By Meg Langford
SECURITY GUARD. GUARDIAN ANGEL. DOWN AND DEAD.
Eutawville, South Carolina. March 25th, 2011.
It started out simply enough. A panicky girl called her father because she had been pulled over late at night for a faulty tail light, and she needed her father to come and help her with the insurance information. And, Briana Bailey told her father, she did not feel safe around this particular law man.
Her father, fifty-three year old Bernard Bailey, is one of the good guys. A Walmart manager, he had recently retired from a lifetime of service to his government as a guard at the Department of Corrections. He was a 1978 graduate of Tennessee State. He had no criminal record, was admired and respected in the community (as the outpourings from hundreds of mourners at his funeral would clearly attest), and Bernard was also father to a large and loving family of five kids. He and his wife Doris had been married for twenty-five years. They were a devoted, churchgoing family. Bernard had been a lifelong member of Springfield Missionary Baptist Church.
Bernard Bailey’s daughter was pulled over by a man named Richard Combs. It is worth noting that Police Chief Richard Combs was the lone cop—did you get that?—the only cop working for the tiny town of Eutawville. As in, he wasn’t technically “Chief” of anybody. Perhaps the townspeople would not have been so quick to let him be the only person in charge of law and order, had they known that he had been fired from his last job in law enforcement.
Bernard Bailey—a black man--came to the rescue of his daughter, and what happened after that was all captured on the cruiser’s dash cam. The local paper, The Daily Herald, offers an analysis of the dash cam footage of that traffic stop:
“No physical confrontation is seen and most of the video simply shows Bernard Bailey on his cellphone or standing by his daughter’s car. Briana testified that her father was calling her mother [it was her birthday] and the Orangeburg County Sheriff’s Department to have a deputy come to the scene.”
Yet, in spite of this video evidence of the almost boring traffic stop, Police Chief Combs would later write the following in his official statement of events:
“Because Mr. Bailey was so aggressive at his daughter’s traffic stop, I felt confident Mr. Bailey would become physically violent and combative if he was approached at his home with a felony arrest warrant.” (Emphasis added)
Interesting: by the end of this entire incident--this minor tail light traffic stop--more officers had appeared, per the phoned in requested of both Bailey and Combs, yet none of these officers saw anything troubling in Bernard Bailey’s behavior. They saw no need to warn him, restrain him, or arrest him. It is also worth noting, as came out in the murder trial that erupted out of all of this, that Bernard Bailey was able to fix the tail light just by jiggling it, causing some to theorize that the Police Chief himself had sabotaged it while walking from his patrol car to Briana’s car.
May 2nd, 2011.
Six weeks later, Bernard Bailey went down to the courthouse, the day before his daughter’s court date, to see if he could just pay the ticket then and there, or at least get the court date for the ticket changed: his daughter had not been able to make it back from college for the hearing. And yet, perversely enough, Police Chief Combs refused to discuss the matter with Bernard Bailey. He said he would only discuss it with Bailey’s daughter.
Seriously? A father goes down to say his daughter is in college and isn’t able to get away, and instead of the officer just handling it, like most other normal people in his position in any other jurisdiction in the entire country would, he refuses to even discuss it with concerned father Bernard Bailey? Is it just me, or are we getting the feeling that this guy is a total jerk, not suited for law enforcement? Whatever happened to community good will? Not only was Briana not expected in court for anything criminal, it was a tail light fix-it ticket. It’s not even a moving violation. Seriously? Seriously? But according to witnesses who worked in the courthouse, Police Chief Combs wouldn’t even discuss a change of date with Bernard Bailey, nor would he let Bernard pay the ticket. We have to consider what would have happened had it been the white mayor’s daughter.
It was then that Combs told Bailey he was under arrest: Felony Obstruction of Justice, for the incident on the side of the road a month and a half earlier. Arrested. As in, Combs intended to cuff Bailey and throw him in jail, right then and there. It was then that a dumbfounded Bernard Bailey had had enough, refused to accept the warrant, huffed out the door, through the parking lot, and to his truck, Combs following behind.
