SC Supreme Court Race Sees A …
S.C. Supreme Court nominee John Few has been accused of committing “serial infidelity” and allegedly coercing at least one woman into having “pressured sex” with him, according to a woman who detailed her allegations to FITS earlier today.
Asked if “pressured sex” meant rape, the woman invited readers to “draw their own conclusions.”
The sensational accusations – which were first hinted at earlier today on the FITS comment section – were categorically denied by Few’s supporters in the S.C. General Assembly, who immediately blamed the rumors on supporters of Chief Appellate Judge Kaye Hearn.
“This is the one of the greatest smears in the history of Palmetto politics,” one Few supporter told FITS. “It is despicable, disgusting and it shows the desperation of the Hearn campaign.”
The Few supporter added that similar allegations have been circulating within the legislature “for a few weeks now” and have actually helped generate votes for Few given the perception that Hearn supporters are playing “dirty pool.”
One of Hearn’s top legislative supporters vigorously denied that her forces had anything to do with the leak, and claimed that the Few campaign was responsible for promoting the allegations.
“(Few’s supporters) are the desperate ones, they are the ones losing the race,” the lawmaker said. “This stunt originated in their camp.”
The woman – who was granted the opportunity to speak to FITS anonymously – was able to conclusively establish proximity to Few on multiple occasions, however she admitted she did not have any physical evidence to support her accusation.
In fact, one of the alleged “victims” referred to us by the woman declined to support her version of events – even when we also offered her the opportunity to speak anonymously.
However, multiple sources have confirmed to FITS that Few and the first woman did have some sort of a relationship, and that the two of them were seen leaving a party together in Columbia as recently as two months ago.
The woman – who did not file an incident report, press charges or report Few’s alleged conduct – told us that she was unaffiliated with either of the campaigns, but did confess that she was “asked to call” us with her story.
Lawmakers will vote on the next Supreme Court Justice two weeks from today.
Obviously, the vote is stirring some strong emotions … and some serious accusations.
We will continue to follow them, obviously …
Comments
By beagle on April 29th, 2009 at 2:13 pm
HOW DARE YOU FITS!!! THIS IS HEARN PROPOGANDA!!! YOU BETTER HAVE SOME GOOD LAWYERS!!!
By fitsnews on April 29th, 2009 at 2:26 pm
“Beagle,”
As it so happens, we do have good lawyers.
-FITS
By the DON on April 29th, 2009 at 2:38 pm
This is pretty pathetic. We knew you threw low blows, but this is just sad. You should be ashamed of yourself. You should also be sued.
By hammerheadSC on April 29th, 2009 at 2:39 pm
beagle, your barking up the wrong tree
By derrick fronterville on April 29th, 2009 at 3:01 pm
Sic, Who needs the Enquirer, Globe and Sun when we’ve got you?.
By jurisprudence on April 29th, 2009 at 3:20 pm
Fits will not get sued because — as is its standard — the article was crafted to avoid direct accusations. The parlor game is now why was this article written? Fits cost Hearn her last shot at the Court, I suspect this is more of the same.
By Attorneys for Hearn on April 29th, 2009 at 4:08 pm
Fits: Interesting how you can take a story that has nothing to do with Judge Hearn and still use it to make disparaging remarks about her. This story is all Fits. It has nothing to do with Judge Hearn. You should leave her name out of it.
By whynot ask on April 29th, 2009 at 4:24 pm
Why not ask whether Few was sleeping with his law clerk while he was married and left his wife for her, then got dumped by her and went crawling back to momma …
By Fashizzle on April 29th, 2009 at 4:43 pm
So FITS has the power to influence judicial elections now? Jeez…last I heard you critics were arguing no one took this site seriously. Thanks for clearing up the confusion.
By Who cares if it's true... on April 29th, 2009 at 4:49 pm
Fits- your Missing the best part of this story…was she hot?
By fitsnews on April 29th, 2009 at 5:20 pm
All-
A couple things – as we stated on an earlier post, our founding editor has no interest in the Supreme Court race other than watching the accusations fly.
As for this post, some fairly serious allegations have been leveled at Judge Few. Based on the information provided, we made an editorial decision to present those to our readers in the context they were made – and the context in which the legislators who will ultimately decide this contest chose to view them.
Is one side playing us against the other? We don’t know and we don’t care.
Will the leveling of the allegations help one side or the other? Again, we don’t know and we don’t care.
Like we said, we don’t have a dog in this fight.
What we do know is that the Few people are convinced the Hearn people are behind it and the Hearn people are convinced it’s a Few stunt – so we can’t really see how the audience of 170 shifted any.
