Photos
Blog
NewslettersCandidate has arrest record, case unresolved
Thu, 2008-10-09 21:38 — Anonymous
House District 124 candidate Jim Brown held a press conference Thursday to discuss his arrest stemming from an argument during a visit to Lady's Island Elementary School nearly two years ago. Read the story here.
- Login to post comments
- 1404 reads
So they kind of gloss over the fact that the principal Terry Bennett and the school district had to settle a sexual harassment lawsuit. Shouldn't that be the story?
How many lawsuits have the school district settled that we never find out about? And why is this coming out now?
Well, this is coming out now to discredit the candidate running against Shannon Erickson. Neither of the Brown's appear to have been convicted so I guess I'll remind everybody that these are alleged acts that neither Brown has been convicted of. It is interesting that all of the alleged charges surround the same district that apparently Mrs. Brown sued in a sexual harrassment suit (funny that never made the paper) presumably represented by her husband, an attorney, who obviously is properly motivated to protect and defend his own family.
His own behavior seems to be discrediting his reputation. Didn't Brown call a press conference for this? So if the BG shows up they automatically favor his opponent?
and the BG reported the beer to minors charges also. Didn't Publix have videotape of that?
Stupid is as stupid does.
At the risk of sounding like UCB, I went to the Public Case Index for Beaufort County, and found that Shannon Brown's charges for providing alcohol to minors and contributing to the delinquency of a minor are STILL PENDING. I don't think I like or trust this guy, or his family. Definitely will not be voting for him.
I know Lynn Patterson and Jim Brown did say those things to her. We sure do not need someone like him running for an office in our state.
I know Lynn Patterson too and she is a smug and rude lady glad to hear she isn't at LIES anymore hope she isn't at any of the schools anything Mr. Brown said to her was probably true I hope Brown wins. And plus his wife won't be in office he will
The link below seems more focused on the issues between Brown and Bennett. The print article seemed focused on Brown's wife. Is there some connection between the School District and the editorial staff? Is a member of the editorial staff's family employed by the school district? Should that have been revealed in the article?
http://www.beaufortgazette.com/developing_stories/story/580138.html
This dude probably got arrested based on the statements of one person alone made in some initial recorder's court proceeding. The DA's office fuddles around for many months, even years, before they place the case on the "dead docket" because there's really no substance from which to proceed. However, at this point in time the defendant effectively becomes a defendant for life. It's a crock of s*** how the system works at times. Unless convicted, it is not valid to hold an arrest record against anybody.....PERIOD.
This article sure has a different spin on the story than the local one.
Statehouse candidate from Beaufort explains 2007 arrest
Associated Press
Friday, October 10, 2008
BEAUFORT — A candidate for the South Carolina House says his arrest nearly two years ago for disturbing a school was a matter of retaliation.
Jim Brown said his arrest in January 2007 followed an argument a month earlier with administrators at Lady's Island Elementary School. The attorney and Democratic candidate had three children in the Beaufort County school then, and his wife had taught Spanish there.
Brown told reporters Thursday the school's principal pushed for his arrest because his wife had filed a sexual harassment lawsuit against the principal. The case was settled out of court, and the lawsuit was dismissed.
The Beaufort Gazette reports the misdemeanor charge against Brown remains unresolved.
Brown is running against incumbent Republican Rep. Shannon Erickson.
http://www.charleston.net/news/2008/oct/10/statehouse_candidate_beaufort_explains_2007_arrest/
Oh...whatever..people always got something to say....I say " GO JIM BROWN GO" I WILL VOTE FOR YOU...AND I WILL TELL ALL OF MY FAMILY AND FRIENDS TO DO SO ALSO....THIS GUY ROCKS...KEEP IT UP JIM...
There was a bunch of stuff that has been pulled down? I told my buddy, the Undertaker, to go look at it and it has disappeared.
There was something about some beer parties and other stuff going on at the Ericksons. Do we only pull down stuff about Republicans the paper likes?
I can put my WWF outfit on and challenge someone to a MONDAY NIGHT SMACKDOWN if I have to. Free popcorn and ringside seats for all.
You call it censoring. I call it trying to maintain some semblance of civility on this site, and the civility is sorely lacking right now.
Three users were banned over the weekend for disgusting personal attacks and over-the-top inappropriate language. I'm not going to debate this point, but know that if you start spreading unsubstantiated rumors and attacking individuals, your post is going to be deleted and you're going to be banned.
Comment on the issues, but do it civilly. We came very close to shutting down these blogs completely about two weeks ago, and it remains an option for the future. Most of you are grownups. Start acting like it.
- Steve Blust, Executive Editor
Not Expecting the BG it police their own Blog is just stupid, whay is worse is that we don't know how to communicate without personal attacks or bad language. I know I went through a OJT period and learned (I hope). The blogger that get on here and use it to push personal or business issues should be banned, the people who taunt and incur the wrath of other just to avoid discussing the merits of an issue should be booted as well. I may not always agree with the rule but as long as it is enforced consistently it is not our business to agree or disagree. Keep patrolling the Blogs !
You call it censoring. I call it trying to maintain some semblance of civility on this site, and the civility is sorely lacking right now.