(Whoa. Back up. The father comes down to sort out a traffic stop involving his daughter …the dash cam footage from that traffic stop six weeks ago with Bailey’s daughter showing no physical confrontation between Bernard Bailey and Chief Combs, absolutely no profanity or threats of any kind, even the other officers called in as back-up clearly seeing the tail light imbroglio as a non-event … and this cop swears out a felony arrest warrant? The very essence of law enforcement’s job, which is to first of all de-escalate and diffuse, has been completely ignored and disrespected by Combs’s ridiculous and arrogant actions. Instead, this cop’s plan is a felony warrant for a dad who came to help a frightened daughter. )
It is worth noting that Combs had just completed his police chief’s training in Eutawville four days before the fatal shooting. Even more damning, according to the South Carolina Criminal Justice Academy, Combs was discharged from the nearby Orangeburg County Police Department in 2007 for “unsatisfactory performance”.
But back to the drama unfolding that day at the courthouse.
It is agreed that Bernard Bailey got in his truck. It is agreed (even by Combs himself) that Combs got right up in Bernard Bailey’s face, in the truck cab, as Combs stood just outside the truck. And it is agreed that Combs shot Bailey dead. The particulars: Combs testified that he reached into Bailey’s truck and tried to turn off the ignition. But (according to Combs) Bernard was in the process of backing out of the parking space when Combs attempted to get the keys--Bernard’s truck moving at a measly three miles per hour, according to forensics experts--so Combs felt his life was threatened, and he shot Bailey three times.
There you have it.
Now, even if I play devil’s advocate, and argue in favor of the police officer—I would have to ask Chief Combs: if you think this man is so dangerous, so volatile, as you have sworn in a written statement, why are you following him to his car, and then aggressively leaning into that car, where Bernard Bailey could have easily retrieved a weapon and shot you? He has refused to accept your arrest warrant, so this is precisely the time to call for back-up and serve him in a different context, a different location. Instead, your decision is to open the door of his truck and place yourself between the truck door and the now moving vehicle. Unprofessional--no, stupid. Your next decision is even worse. Finding yourself off balance with your adrenalin pumping, you discharge your weapon three times, in a public place, on a busy day. Stupid. Stupid, dangerous, and deadly.
To quote Circuit Court Judge Edgar Dickson, when Combs’s defense asked for immunity from prosecution on the shooting charges:
“There was no need for Mr. Combs to act as he did on May 2nd, 2011, when Mr. Bailey refused service, as Mr. Combs expected would happen. Mr. Combs should have allowed Mr. Bailey to leave and then enlisted the assistance of other officers or served the warrant at court as he originally planned.”
It is worth pointing out one other small detail regarding the endgame of that tragic morning in front of the court house: Combs claimed that Bailey was backing up when he chose to shoot him three times. Yet forensic analysis told the sad and simple truth: Bernard Bailey was found with his foot on the brake. According to experts analyzing the scene, Bernard had started to back out, but then stopped as soon as the altercation began.
There is ample evidence that Combs was not telling the truth about the nature of the shooting: and this is the crux of the matter, because Combs claimed that he had fallen down and that Bailey was “coming towards me” when Combs fired the three shots. But Combs’s story, like the magic Kennedy-Connally bullet, requires that we suspend the laws of physics. The forensics evidence, the ballistics, simply don’t support Combs’s version of reality. He claims that Bailey was coming at him, yet the bullet that killed Bailey entered through the left shoulder, shot through the jaw, and lodged in Bernard Bailey’s skull. Impossible to do, if somebody is looming over you.
Here is an excerpt of transcripts from Combs’s trial. In this part of the trial, Prosecutor David Pascoe questions Combs about his recounting of the shooting, and it is clear from his tone that he doesn’t believe Combs:
(https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BvblM4iDWE
OR YOUTUBE: “Stand Your Ground pretrial hearing for former Eutawville Police Chief”, on the Time and Democrat channel.)
PROSECUTOR PASCOE (to Combs): Alright. First two shots are going to be to the chest area, correct? And that’s consistent with the autopsy report that you’ve looked at, correct? One shot, almost point blank range, right here in the chest. Alright? Another shot right down here, near the abdomen, near the chest, correct? Those obviously are going to be your first two shots. Now the third shot goes through the shoulder, right here, correct, goes into his jaw, correct? Through his jaw, and is found back here in the back, towards the back of the head.
