact us E-mail the Editor Phone: 803-634-0964 day 803-279-5041 eve 803-279-8943 fax Mail to Edgefield Daily.com PO Box 972 Edgefield SC 29824 School System EC District Office School Board Strom Thurmond Fox Creek High School News Student News Public Offices Edgefield County Edgefield Johnston Trenton Legislative Contacts Public Forums To enter you must read our Terms of Service Pundits Neal Bortz Townhall.com National Review Online The New Republic Add your online favorite by e-mailing it to us here. News links Edgefield Advertiser Aiken Standard North Augusta Star The State Augusta Chronicle Atlanta Journal United Press Associated Press FOX News Reuters CNS News WorldNet Daily Newsmax Drudge Report GoogleNews Yahoo!News New York Times New York Post Los Angeles Times Washington Times Washington Post |
"Prosecutorial misconduct" cited as reason
to for mistrial in Jury Trial Judge Carpenter had no choice after warning the state several times before the trial to statements ruled out Edgefielddaily.com web posted September 27, 2005 EDGEFIELD – An Edgefield County Magistrate’s Court jury trial took another unforeseeable twist for the second time in eleven days. Monday at 10:00 a.m. The South Carolina Department of Natural Resource's Office, represented by Officer Larry Davis, had charged Dan Morgan Foreman with simple possession of marijuana for an arrest that dated back to July 5, 2003 in a jury trial. In the end it was DNR Officer Davis who managed to have the case tossed as a mistrial within minutes of it beginning. During pre-trail motions heard outside the presence of the jury Defense Attorney James Whittle of Aiken motioned that statements made by other boys present at the time of the arrest be stricken since none of them were present to testify. DNR Officer Davis argued that the statements were freely given by all parties involved and he planned to use them. Magistrate Brenda Carpenter ruled that unless the witnesses were present none of the statements were admissible and the state was to be careful not to mention or allude to them in testimony, several times, and under no circumstance. Once the six woman jury was seated and the trial began both parties involved gave opening statements which went off without a glitch. Then Officer Davis called himself to the stand and in just a few sentences managed to say everything Judge Carpenter had warned him about not saying during the trial. Mr. Whittle objected and wanted to “take up matters outside the presence of the jury”, while walking out of the court area and down the walkway between the seated observers in total disgust. Once the jury was removed Mr. Whittle stated that Judge Carpenter had plainly instructed the state not to make reference to any statement that had been ruled inadmissible. “He plainly stated twice” what Judge Carpenter had instructed the state not to do Mr. Whittle said. Mr. Whittle made a motion that the case be dismissed and that if it was pursued he would seek to have Mr. Davis cited for, “prosecutorial misconduct on behalf of the state.” Judge Carpenter admonished Officer Davis and granted the mistrial. After the jury was returned and dismissed she addressed the matter of the misconduct on the behalf of the state. Judge Carpenter stated she did not see that the misconduct charge was necessary against Officer Davis. Mr. Whittle stated, “for the record” that in order for the dismissal to be granted and a new trial sought he would have no choice but to file the charge and have it be made known in any further case the state sought against his client concerning the actions of Officer Davis. After the trial was over Edgefield Daily.com asked Mr. Foreman if he was pleased for the outcome to which he grinned and nodded yes as his parents, seated nearby, visibly agreed. Mr. Whittle said on behalf of his client, “we don’t make any statements to the press in an active case.” It is unclear at this time if the misconduct alleged against Officer Davis will be forwarded on or if the state intends to pursue retrying the case. “I wouldn’t count on it ever coming back up,” said one long time court observer. The state had physical evidence to produce in the case and lost that due to Officer Davis' refusal to stick to the evidence and not hearsay that had been ruled inadmissible. Edgefield Daily.com spoke with jurors after the trial. Two said they thought the defendant was a "nice young man" and that they felt the best thing happened even though neither knew the defendant. "It was just kids," said one. Another acknowledged knowing a member of the prosecution. The case was SCDNR vs Dan Foreman # 626055 filed 07/05/03. Mistrial granted by Magistrate Brenda Carpenter 09/26/05. Pending.
Return to Main Page
Contact us All original material is property of Edgefield Daily.com and cannot be reproduced or distributed without the expressed written permission of Edgefield Daily.com |
|
| Contact us: Editor |
|
|
 |