COLUMBIA, S.C. (AP) - A judge on Friday said he’ll need about a week to consider whether a case against House Speaker Bobby Harrell should be handled by a legislative panel instead of in the state’s courts.
For more than an hour, Circuit Judge Casey Manning heard a request by the powerful Charleston Republican’s attorneys, who say the allegations should be dealt with by the House Ethics Committee.
Since January, the State Grand Jury has been considering whether Harrell should be indicted. The case stems from allegations he used his influence to get a permit for his pharmaceutical business and improperly appointed his brother to a judicial candidate screening committee.
Ashley Landess of the South Carolina Policy Council, a libertarian think tank, brought the allegations to state Attorney General Alan Wilson. The Republican prosecutor forwarded the matter to the State Law Enforcement Division and is now in the process of presenting those findings, which remain secret, to the State Grand Jury.
Much of Friday’s hearing centered on Harrell’s arguments that his case should be considered akin to ethics allegations against Gov. Nikki Haley. In 2011, Republican activist John Rainey sued Haley, accusing the GOP governor of improper lobbying while working as a hospital fundraiser and for a highway engineering firm while representing Lexington in the state House.
Manning also heard that case, ruling the matter should be dealt with by House Ethics. Rainey lodged a parallel complaint with that panel, which ultimately cleared Haley of all allegations. He also lost an appeal to the state Supreme Court, which said legislators, not courts, should handle citizen complaints against elected representatives.
Harrell attorney Bart Daniel argued this case should be dealt with identically, noting that Wilson himself had discussed putting the issue before House Ethics in 2012 after reporter inquiries.
“Normally … you would send it to the House Ethics Committee if it involved a member of the House,” Daniel said.
In court, Wilson said the Rainey case was different because that matter was entirely civil and initiated by a private citizen. The Harrell case - while technically flagged to the attorney general’s attention by Landess, a private individual - has risen to a criminal level, with Wilson, SLED and the State Grand Jury all being involved.
“This is a criminal court, not a civil court,” Wilson said, noting that Landess’ initial letter to him alleged public corruption, not merely ethics violations - which Landess herself reiterated to reporters after the hearing.
Landess has also said House Ethics Chairman Kenny Bingham, R-Cayce, told her criminal allegations were best handled by the attorney general.
Three former attorneys general attended the hearing to support Wilson. Manning acknowledged that, whatever his decision, it will likely be appealed.
“Everybody’s trying to do the right thing,” the judge said.
After the hearing, Harrell briefly spoke with reporters but took no questions. In an emailed statement, he said Wilson’s actions were politically motivated.
“It’s a disappointing fact that had this matter been placed in the hands of a prosecutor free of political motivations from the start, this complaint would have been thoroughly investigated, properly dismissed and rightfully exposed as nothing more than baseless political mudslinging long ago,” Harrell said of Wilson, who is running for re-election this year.
___
Kinnard can be reached at https://twitter.com/MegKinnardAP
Please read our comment policy before commenting.