COMBS: I wasn’t aware of that.
PROSECUTOR: Well, if that’s true, then none of the slugs would have caused that. The other thing I’d like for you to tell me is how that shot occurred if he’s coming toward you?
COMBS: As far as what? I mean, you’re standing, I’m below him, I’m not on the ground at that point.
PROSECUTOR: Well, I’ll be right here, (Prosecutor Pascoe gets on the floor, near the man who is posing as Bailey in the courtroom re-enactment). So I’m below him. And you’re saying he rose up toward you?
COMBS: When I fired, he was coming towards me, yes.
PROSECUTOR: (incredulous) You’re telling the court that he’s coming towards you after you shot him two times at point blank range with a forty caliber pistol, in the chest?
COMBS: Yes sir.
PROSECUTOR: That didn’t knock him back? He came toward you?
COMBS: He came towards me.
PROSECUTOR: (Sarcastic) Gotcha. Good. That makes sense. Now tell me also how you got the third shot in?
COMBS: Like I said, I mean he was coming back at me, that’s when I fired the third shot.
PROSECUTOR: (clearly skeptical) I just wanna make sure. Double check. Are you sure the third shot didn’t happen as you’ve already stuck two bullets in his chest forty caliber, which would knock him back that way, (Pascoe indicates Bailey’s body slumped away from the door, towards the passenger seat), that third shot didn’t go through his shoulder, through his jaw and into the back of his head?. .. (Sarcastic) That’s not how it happened?
Note that the autopsy contradicts Combs’s assertion that Bailey was coming towards him in a threatening manner, while Combs was knocked down on the ground. Also, the third shot that killed Bailey came from the side, went through his left shoulder, through his jaw, and lodged in his skull, suggesting that Bailey was not looming over him, as Combs alleges. Combs clearly did not need to fire “the kill shot”. Bernard Bailey surely was slumped over at that point. Bernard Bailey died needlessly.
It is also worth noting that Combs was tongue tied and inarticulate when the prosecutor tried to make sense of why Combs would serve up a felony warrant in the first place, carrying with it a possible ten year prison sentence, for a man who simply came down to help his confused and frightened daughter with a traffic stop at 2:15 in the morning. Below are the direct trial transcripts, and a link to the action:
(https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kw6E3YSRjE0
OR YOUTUBE “Former Police Chief Takes The Stand”, Times and Democrat channel.)
PROSECUTOR: Exactly when was Mr. Bailey obstructing justice?
COMBS: During the traffic stop, sir.
PROSECUTOR: Was he obstructing justice when he fixed the tail light that you said was broken?
COMBS: I don’t know that he fixed the tail light, sir.
PROSECUTOR: Was he obstructing justice when he called 911 because he didn’t trust you? Was that obstructing justice?
COMBS: I didn’t know that he called 911.
PROSECUTOR: Or was he obstructing justice when he said thank you, sir, have a good night?
COMBS: I don’t recall that he said that.
PROSECUTOR: It’s on the video. You didn’t hear it?
COMBS: I didn’t recall that.
PROSECUTOR: Is it possible that you didn’t recall a lot of things from that night? And that’s why you made the bad decision to get the Obstruction of Justice Warrant?
(Unintelligible from other lawyers in background.)
PROSECUTOR: Let me ask you this? What were you thinking? Charging someone with the ten year crime of Obstruction of Justice over a broken tail light?
COMBS: Sir, the events that occurred that night fit the charges of Obstruction of Justice
PROSECUTOR: That’s right, I forgot. You actually took the time to look at the statute of Obstruction of Justice.
COMBS: I checked the statutes.
AUTHOR’S NOTE: And, just for the record. South Carolina has no “statutes” regarding “obstruction of justice.” It is common law, and, one might add, common sense. It is hard to believe that there is a reasonable and just police officer out there—and I believe there are many such men and women—who would think that a father visiting his daughter at a traffic stop at two a.m. rises to the level of obstruction of justice, much less a felony. Both the dash cam, as well as the other officers who arrived on scene, corroborate the fact that Bernard Bailey’s presence there was, for all intents and purposes, a non-event.
