How did SC State House probe turn into fight among prosecutors?

South Carolina Attorney General Alan Wilson last week fired the special prosecutor he had asked to investigate possible criminal wrongdoing in the General Assembly.

David Pascoe is now asking the state Supreme Court to rule on whether Wilson’s firing of him is legal, since Wilson had recused himself from the case, citing potential conflicts of interest.

Here are some key questions on the conflict’s details.

How did the case get to this point?

Wilson asked the State Law Enforcement Division to begin an investigation in February 2013 based on a complaint filed by Ashley Landess, head of the small-government advocacy group S.C. Policy Council. Landess and other watchdogs raised questions that S.C. House Speaker Bobby Harrell, R-Charleston, was abusing his power and misusing campaign contributions.

Harrell fought the investigation – at first in secret – by challenging Wilson’s objectivity. Wilson bowed out of the case, though he said the allegations were “baseless.” Wilson appointed 1st Circuit Solicitor David Pascoe as the case’s prosecutor. Harrell pleaded guilty in October 2014 to six counts of misusing campaign money. He avoided prison, but agreed to resign and not run for office for at least three years.

When SLED’s 42-page investigative report on Harrell was released to the public, nine pages that explored potential violations by other lawmakers were blacked out, or redacted. An investigation into that part of the report began after Harrell’s case ended.

When did Wilson recuse himself from the case?

The same month Harrell pleaded guilty, the Attorney General told his chief deputy, John McIntosh, in an email to “ensure I am firewalled,” saying he could have potential conflicts with lawmakers under investigation.

When did Pascoe take over other parts of the investigation?

In a letter dated July 2015, Wilson’s office told SLED to send any new findings not to the attorney general’s office, but to Pascoe.

What are Wilson and Pascoe fighting about?

A key point of the fight is who can initiate a State Grand Jury probe. The State Grand Jury is only one tool in an investigation. But it’s a powerful one. It can subpoena documents and people – make them testify.

But the law says the attorney general and the head of SLED together – only them and only together – may initiate a State Grand Jury investigation.

Pascoe used a Richland County grand jury in his prosecution of Harrell.

How much authority does Pascoe have over the investigation? Or is he fired?

That remains in dispute and now is headed to court.

As he probed potential wrongdoing by other lawmakers mentioned in the SLED report, Pascoe sought to convene a State Grand Jury investigation last month. Pascoe says in a letter to McIntosh that he did not reach out to Wilson’s office to ask that Wilson to initiate a State Grand Jury probe because of the Attorney General’s recusal.

Wilson’s office told Pascoe that he had overstepped his legal authority in going directly to the Grand Jury himself. And Wilson asked the clerk of the Grand Jury not to allow Pascoe to

Pascoe sued Wilson in the S.C. Supreme Court. Then Wilson fired Pascoe as the special prosecutor and tried to assign the case to another solicitor, Solicitor Dan Johnson of Richland and Kershaw counties’ 5th Circuit. Johnson declined to take the job until Pascoe’s complaint is resolved in court.

What is the core of Pascoe’s argument?

Once Wilson stepped aside in October 2014, Pascoe says in his court filing, he cannot reassert his authority over the investigation.

“Recusal is a one-way street,” Pascoe writes, “the effect of which is full, final and unambiguous. This leaves no role for the attorney general in this matter.”

How, according to Pascoe, is the attorney general’s office impeding the State House corruption investigation?

Pascoe said in his filing that he needs the State Grand Jury to continue the “incomplete” investigation into lawmakers. But he argues McIntosh stopped that by instructing the State Grand Jury’s clerk, Jim Parks, not to administer oaths of secrecy to prosecutors working for Pascoe and to not issue any more subpoenas.

Those moves are “effectively obstructing our ability to continue the necessary investigation,” Pascoe wrote to McIntosh.

What does Wilson’s office have to say about Pascoe’s actions?

McIntosh wrote in firing Pascoe: “This action of terminating you has nothing to do with the merits of the underlying investigation, but is based upon my conclusion that all prosecutors must follow the law.”

During his Wednesday news conference, Wilson denied that the attorney general’s office was blocking the investigation. And he said Pascoe was “tainted.”

“He clearly doesn’t know what he is doing,” Wilson said.

Why is Wilson angry with the media?

Without saying directly that Pascoe was involved, Wilson criticized what he called “media leaks” that allowed, specifically, The State newspaper to report on the dispute. State Grand Jury proceedings are supposed to be secret, Wilson said.

The State newspaper contends that what has been made public are procedural arguments and court filings, not Grand Jury proceedings. The State has told the Supreme Court that its attorney would like to argue that all documents and proceedings of the court on this matter should be considered public.

Why is this infighting among prosecutors important?

The outcome will determine who is in charge of this high-profile, public corruption investigation that already has convicted the onetime most powerful member of the General Assembly, Harrell.

“Without direction from the court and resolution of this dispute,” Pascoe argued in court records, “it is likely a public corruption probe will not go forward.”

Wilson said during his news conference he would be willing to sign a State Grand Jury investigation “right now if there’s an untainted prosecutor available.”

“I don’t care about the outcome of the investigation.”

This story was originally published April 2, 2016 at 5:05 PM with the headline "How did SC State House probe turn into fight among prosecutors?."