The South Carolina Department of Public Security (SCDPS) has completed an internal investigation into allegations of preferential treatment by a former SC Highway Patrol (SCHP) leader. The inquiry about the retired captain Stacy Craven – who retired from SCHP a month ago under a cloud of scandal – was led by the SCDPS professional liability office, a division that has been criticized in the past for its limited interpretation of the facts and selective dispensation from justice.
Hopefully, that will change following the recently announced resignation of the SCDPS director with scarring scandals Leroy Smith.
In the meantime, however, the SCDPS seems content to continue taking care of itself … and, as a result, police “leaders” in this agency are likely to continue to take care of wealthy and powerful individuals in Palmetto State when they conflict with the law. .
This is certainly what seems to have happened in Craven’s case, anyway …
In an extensive report obtained by this media, SCDPS investigators supported an allegation against the former SCHP leader regarding the preferential treatment scandal – which involved a prominent defender of the Clemson University. However, it decided not to support two additional claims.
First, the SCDPS determined that Craven “improperly intervened” in the process of a high-profile suspect five years ago – but the agency did not conclude that he did so in order to “obtain some kind of personal gain or benefit”. The agency also rebuked the suggestion that Craven “was a liar” with agents from the SC State Law Enforcement Division (SLED) while conducting a criminal investigation into the scandal earlier this year.
In fact, the SCDPS report repeatedly questions SLED’s assessment of Craven – one of several witnesses who appears to have been hit by selective amnesia regarding his memories of what happened.
To recap: around 6:05 pm EDT on November 29, 2014 – after Clemson’s 35-17 win over rival South Carolina in football – Stanley Roy Riggins Charlotte, NC (the brother of the former Clemson board member David P. Riggins) was held by SCHP throw cable Michael Taylor for allegedly driving under the influence of alcohol (DUI) and committing an alcohol law violation on Highway SC 93 on Centennial Boulevard in Clemson, SC
FITSNews reported exclusively on this incident in May, and followed up in July with a report that Craven was in fact the focus of the investigation.
(Click to view)
(Via: SCDPS)
According to an incident report obtained by this media, Riggins was arrested on suspicion of DUI “due to a fight that occurred after the Clemson / Carolina football game”.
“Riggins … was irritated (sic) by a pedestrian who, he says, did not move,” noted the report. “He claims that he then stopped his Land Rover, jumped and confronted him.”
During the confrontation, Riggins claimed to have been “thrown to the ground” before the pedestrian fled the scene.
After allegedly failing a field sobriety test, Riggins was taken into custody by Taylor and transported to the Pickens County, SC detention center – where the SCHP incident report indicated that he was offered (and allegedly declined) a breathalyzer exam.
Is that what really happened?
According to the SLED report, Craven intervened in the breathalyzer exam – interrupting it how it was being administered and take personal custody of Riggins. As a result, Riggins – who was allegedly described by Craven as “one of the main contributors to Clemson University” – was never fined at Pickens’ detention center and there was (and is) no record of his arrest.
Craven literally entered prison, rescued the influential businessman, escorted him out of the building and handed him over to “family members”. In addition, as Riggins was never fined, the automatic suspension of the driver’s license for six months, due to the subject’s refusal to undergo a breathalyzer exam, did not apply to him. The North Carolina Department of Transportation’s motor vehicle division (NCDOT) was never notified of Riggins’ arrest.
In addition to intervening in Riggins’ arrest, Craven was also instrumental in dropping the DUI charge against him – by contacting an assistant attorney at the SC’s thirteenth circuit attorney’s office Walt Wilkins and asked if the charge could be reduced to an open container violation. On May 8, 2017, Riggins pleaded guilty to this open container charge and paid a $ 257.50 fine.
According to Riggins, he was informed that pleading guilty to the open container charge was necessary to avoid the appearance that he had escaped “unpunished”.
(Click to view)
(Via: Getty Images)
In addition, Craven appears to have intervened on behalf of Riggins with the Pickens County magistrate JM Gillespie – who told several investigative agencies that he did not speak to Craven about the matter. Cell phone records debunked Gillespie’s claim, however, indicating that Craven called the judge the night Riggins was arrested.
Craven also made several calls on the night in question to his former supervisor, SCHP major Michael Warren – a “personal friend” of the Riggins family. The cell phone records revealed that Warren was in contact with the Riggins’ family the night of the arrest, but he denied having given Craven “any instructions to release (Riggins) from custody”.
Warren resigned in May, after three decades with the patrol.
According to him, Riggins had a heart problem and asked about the arrest because of concern for his health.
Despite what we believe to be overwhelming evidence of misconduct in office on the part of Craven (and perhaps others at SCHP), the eleventh lawyer on the SC circuit Rick Hubbard refused to sue. However, Hubbard did conclude that Craven provided responses to SLED investigators that were “suspicious and, in some cases, proven to be false”.
The media criticized Hubbard in no uncertain terms for his decision.
“Craven’s corruption in connection with this case was clearly documented by a report from the Office of the Inspector General of SC (SCOIG), and later documented by a report from SLED,” we note. “Consequently, Hubbard’s claim that he did not think he could make a charge of misconduct in the office or obstruction of justice against Craven is laughable.”
Stay tuned … this news medium has received information related to rumors of a “career opportunity” for Craven that may shed additional light on this situation in the coming months.
Until then, we will continue to insist that those who have the task of enforcing our laws – and dispensing justice to those who violate them – behave in a manner consistent with the law’s insistence on equal protection.
-FITSNews
*****
WANT TO TURN OFF THE SOUND?
Is there anything you would like to say in response to one of our stories? Feel free to send your own letter to the editor (or guest column) by email HERE. Do you have a tip for us? CLICK HERE. Have a technical question or a failure to report? CLICK HERE. Do you want to support what we are doing? SUBSCRIBE HERE.
Flag: SCDPS