Click here to purchase photos
Solicitor seeks review of attack case
by ANNA BROWN
3 years ago | 387 views | 0 0 comments | 3 3 recommendations | email to a friend | print
Staff Writer

16th Circuit Solicitor Kevin Brackett says he will ask the State Attorney General's Office to review the case of four people accused of attacking a TV news reporter covering a Union murder case.

Trina Vinson, Tousha Smith, Billie Joe Taylor and Ronald Harris all were charged with assault and battery on March 11 in the attack on WSPA-TV reporter Charmayne Brown. Ms. Smith also is accused of kicking cameraman, Ti Barnes. Mrs. Brown and Barnes were on Spring Street covering the murder of Tommy Howell, Ms. Vinson's father and Ms. Smith's grandfather. Shane Howell, who is Ms. Vinson's son and Ms. Smith's brother, is accused of murdering Tommy Howell at the home they shared on 200 Spring St.

The assault charge is a Union Municipal Court charge. All four defendants appeared in court on March 24. Brackett approached the bench and asked Municipal Judge Wade Hampton for a continuance until the state had time to review additional evidence.

Tuesday, Brackett said he has determined it would be a conflict of interest for him to become involved in the case because Shane Howell's family members are victims in the murder of Tommy Howell. Brackett said he is in the process of preparing a letter asking the attorney general's office to review the case to determine if any other charges should be filed against the defendants or if the charges against them should be upgraded.

"I have a conflict of interest because all those charged in the Charmayne Brown case are victims in the murder case," he said. "I can't prosecute them one day and then call them in to talk to them about the murder case the next day; they are potential witnesses in the murder case."

Brackett said he had asked for the continuance in the case at the request of Mrs. Brown's attorney, John Hawkins of Spartanburg and at the request of WSPA-TV's lawyer.

Brackett said if the case had been resolved in city court, no further charges against the four defendants could have been pursued because of the rules of double jeopardy- someone can't be tried twice on the same charge.

"The appropriate thing to do seemed to be to ask for a continuance," he said.
Comments
(0)
Comments-icon Post a Comment
No Comments Yet
report abuse...

Express yourself:
We're glad to give you a forum to air your point of view on issues important to this community. We just ask that you keep things civil. Leave out the personal attacks. Do not use offensive language, ethnic or racial slurs, or assail anyone's personal or religious beliefs. For anyone who can't be civil, we reserve the right to remove your material. We also reserve the right to ban users who violate our visitor's agreement.
Weather
Sponsored By:

Lottery
Sponsored By:

Stocks
Sponsored By:

featured businesses
Gasoline Prices
Sponsored By:

Recipes
Sponsored By: