‘There Is No Law on It’: Audio Fuels S.C. Dispensary Trafficking Defense

Getting your Trinity Audio player ready...

by JENN WOOD

***

The legal and political battle surrounding Upstate dispensary prosecutions intensified this week as South Carolina House candidate Jesse Turner released an audio recording he claims undercuts the foundation of the case against him.

Turner — who was indicted last month alongside attorney Ashaley Boatwright in a statewide grand jury trafficking case — posted the recording to social media along with a sharply worded statement accusing law enforcement of targeting compliant businesses and “creating law through prosecution.”

The six-minute call, which Turner said he had initially planned to reserve for court, appears to capture a conversation between a dispensary operator and a Spartanburg-area law enforcement officer discussing hemp legality, testing protocols and enforcement standards.

***

***

At multiple points during the recording, the officer acknowledged the lack of clear statutory guidance — while simultaneously referencing guidance provided by the S.C. attorney general’s office and the S.C. State Law Enforcement Division (SLED).

“There is no law on it,” the officer stated during the exchange, before adding that enforcement decisions are based on the attorney general’s position.

That tension — between statutory law and enforcement policy — sits at the center of Turner’s defense.

Throughout the call, the speaker identified as the business operator repeatedly insisted the products were compliant under both federal and state law, citing the 0.3% Delta-9 THC threshold established by the 2018 Farm Bill and supported by third-party certificates of analysis.

The officer, however, pushed back — indicating authorities “follow the attorney general and SLED guidelines,” even while acknowledging that disputes over legality are ultimately being resolved “through court” or potential legislative action.

That exchange tracks closely with the broader legal landscape already shaping this case — one in which lawmakers have yet to draw a clear line, leaving courts and prosecutors to define it in real time.

***

TURNER FRAMES CASE AS POLITICAL — AND SYSTEMIC

In his accompanying statement, Turner framed the recording as evidence of what he described as retaliatory enforcement.

“When a business goes above and beyond to stay legal and compliant, yet still gets targeted, that’s not enforcement,” Turner wrote. “That’s retaliation.”

He further accused authorities of refusing to test products upon request while simultaneously pursuing enforcement actions — a claim that appears to echo a portion of the recorded exchange in which the officer stated testing was conducted only in connection with suspected criminal activity, not at a business owner’s request.

Turner further criticized what he termed the use of prosecutorial discretion to “create law,” arguing that policy positions from the attorney general’s office are being applied as de facto legal standards.

“The law of the State of South Carolina trumps any policy of any office in the executive branch,” he wrote.

He went further — warning such practices erode the separation of powers and likening the current enforcement environment to a “de facto police state.”

***

RELATED | DISPENSARY TRAFFICKING CASE EXPANDS

***

DEFENSE ATTORNEY: CASE REFLECTS “POLICY VS. LAW” PROBLEM

Turner’s attorney, Erika Baldwin, expanded on that argument in a statement provided to FITSNews — framing the case as part of a broader pattern in which enforcement decisions are driven by policy rather than clearly defined statute.

According to Baldwin, Turner took proactive steps following an earlier raid on his Anderson dispensary — directing counsel to notify law enforcement agencies in advance of new store openings and inviting officers to test products for compliance.

“The purpose of this letter was to inform the law enforcement agency that the dispensary would be opening and to invite officers to test products to ensure legal compliance,” Baldwin said.

She argued the audio recording reflects a deeper issue — one in which even law enforcement acknowledges the absence of clear statutory authority.

“What you hear in this phone call is a Spartanburg City Police Department officer effectively stating that no law exists regarding THCA products — only ‘opinions’ and ‘guidelines’ from the Attorney General’s Office — and that the only way to determine the law is through prosecution,” Baldwin said.

Baldwin also pointed to a portion of the call in which officers declined to conduct testing absent suspected criminal activity — despite being invited to do so — suggesting enforcement decisions were being made in anticipation of prosecution rather than based on verified violations.

***

***

“This is not enforcing the law,” she said. “This is going rogue.”

More broadly, Baldwin characterized the case as part of a recurring legal dynamic in South Carolina — citing past examples in which prosecutors relied on policy interpretations ahead of legislative clarity, including prior fentanyl trafficking prosecutions before the creation of a specific statute addressing the drug.

“This is exactly what is happening now,” she said. “Each jurisdiction in South Carolina relies on its own ‘policy’ to enforce what it believes should be the law.”

Baldwin argued that dynamic ultimately undermines the separation of powers — placing the responsibility for defining criminal conduct on prosecutors and courts rather than the legislature.

That public strategy now extends beyond the audio itself. Turner also released accompanying video footage which appears to question law enforcement tactics during the search of the dispensary — including captions suggesting officers disabled the store’s surveillance cameras.

“Police turn off the power to the cameras to ‘search’ the building. Interesting,” one caption reads. “What are they afraid of me catching on camera?”

Turner did not provide additional context for the footage, and it is not immediately clear under what circumstances the cameras were disabled.

***

RELATED | ‘DO I TAKE A GOOD MUGSHOT OR WHAT?’

***

CASE REMAINS ACTIVE AS LEGAL BATTLE TAKES SHAPE

Turner’s release of the audio injects a new layer into an already high-stakes prosecution — one that is increasingly evolving into a broader test of South Carolina’s hemp laws.

As previously reported, Turner and his co-defendants are facing multiple felony counts — including trafficking marijuana, conspiracy and possession with intent to distribute — tied to an investigation into an Anderson County dispensary. Prosecutors in the office of attorney general Alan Wilson will ultimately have to prove not only that the products exceeded legal THC thresholds, but that the defendants knowingly operated outside the bounds of the law.

The defense, by contrast, is framing the case in more fundamental terms — arguing those bounds were never clearly defined to begin with.

That argument aligns with the broader uncertainty surrounding hemp-derived THC products in South Carolina, where legislative efforts have repeatedly stalled — leaving enforcement agencies and courts to fill the gap. Even within the recorded call, the officer acknowledges that clarity may ultimately come through only two avenues: litigation or legislative action.

That reality is already playing out across the state.

What was once treated as a regulatory gray area is now being prosecuted as organized criminal conduct — with cases like this one poised to shape how the law is interpreted moving forward.

For Turner, the strategy is now clear: fight the case in court — and in public. For prosecutors, the challenge is equally clear: translate a contested and evolving regulatory framework into a criminal conviction that can withstand scrutiny.

And for South Carolina, the stakes extend well beyond a single defendant — potentially determining where hemp ends, and felony trafficking begins.

***

ABOUT THE AUTHOR …

As a private investigator turned journalist, Jenn Wood brings a unique skill set to FITSNews as its research director. Known for her meticulous sourcing and victim-centered approach, she helps shape the newsroom’s most complex investigative stories while producing the FITSFiles and Cheer Incorporated podcasts. Jenn lives in South Carolina with her family, where her work continues to spotlight truth, accountability, and justice.

***

SOUND OFF…

Got something you’d like to say in response to one of our articles? Or an issue you’d like to address proactively? We have an open microphone policy! Submit your letter to the editor (or guest column) via email HERE. Got a tip for a story? CLICK HERE. Got a technical question or a glitch to report? CLICK HERE.