Journal of the House of Representatives
of the Second Session of the 110th General Assembly
of the State of South Carolina
being the Regular Session Beginning Tuesday, January 11, 1994

Page Finder Index

| Printed Page 310, Jan. 13 | Printed Page 330, Jan. 13 |

Printed Page 320 . . . . . Thursday, January 13, 1994

Q. And, secondly, have you asked any third party to seek your consideration of your candidacy by any Member of the General Assembly?
A. No, sir, I have not.
Q. Judge Pyle, we have a witness who has asked to appear today. Actually two. Mr. Henry Martin, Sr. and a Ms. Ruth Trippe. I believe they are both present.

I would ask the Committee, Mr. Chairman, if they ask general questions, perhaps we could have the witnesses come up, offer their testimony and have Judge Pyle come back and respond to it.
THE CHAIRMAN: All right. We'll do that then. If that's acceptable with the Committee, that's the way we'll proceed. Judge --
A. You want me to just stand aside or --
THE CHAIRMAN: Yes, sir, if you don't mind because we've been using that side over there for that testimony. All right, Mr. Henry Martin, Sr. Mr. Martin present. Mr. Martin, if you'd raise your right hand for me, sir. Do you swear to the tell the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth so help you God?
MR. MARTIN: So help me God.
THE CHAIRMAN: When you go -- let Mr. Couick here, the counsel, ask you the questions. When you go to respond or talk to him, try to speak into this mike because this lady over here is trying to get everything down and the acoustics in here are not the best. Mr. Couick.
MR. MARTIN - EXAMINATION BY MR. COUICK:
Q. Mr. Martin, you and I have spoken by phone for the last week and I believe we also sent a letter to you earlier this week. I offered in that letter if you would like to have the assistance of anyone, you are welcome to bring him with you and I'd like to offer at this time if you'd like to have anyone sit with you and to help you understand any of the matters or any questions I ask you, you're welcome to have them come forward as well.
A. Well, they brought me down here.
Q. Yes, sir.
A. They don't know nothing about this case.
Q. Okay. All right.
A. Nobody, but me and my son.
Q. Yes, sir. Mr. Martin, you have filed an affidavit with the Committee labeled a Motion Of Letter To Request Permission To Appear Before The Screening Committee To Testify. The Committee has received that. They've been supplied with copies of that.

As a part of that letter or complaint, there was a resolution of a fee dispute board application and resolution documents there, by judicial


Printed Page 321 . . . . . Thursday, January 13, 1994

canon, those matters which do not relate to Judge Pyle individually are confidential and I would ask that we not mention that resolution of fee dispute board document at any time during your testimony. And if you have any question about what I'm talking about, I will be glad to take a break, meet with you. It's what I mentioned to you on the phone the other day, that this was not relevant to today's hearing.

Ms. Goodman, would you walk down there and show him the document that I'm speaking about? Mr. Chairman, I've not included that in your packets because of the problem with confidentiality --
THE CHAIRMAN: Yes, sir, I understand.
Q. -- and it does not relate to the Judge Pyle situation. I believe you have before you a two-page document?
A. Yeah, I have a two-page document.
Q. That you've signed and your son, Mr. Henry W. Martin, Jr., has also signed. For the Committee's benefit, Mr. Henry W. Martin, Jr. is currently incarcerated I believe at CCI here in Columbia. He has called me several times this week. He has asked on each occasion that he be allowed to come before the Committee and testify.

At this point, I'd like to report to the Committee, it's Counsel's recommendation that he not be called before the Committee to testify for two reasons. One is Mr. Henry Martin, Sr. tells me that he was present during the duration of the entire trial that's in question and that he's also familiar with the testimony that would be offered by his son and he's in the same position to offer that.

In addition without prejudice to the complaint here, his son, part of the complaint against him was threats against various Members of the Judiciary and I don't believe it would be appropriate to bring him here today.
THE CHAIRMAN: Any Committee Members have any comments? All right, proceed, please, sir.
Q. Mr. Henry Martin, Sr., Mr. Martin, if I could perhaps summarize the gravamen of your complaint and you tell me if you disagree or agree with how I summarize it. You complain against Judges Pyle and Judge Smoak. Both of those judges are here today and we will take your testimony about Judge Smoak in a few minutes.

