Columbia, S.C.: A Day in Court Brings Hope for Justice in the Bowen Turner Case
In an emotionally charged session on Tuesday, a three-judge panel from the South Carolina Appellate Court heard appeals relating to the controversial case of Bowen Turner, a 22-year-old man from Orangeburg County who was accused of multiple sexual assaults as a teenager and has faced a slew of legal troubles since. The courtroom was filled with anticipation as the panel listened to arguments that could change the trajectory of Turner’s involvement in the legal system.
A Victim’s Perspective
Among those present was Chloe Bess, one of the three women who accused Turner of assault when they were all teenagers. With an air of cautiously optimistic determination, Bess spoke after the hearing, sharing her feelings about being heard in a courtroom that had once felt so unwelcoming. “The things that were said. It was nice to hear,” she expressed. “I just hope that the right decision is made. That way moving forward, this doesn’t happen to other victims.”
The appeals examined were multifaceted, addressing Bess’s rights as a victim and whether Turner should remain on the sex offender registry. Understanding the implications of this decision is vital, as it could have long-lasting effects on both Turner and potential future victims.
The Defense’s Argument
Turner’s defense attorney, Bob Dudek, voiced concerns about placing Turner on the registry, emphasizing how such a designation could hinder his ability to lead a normal life. Dudek explained, “A guy who was a teenage boy with an alcohol problem when this all occurred, certainly being placed on the sex offender registry would super costly to any chance, any chance of a normal life.”
In 2022, Turner accepted a plea deal that led to a conviction for assault and battery, resulting in probation. However, just one month later, reports indicate he was again in trouble, facing charges of disorderly conduct and threatening a public employee, which included a bizarre threat to a deputy regarding COVID-19 protocols.
The State’s Standpoint
On the flip side, the state maintained that the original circuit court judge had the authority to place Turner on the registry following his probation violations. State prosecutor Matthew Buchanan cited the plea deal as a key factor in justifying Turner’s registration. “The authority to put Mr. Turner on the sex offender registry came from that original plea,” he stated, adamant about the legal backing for the decision.
Rights of the Victim
A focal point of the second appeal revolved around Bess’s legal rights. Her attorneys argued that her rights were overlooked when she was not given a chance to address the court before Turner accepted his plea deal. Attorney Sarah Ford called for new procedures, stating, “Let’s make it a rule, a procedure, for our criminal court and our judges to say, ‘Yes, we will hear from victims at a point that’s meaningful for them.’”
Opposing counsel countered, pointing out that the appellate court may not possess the authority to create such a rule, claiming that it’s ultimately up to the legislature to define what it means for victims to be heard during court proceedings.
A Community’s Call for Change
As the proceedings wrapped up, Bess shared how today’s experiences left her feeling “supported and validated” for the first time in over five years. “To have someone up there in that position of power using her voice as well to ask the right questions and kind of get down to things, it was very, very refreshing,” she remarked, underscoring the significant impact this hearing had on her sense of justice.
With the panel taking its time to deliberate, the community cannot help but hold its breath. The outcome of the Turners cases could not only affect Turner and Bess but also has far-reaching implications for how victims are treated within the legal system moving forward.
As Turner remains in the custody of the state Department of Corrections, the bigger question looms—how will the court balance rehabilitation and accountability as they craft their decision in this highly scrutinized case?
