The meaning of 'intent to kill'

e-mail this story discuss this issue in our forums

a much-needed commitment to reduce the

state's tragic rate of domestic violence.

Something is seriously wrong with our judicial system when a magistrate believes that $45,000 is an adequate bond for a man accused of assault and battery with the intent to kill. On July 16, Maranda Williams was allegedly beaten until she was unconscious. She was left with several broken bones in her face.

The man accused of the assault, Charles Christopher Williams, allegedly had waited four hours in a Bi-Lo parking lot for the opportunity to assault Maranda Williams. At his bond hearing, he showed no remorse, according to the judge. Nevertheless, Magistrate Shirley B. Keaton set bond at a mere $45,000.

That turned out to be a fatal decision. Charles Williams on Sept. 3 returned to the East North Street Bi-Lo and now is accused of shooting Maranda Williams in the back, killing her. Charles Williams faces the death penalty.

The question remains: Would Maranda Williams be alive today if Keaton had set a much higher bond or had denied bond to Charles Williams following the earlier charge? Do the words "intent to kill" mean nothing?

Keaton, in a recent interview, said the $45,000 bond actually was appropriate. She reserves higher bonds — or bond denials — for cases in which a weapon is used. But surely the Williams case rose to that level when fists allegedly were used as a weapon to beat Williams unconscious and break facial bones.

If Keaton merely was acting within the parameters of standard judicial practice then perhaps Keaton is not to blame, but South Carolina's judicial system most assuredly needs to be overhauled to keep those accused of brutal attacks in jail. A lack of jail space should not be an excuse for not locking up dangerous suspects: A chief governmental responsibility is to protect the public from predators.

Judicial changes should be just one component of a larger strategy to combat domestic violence. Among other things, South Carolina needs a much stronger support system for crime victims. Victims of domestic violence especially should not feel they have nowhere to turn for protection and financial assistance.

State Rep. Gloria Haskins, R-Greenville, is working on a bill that will bring suspects accused of domestic violence to trial sooner. The bill may be promising but it would not have helped in the Williams' incident, and it may be hard to justify moving domestic violence cases ahead of other cases where violence is involved.

A priority for state lawmakers should be the 23 recommendations made by the Governor's Domestic Violence Task Force in 2000. Many of the recommendations were taken from successful policies in other states. A state Commission on Domestic Violence is needed to monitor incidents and make public policy recommendations. The report also endorses a public education campaign and criminal domestic violence education for both the judiciary and law enforcement.

South Carolina has long had one of the highest rates of domestic homicide in the nation. On this tragic issue, this state has a great deal of soul-searching ahead of it — something that should have taken place long before the death of Maranda Williams.