About Judge Pyle, there are two specific complaints you have. One is that he is related to a Mr. Ricky Norris that your son was charged with murdering and later convicted of murdering. You in your letter say that you have information that Judge Pyle is the uncle of Ricky Norris and that the complaint is that Judge Pyle issued an order --
A. You wrong. He's the nephew of Judge Pyle.


Printed Page 322 . . . . . Thursday, January 13, 1994

Q. Right. Ricky Norris is the nephew of Judge Pyle and Judge Pyle would be his uncle, right?
A. Right.
Q. Your complaint is that Judge Pyle ruled on the production of evidence as Administrative Judge in Greenville during the trial of your son for the murder of Ricky Norris?
A. No, he didn't -- wait. Wait a minute, sir. Let me tell you. Now they laid that on my son. Listen to me good. You see now, he laid this on -- on my son because they had -- they -- it was a drug racket going on between Norris and them people for what he got in his front pocket.
Q. Yes, sir. And Mr. Martin --
A. You see --
Q. I understand your --
A. Yes, sir.
Q. -- disagreement with the conviction and incarceration of your son, but today we're here to talk about any conflict of interest that Judge Pyle might have had.
A. Well, who -- we went to him.
Q. Right.
A. He had sat -- we went to him several different times and
-- and went to Judge McBrown (phonetic) and went to the line. The line, whatever you call them.
Q. This is after your son was charged?
A. Yes. That's been going on about ten or twelve years. Maybe fifteen now, sir.
Q. And Mr. Martin --
A. Yes.
Q. -- you went to -- this is after your son allegedly --
A. No.
Q. -- shot --
A. No, sir. This has been going on a long time.
Q. Mr. Chairman, unfortunately --
A. Wait. Wait. Wait a minute. Let me say this here. You see -- Judge Pyle, you see he's the most racist, prejudiced man and him -- and him and Judge Smoak is, too. These are the most prejudiced people I ever seen in my life.
Q. Mr. Martin --
A. Yes, sir. Let me get through.
Q. Well, Mr. Martin, let's organize this a little bit --
A. Okay.
Q. -- for the Committee.

Printed Page 323 . . . . . Thursday, January 13, 1994

A. Okay.
Q. And I'm not trying to cut you down on saying anything, but let's take things one at a time. As I said, you've got two basic complaints against Judge Pyle. One is that you say he was related to Ricky Norris?
A. Yeah, you see it there. Ain't you got this copy?
Q. Yes, sir, and I will say -- I've said it for the benefit of everybody here and that you say that even though he was related to Ricky Norris, he still as a judge made a ruling in your son's case that related to the production of evidence, is that true? That's one of your complaints is that he -- even though he was related to Ricky Norris, he still made a ruling on evidence?
A. Well, you see, he was supposed -- he was supposed to -- when that trial was up there, Smoak, he said he was repented (sic) to come to the court. He didn't come. And all the member we pleaded for, they didn't come. Well, that's because he had them in his pocket. That's how come.

Now look now if you're going to run a clean judgeship or whatsoever, if it is, you've got to first clean up your house. If you got to keep -- you just can't keep on sweeping stuff up under the rug. Do you see what I'm saying? Well, it's got to come out somehow.

If you keep on sweeping it up under the rug, you're going to have a filthy house. You see, if you're going to run a just house, you've got to clean it up.
Q. Mr. Martin --
A. Yes. Wait -- yes, sir. Just hold one thing.
Q. Mr. Martin, excuse me. I'm not trying to stop you. I'm trying to help you.
A. Okay.
Q. What is the activity on Judge Pyle's part? What has he done that's filthy that you're talking about? What has he done?
A. What has he done? He caused my boy to be incarcerated and whatever you said in there. See, he got to listen up there. Like I tell you now, he got -- he do what he said do and he stayed in the background. You see what I'm saying? All right now, now see, placing him being a justice judge, that ain't him, you see. And -- and Judge Smoak either. It ain't him either. He about one of the prejudiced man I ever seen in my life.
Q. And, Mr. Martin, let's --
A. Yes. Wait. Wait. Wait. Just hold one minute. And do despise a black man -- you see a black man ain't got no justice in their court. You see what I'm saying? Do you see equal -- black man ain't got no say so. Ain't got no justice in his court.