-FITS
By Not Sayin', Just Sayin' on April 29th, 2009 at 6:07 pm
Few’s a drunken skirt-chaser, as everyone knows. He had an affair with a law clerk that contributed to the collapse of his marriage, but the affair was one of many. I realize this doesn’t make him a rapist, but it does raise questions about his character (do we want Justice Bill Clinton?) But this isn’t news, because Few’s personal conduct was an issue in his 2007 screening for the supreme court, when he was not nominated:
“Q. Thank you. The final question is a two-part question. One of the negative bench and bar surveys also raise the concern that you are immature and have a reputation for socializing and partying, was the specific word used in the bench and bar, in your community. Do you feel that these are legitimate concerns?
A. Well, I will respond in two ways. First, by saying that, any concern that’s raised about a judge is a legitimate concern. And whether it is truly based on a correct perception of reality by that complainant or not, it’s something that the judge should consider very strongly and try to improve from. I do not believe that I am immature. I recognize, of course, that I am young compared to most of my peers. I’m one of the youngest members of the Circuit bench and I’ve been serving almost seven years, so I was certainly the youngest member when I started. I have always tried to be conscious of that and recognize that my being young compared to my peers is a factor that I should consider.
I have tried to take my time. I’ve tried to focus on not making rash decisions and not allowing myself to get heated on the bench. When I feel that way, I try to get off the bench to cool down. So I do not feel that I am immature and I don’t think that is my reputation. I think if you look at my reputation around the state, it is that I am not at all immature. Now, regarding the question of socializing, and I’ve heard the word partying mentioned; I’m not sure if that was the word you used. Recognizing that it is a legitimate concern, because it is brought up and it is something that I need to keep in mind as I move forward into the future, I don’t think that that is my reputation. I am concerned about this for two reasons. First of all, I’m concerned about it because it affects my reputation as a judge. I am particularly concerned about what was said, though, because it affects my reputation as a man, as a father, as a son, as a family member, and that is a reputation that I think I enjoy around my community and around the state as being excellent and I don’t want anything to affect that. If I have been perceived by someone as socializing in an inappropriate way, then that’s something that I will address. And I will address it primarily because it’s important to me as a man, and secondarily because, but not minimizing that, but because it is it important to me as a judge.
Q. The second part of the question deals with this socializing issue as well. How do you handle the situation in the courtroom when an attorney or a litigant appearing before you was one with whom you had previously had a social relationship?
A. Do you mean a relationship that is closer than just a couple of friends?
Q. That’s right.
A. I would recuse myself.
Q. Thank you.”
Source: http://intranet.scstatehouse.gov/judicialmeritpage/JudScreeningWebPage.html
Click on: Transcript of Public Hearings – April 18, 2006
Excerpt appears on pages 143-44
By HearEvilSeeEvilSpeakEvil on April 29th, 2009 at 6:27 pm
So Hearn’s husband is a legislator? Uhh, where is the ethics in that!!! I heard several Legislators saying yesterday, “your going to vote against one of our own?” Since when are those credentials for sitting on the bench? The arrogance of this place makes me want to puke.
By Mary on April 29th, 2009 at 7:01 pm
Will, I have no idea who Hearn is but I can tell you that what you have said about Few is true according to some of my fellow colleagues. I am a legal secretary in Greenville, and I can tell you that at least three of my counterparts at other firms have said that Judge Few has either made inappropriate advances at them or has actually engaged in fellacio and/or intercourse with them.
By clemsun on April 29th, 2009 at 9:18 pm
Few may get around. I don’t know. But I do know that he’s a bully. He’s a jerk, and that’s not what we need on any bench.
By crush on April 29th, 2009 at 10:08 pm
Mary,
Fellacio? New one for me.
By Bob on April 29th, 2009 at 10:17 pm
Few’s never had an affair with a law clerk…only 3 of them were female and he doesn’t have enough game to pull that off anyway.
By What Will Folks is thinking right now.... on April 29th, 2009 at 10:39 pm
My plan works again. Let me tell y’all how this plays out. I want Bruce Williams to be the next Chief Judge of the Court of Appeals (well since I couldn’t get him on the Supreme Court). My backers (SCRG, Club for Growth, SCBIPEC, etc.) know Hearn is going to win this election. And, they know that I want Bruce to be the next Chief Judge of the Court of Appeal after Hearn. Also, they know that Few will be Bruce’s competition for that seat. So what do my backers do? They pay me to fabricate and write this post and cut the legs out from under a Few for Chief Judge campaign next election. And, if it embarrasses Hearn? Just an added bonus. I get what I want.
By AWWW on April 29th, 2009 at 11:31 pm
crush – Mary might be spelling challenged, but its not surprising that someone correcting the grammar of fellow posters on a blog commentary doesn’t know what fellatio is.
By It's over now on April 30th, 2009 at 10:41 am
Few withdrew and so did Jefferson.
By Not Sayin', Just Sayin' on April 30th, 2009 at 10:51 am
Hearn’s opponents dropped out.
By Ben on April 30th, 2009 at 12:06 pm
Can someone give me the initials of the law clerk? I think I have an idea on who it is.