Three users were banned over the weekend for disgusting personal attacks and over-the-top inappropriate language. I'm not going to debate this point, but know that if you start spreading unsubstantiated rumors and attacking individuals, your post is going to be deleted and you're going to be banned.
Comment on the issues, but do it civilly. We came very close to shutting down these blogs completely about two weeks ago, and it remains an option for the future. Most of you are grownups. Start acting like it.
So once again you decide to impose standards when you see fit. You allow openly racist attacks on Obama to go on day in and day out, but you are ok with that.
You allow all kinds of garbage to go up, but when it cuts to the quick about one of your pet projects (fronting for say local candidates) you act like a spoiled brat and whip out the eraser.
You posted some garbage about a fine man in this community, Jim Brown. People who had knowledge of the actions of the principal that led to the event you choose to report on weighed in with other facts. Did not quite fit your story line so you took them down. Apparently the same principal has also done all kinds of bizarre things but you will not allow those to be posted and I am certain you will not be reporting on them.
So call it what you want but in the real world it is called censorship and you would be the person doing the censoring. Congratulations!
By your own standard of "attacking individuals" you and the paper should be banned. What did the cheap shot at Jim Brown have to do with his candidacy.
Pot. Kettle. Black.
Disagreeing with a political candidate is not racist just because the candidate is black, purple, pink, or paisley.
And what you apparently do not understand about a blog is the fact it is privately owned. The owner may delete ANY post he so desires, regardless of ANYone's opinion of it. The owner may ban ANYone he/she desires. And the owner may be as conservative, liberal, socialistic, communistic, gay, straight, racist, racially balanced, American, anti-American, feministic, chauvinistic, or any other way he/she so desires.
And you, my friend, may leave at any time for whatever reason or for no reason without repercussion.
Now, isn't that fair? And if you think it's not fair, it does not matter. That's the way it is.
You posted some garbage about a fine man in this community, Jim Brown. People who had knowledge of the actions of the principal that led to the event you choose to report on weighed in with other facts. Did not quite fit your story line so you took them down.
The only thing the Gazette posted on this was the story from a press conference that Jim Brown called. You conveniently neglected to mention that little point.
And political party affiliation has nothing to do with any of this. The Gazette has been skewered repeatedly on this site for, in the eyes of some posters, going out of its way to praise Democratic candidates and put down Republicans. Now we're accused of favoring the Republican and going after the Democrat. Both claims are incorrect.
Judging from your first post, you seem to want unfiltered speech on this site, where anyone can say anything about anyone. That's not going to happen. There are plenty of sites out there that tolerate and even encourage that behavior. I would recommend that you head there.
I'm through responding to anything on this thread.
You posted some garbage about a fine man in this community, Jim Brown. People who had knowledge of the actions of the principal that led to the event you choose to report on weighed in with other facts. Did not quite fit your story line so you took them down.
I'm through responding to anything on this thread.
Let me get this straight. You wield absolute censorship, not as a private individual, but as a member of the esteemed fourth estate.
When you are challenged on your tyrannical hand with the delete button your well reasoned response is I'm through.
Is that same level of fairness that you just exhibited applied to say other areas of the paper? That cool calm reasoned approach makes one really trust your impartial approach to reporting the news. Obviously by deleting posts related to the principal in question you want to dictate the news and censor those with any additional information.
A half a loaf is better than none only applies to a fine French bread, not reporting of the facts.
And why did Jim Brown call the press conference? There was no pressure from Shannon Erickson or her republican cronies dishing out dirt was there. You must think we fell off the turnip truck last night.
And as to the other censorship champions here I might remind you that freedom of the press is a two way street. They are granted great freedom but must also exercise great responsibility.
So how do you know all these other stories you have censored and deleted here are not factual? Did you investigate them or just decide high atop your censorship tower that you rest comfortably in that they must go?
And of course you failed to address the rampant racist and homophobic rhetoric that is posted to this site on a daily basis. Do you care to use your all powerful delete button to those vile posts or are you okay with them here. If you would like examples just scroll around and you will find them.
As Mr. Morley so aptly noted - "You have not converted a man because you have silenced him."
my first thought after reading this is Wow, who got your panties in a wad?? I don't post much, very rarely because some of the folks on here are just totally out there, and why argue with someone you can't see face to face, that's just wierd to me. But really now. I have no caring one way or the other on this issue but seriously? Seriously, this is the Beaufort Gazette, with a small staff, who was called by a candidate to a press conference and they reported on it. Somewhere else on here Mr Kidd has stated that they are looking into other leads on this story. You are all upset because as far as you are concerned the BG is after your candidate and the Erickson group caused this to happen. Maybe they did maybe they didn't. Maybe your guy decided that it might come up and wanted to clear the air, who knows, but this nasty attitude you are showing about all of this makes me wonder if I would want to vote for your guy, if he has people like you backing him, how good of a person could he really be?? This is exactly why I hate politics, who can say or imply the worst about someone else is the winner. And if your guy looks bad make someone else look worse and maybe your guy will win!! WooHoo can't wait till November 4th is over, maybe life will get nicer again.