Printed Page 324 . . . . . Thursday, January 13, 1994

Q. Mr. Martin, have you --
A. Anything in -- look, listen, anything or in his court, them people what he got in his front pocket. He don't care what they do. You see throughout the Greenville County, throughout the State of South Carolina as far as that part is concerned. You see what I'm saying? You see, you don't need these kind of people in office.

You don't -- you got to clean your house up before you can run a clean house. Do you hear what I'm saying? All right now, now as far as he standing in the way of justice, he's supposed to be a justice of the people, the right of the people, put it like that. You see, but he ain't that, you see. He's for the unjust. Anything -- he's got a dirty trick about him. He -- he got handed.
Q. Mr. Martin --
A. Yes.
Q. I'm glad -- in truth the Committee is glad to entertain your testimony. One thing we need to know is specifically you talk about unjust treatment or dirty tricks.
A. Yeah.
Q. Can you tell us a specific example of something that Judge Pyle has done in the case of your son that was a dirty trick or where he used his influence with the Solicitor or other personnel involved in the courtroom and your son's trial?
A. You see, Louis Cramm (phonetic), he was a friend of Ricky Norris. He was hoping to -- or smoked cocaine, push cocaine, so I -- I didn't like that, you see. And had all in my community -- you see, all them people around there, he got them in his front pocket.
Q. Mr. Martin --
A. Black and white, what I'm talking about.
Q. Mr. Martin --
A. And what you find -- just hold one minute. You see, what was -- what few white people standing up for justice, they don't have nothing to do with it. I can count them on this finger, this hand is what I'm talking about, all over Greenville County, throughout Greenville County. You see, and this don't make sense.
Q. Mr. Martin have you filed a complaint against Judge Pyle with any Supreme Court or with any organization like the NAACP in Greenville County?
A. No, I won't fool with the NAACP. They're the same way.
Q. Mr. Martin, I would like to have the opportunity as I'm sure the Committee would to listen to Judge Pyle respond to your comments. If


Printed Page 325 . . . . . Thursday, January 13, 1994

there is some specific question once we've listened to Judge Pyle that you have, I would ask that the Committee's indulgence to let you come back.
A. I sit right here. I just -- I'm not cutting off. I'll sit right here. He's up for reelection. You don't need no kind of man like this here that --
Q. Yes, sir.
A. -- for a judgeship -- judgeship, you don't need no kind of man like that and -- and Judge Smoak, you don't need these kind of people.
Q. Mr. Martin --
A. Yes.
Q. Let's do this, let's have Judge Pyle respond to your allegations and if you would take a seat back where you were, I'll ask you the Committee to let you come back and ask any specific questions --
A. Uh-huh.
Q. -- you might have.
A. Well, you can ask me now while I'm here?
Q. Yes, sir.
A. Yes, sir. If I can make this thing shorter, you can ask me now. I don't have to go back there.
THE CHAIRMAN: Any Member have any questions at this point? Okay. Thank you, sir. If you take a seat back and we'll have him come back and respond --
A. Thank you.
THE CHAIRMAN: -- and see if Counsel needs to ask some additional questions.
A. Yes, sir. Thank you, sir.
THE CHAIRMAN: Thank you, sir. Mr. Pyle, if you'd come forward and take a seat, please, sir. Mr. Couick.
RE-EXAMINATION BY MR. COUICK:
Q. Judge Pyle, I think that we all can appreciate that the testimony given by Mr. Martin has some specific accusation in the sense of a relationship between Ricky Norris and yourself. Can you first respond to that?
A. Yes, sir. You were good enough to forward to me the information that Mr. Martin and his son mailed to you and I responded by way of letter to that.

My recollection of the matter is that in the late seventies or early eighties, I presided over a land dispute case involving Mr. Martin and his son and some adjoining landowners. Quite frankly, I do not remember the outcome of that trial, but apparently I ruled against Martins.

Sometime after that I received a written letter from Mr. Martin, Jr., wherein he threatened to kill me if I did not pay him 4 million dollars. I turned that over to the authorities in Greenville County.


