I write this letter in response to the article written June 11 in The Times and Democrat by reporter Richard Walker. I take issue with the inaccuracies printed in reference to the exoneration of my client, former Santee Police Chief Kenneth McCaster.

You would have thought the bench trial on these charges meant closure for this unjustly accused man. However, after reading the article in the paper, it leaves a reader to believe that something improper was done with the charges against my client.

When Mr. McCaster or anyone comes into court, they are presumed to be innocent and surrounded by a cloak of innocence. The burden is upon the prosecution to prove every element of the charges against the defendant beyond a reasonable doubt.

I appeared in court on June 10 with Mr. McCaster before Judge John Cecil Moore for a bench trial on charges of DUI 1st, public disorderly conduct, improper parking and open container. General Counsel Charles H. Sheppard represented the state troopers.

Before the trial started, Attorney Sheppard moved to dismiss the charges of improper parking and public disorderly conduct. Since Attorney Sheppard was the prosecutor for the state, he had every right to do just that.

Moreover, since Attorney Sheppard was prosecuting the case for the state troopers, he had the legal obligation to put forth sufficient evidence to convince the judge of all the elements of the DUI and open container charges. Additionally, the two elements of open container are that, you cannot have an open container of beer or wine in a vehicle on a public highway with an alcohol content of one-half of 1 percent or more by volume. The prosecutor failed to present any evidence of the latter to the court.

Furthermore, the elements of DUI are that a person cannot drive a motor vehicle in South Carolina while his faculties to drive are materially and appreciably impaired. It was incumbent upon the prosecutor alone to put forth evidence that Mr. McCaster was indeed the driver of the vehicle and that his faculties to drive were materially and appreciably impaired. He failed to put forth any evidence to show that Mr. McCaster was the driver of the said vehicle. Our Supreme Court has held pursuant to the case of State vs. Graves that the vehicle must be in motion to constitute driving. Additionally, there was never any testimony or evidence by anyone that my client had consumed any alcohol whatsoever. The only testimony put forth was that he was asleep at the wheel and confused when he was awakened.

When the prosecuting attorney rested the state’s case, I made a motion before the court for a directed verdict of not guilty. Since, the state failed to present the Corpus Delecti “elements” of the two aforementioned charges, the judge granted those motions as a matter of law. He did that because he followed the law in this case. Subsequently, the verdicts of not guilty were reflected as the proper outcome of this trial.

The paper printed, “Magistrate drops case against former Santee police chief.” The article gives the impression that some favoritism was shown. Quite the contrary, Mr. McCaster was prosecuted more vigorously than the average person would have been on any given day.

This was demonstrated by the fact that Attorney Sheppard represented the state troopers. The troopers appear in court every day without legal representation and present their own cases and quite frankly do a superb job.

Mr. McCaster received his day in court and the prosecutor for the state had every opportunity to prepare and present his case. He presented the evidence to best of his ability, the troopers performed their duties to best of their abilities, I defended my client to best of my ability and the judge certainly did what the law and evidence mandated that he do. Based upon the lack of evidence presented by the prosecutor, the judge directed verdicts of not guilty on both charges.

Additionally, the tape recordings of this proceeding are a matter of public record and may be reviewed upon request by anyone pursuant to the Freedom of Information Act.

My client was exonerated of all charges on June 10 and the headlines and following print should have reflected the directed verdicts of not guilty. Instead of, “Magistrate drops case against former Santee police chief.” It drew a lot of attention and created a cloud of suspicion with the language used by The Times and Democrat that was very inaccurate and unjust.

The state’s attorney presented the true evidence at trial and the verdict spoke the truth, not guilty.

Mr. Editor, would you please set the record straight!

Gerald J. Davis is an attorney in Orangeburg.

You must be logged in to comment.