Printed Page 326 . . . . . Thursday, January 13, 1994

As a result of that, I believe Mr. Martin was picked up and sent to Columbia for observation. I don't recall having any further contact with the Martins. I read in the newspaper where Mr. Martin, Jr. had been arrested and charged with murder. I recalled at that time that he was the same Mr. Martin who had threatened to kill me with a shotgun, which was the weapon used in this case.

I don't know Ricky Norris. I have never met the gentleman. I'm certainly not related to him. I'm not related to any Norris. I'm not related to the Howard.

And I certainly deny being a racist. Quite to the contrary, I have lived my life trying to be just to everyone regardless of race, color or creed and I can expound on that if you wish.
Q. Mr. Chairman, I have no further questions.
THE CHAIRMAN: Any questions? Judge Pyle, just so it's clear. In other words, when I look at the documents and everything, absolutely no relationship either by blood or by marriage --
A. That's correct.
THE CHAIRMAN: -- to Mr. Norris; is that correct?
A. Now, one thing Mr. Martin did point out, I signed an Administrative Order which authorized the seizing of Mr. Martin, Jr.'s clothing so some tests could be run on that. I -- those types of orders come across my desk daily and I routinely sign them. I did not notice in this case that it was Mr. Henry Martin, Jr. Had I noticed that, I certainly would not have signed it, but I did so in my capacity as Administrative Judge.
THE CHAIRMAN: And that was just where probable cause was shown to --
A. Yes, sir.
THE CHAIRMAN: -- indicate the need to look?
A. Yes, sir. And they were seized solely for the purpose of testing the clothing.
THE CHAIRMAN: Any Members have any questions? Mr. Couick.
MR. COUICK: Mr. Chairman, I have no further questions either for the complainant or Judge Pyle.
THE CHAIRMAN: Judge Pyle, that would complete it. Do we have any further need for Judge Pyle.
MR. COUICK: No, sir.
THE CHAIRMAN: Judge Pyle --
MR. COUICK: I'm sorry.
A. There is another --
MR. COUICK: We do have one other complainant. I'm sorry.


Printed Page 327 . . . . . Thursday, January 13, 1994

CHAIRMAN: All right, I'm sorry. All right. Mr. Couick, who is the next --
MR. COUICK: Mr. Chairman, I'd like to have Ms. Ruth Trippe of Taylors, South Carolina.
THE CHAIRMAN: Ms. Ruth Trippe, if you would come forward, please, ma'am, to the chair over there where you've seen everybody else. And if you would just stand for one second and raise your right hand for me.
MS. TRIPPY: May I affirm, please?
THE CHAIRMAN: Do you swear to tell the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth, so help you God?
MS. TRIPPY: I affirm.
THE CHAIRMAN: Thank you, ma'am. Sit down and Mr. Couick here, the counsel, has some questions to ask you. Please, answer them and as I've told the previous witnesses, these microphones are not state of the art, so you've got to get up really almost in front of you like that and try to direct as best your testimony like that so that the court reporter can get it. Thank you.
MS. TRIPPE - EXAMINATION BY MR. COUICK:
Q. Ms. Trippe, thank you for coming today. Before I would ask you any questions, I would repeat a comment that I made as Counsel for the Committee yesterday to a group of persons that were here to testify regarding another judge.

Their testimony in some ways went to the qualification of the judge, but in other ways it was more to the merits of the case the judge was considering. This Committee is not an appellate court. We're not here to decide if a judge determines constitutional issues in an appropriate fashion.

What we're here to determine is that -- or the Committee determine is that the judge gives due regard to the arguments made by both sides and he fairly and impartially determines the merits of the case and then rules.

You have made an allegation that Judge Pyle is unconstitutional in the sense that he has ordered -- ruled against certain citizens in their right to peacefully pray on the sidewalk and that this was a direct violation of your constitutional right to do so and he, in fact, imposed a ten-foot restraint on each side of the driveway.

I believe that you also allege and this is more as to something specific that a Ms. Suzanne Coe who is an attorney who used to clerk for Judge Pyle requested this and he did this and you said you believed that he had conflict of interest.


Printed Page 328 . . . . . Thursday, January 13, 1994

You give the location of the prayer vigil as being in Greenville. You offer at least to my immediate impression a question as to whether he ruled in a -- constitutionally correct, which I do not believe this Committee has any jurisdiction to determine, but you do ask a pertinent question as to whether there was any conflict of interest in hearing the case being argued by a former -- or allegedly former law clerk, a Ms. Suzanne Coe. If we could to some degree help the Committee by restricting the testimony to the second part of the your complaint.
A. Okay.
Q. And you're welcome to briefly describe to the Committee your allegations about a conflict of interest.
A. Okay.
Q. At this time. Please go ahead.
A. Thank you. I am a sidewalk counselor and I have --
REPRESENTATIVE ALEXANDER: I can't hear.
THE CHAIRMAN: If you could just speak into that -- pull that little button forward to you just like that and speak just as close as you can into that microphone.
A. I can talk louder, too.
THE CHAIRMAN: And if you can talk louder, that would be good.
A. I am a sidewalk counselor and I've been outside the abortion clinic for five years and at that time I was out there on regular basis and never has there been an accident or any danger whatsoever outside the abortion clinic in the driveway. Suzanne Coe came along, I believe, a couple years ago as an attorney for the abortion clinic.

At that time, she began to ask for restrictions through the police department, having the police department called on numerous occasions and at that time, there were not arrests made in multiple numbers.

In November of last year, they began to have a group called Passage for Right started and there were numerous people that were coming there at that time. They were peacefully praying on the sidewalk. At that time, Suzanne Coe asked Judge Pyle to bring an injunction against the Pro Life men and women that were out there praying. I gave you a copy of the injunction that he made.

That injunction stated, as you said, that we had to stay ten foot away from the driveway on both sides. That was a violation of our constitutional rights and I'm not going to get into that. I understand you're saying that, but at that time it hindered us from doing the work that we had to be doing out there. And I am here in in opposition to the fact that this injunction was made and I believe a very definite conflict of interest since Suzanne Coe had clerked with Judge Pyle's law office.


Printed Page 329 . . . . . Thursday, January 13, 1994

MR. COUICK: Mr. Chairman, I have no other questions. I think that Ms. Trippe has very, very well developed her accusation of a conflict of interest. I think that it might be -- our time might be best spent speaking to Judge Pyle asking him some questions and allowing Ms. Trippe to remain here and hear his responses. And I think it very definitely turns on some interpretation of the Canons.
THE CHAIRMAN: Any Members have any questions? Thank you, ma'am, Ms. Trippe.
A. Thank you for allowing me to be here.
THE CHAIRMAN: Sure. Judge, if you could come back up. Mr. Couick.
RE-EXAMINATION BY MR. COUICK:
Q. Judge Pyle, had Ms. Coe served as a law clerk to you while you were on the bench there in Greenville?
A. Yes. She was one of my former clerks.
Q. Do you recall what period of time she did service in your court?
A. Quite frankly, I do not. It's been within the past four years.
Q. This order was issued on January 27th, 1993. At the time of its issuance was she in your employ?
A. She was not.
Q. She had left your employ at least sometime prior to that?
A. Yes. Well over a year or more.
Q. Judge, are you familiar with the Canons of Ethics, particularly Canon 3, that tells when a judge should disqualify himself in a proceeding when his impartiality might be reasonably questioned including, but not limited to instances where he served as a lawyer in the matter the controversy lawyer or a lawyer with whom he had previously practiced law served during such association as a lawyer concerning the matter or the judge and such lawyer had been a material witness concerning or also that tossed up family in terms of a living within a household, are you aware of anything within that general Canon that would prohibit you from hearing a case by your law clerk?
A. No, sir, I am not.
MR. COUICK: Mr. Chairman, while it might seem like short questioning, the Canon is fairly explicit. Counsel has been unable to determine anything that would come close to supporting the allegation by Ms. Trippe in terms of there being an absolute disqualification. As we've heard in other testimony today other times for disqualification are left to the judgement and discretion of the judge.

There is nothing here that would seem to indicate that Judge Pyle has abused the discretion that might not otherwise be warranted here.


| Printed Page 310, Jan. 13 | Printed Page 330, Jan. 13 |

Page Finder Index