***********
What happened out of all this? Was justice meted out? I leave it to you:
--The United States Department of Justice investigated the shooting, but chose not to file charges.
--On December 3rd, 2014, a grand jury indicted Combs for murder. On January 13th, 2015, a mistrial in the murder trial against
Combs was declared, as a jury could not come to a unanimous decision about Combs’s guilt. Nine people of the twelve person jury (seven blacks, five whites) found him guilty. But ultimately, all twelve could not agree on a verdict. Combs was once again a free man. And Bernard Bailey was still a dead man.
--In the summer of 2015, the prosecution decided to re-try Combs. Again, a hung jury.
--In September of 2015, rather than go through a third trial, Combs agreed to a plea deal. The murder charge was dropped and he pleaded guilty to misconduct with a penalty of one year house arrest.
Disappointing, of course, in fact “disappointing” does not begin to describe it. One wonders what these two and a half trials cost the taxpayers. And much of the public has been quick to ask why everything took so long. A homicide in 2011, and a mistrial in 2015? As it happens, the Prosecutor Pascoe (who, if you study the video of the trial, actually is doing everything in his power to hold Combs accountable for killing Bernard Bailey) will tell you that it took seemingly forever to get Combs’s first defense thrown out. Are you ready for this? Combs’s first defense was … wait for it …“Stand Your Ground”. He issues a felony warrant, pursues the guy out to his truck, leans in, grabs for the keys, but then defends the three gunshots he fired that killed the man as “Stand Your Ground.”
AUTHOR’S ASIDE In cases like this, the lily white among us, of whom I am one, are quick to engage in Monday morning quarterbacking and say “Well, just don’t resist arrest.” Sounds like good advice at face. But in a world of camera phones, where evidence of excessive force, police brutality, and even the planting of evidence are all rampant, anybody who doesn’t understand the yawning terror that a black man experiences at the thought of submitting himself to a pack of white officers just isn’t using his imagination, his sense of history—or, perhaps most importantly, his compassion. But we will cover this more in a chapter on “resisting arrest” containing some very enraging YouTube footage. Hey, I’m not saying resisting arrest is a good idea. I’m just saying that the system’s failure to ever—or at least, almost never--convict police for anything is a travesty. It is disingenuous, and it has disinspired certain factions of minorities from obeying the law. Why should they, when the law doesn’t seem to apply to authority figures? There is abundant proof that some police officers think they can get away with just about anything. And if you don’t believe me, just ask Isaac Woodard.
*****************
Oh, and here is one last question that is needling me. Did we really have to shoot Mr. Bailey dead with a 40 caliber weapon? Had Mr. Combs never heard of mace? Pepper spray? A Taser? Some cops seem in love with their Tasers, and while I think it sounds like a ghastly experience, to be on the receiving end of a Taser shot, I think we would all agree that it is not as ghastly as being dead. The town of Eutawville bemoans that their struggling small town budget is inadequate to properly outfit their tiny police force, but I looked it up, and a Taser is about sixty bucks. Mace is twelve. You can even get a lipstick size mini shot for eight bucks.
Eutawville did not have eight dollars to save a black man’s life. To give their police chief an option other than a 40 caliber weapon.
I find this odd, because in the years since Bernard Bailey’s shooting, what they have had money for is: $455 bucks for a village wine tasting, a town administration annual budget totaling $131,988 dollars, $135,000 dollars for a park and walking trail, $2500 dollars for (what must be a glaringly ugly) LED sign that flashes and tells you when the next town council meeting is, and lastly, an undisclosed sum to be spent on a public address system with eight microphones for the members of the town council to use at their meetings. We should note that the population of Eutawville is 307 people. So assuming that the entire population attends the scintillating town council meeting (which has never happened in the history of town council meetings in the entire history of the world, town council meetings being about as interesting as watching a scab form), and further assuming that 8 of those 307 are on the speaking person’s side of the mic, that is basically one microphone for every 37.375 people. Really? You need a microphone so that 37 people in the first two rows can hear you? Seriously? It would have been much easier and cheaper to just have the local drama teacher come in and give everybody in the town council a few lessons in how to project your voice.
So. Money for microphones and parks and wine tastings.
But, no money for non-lethal weapons. Not even that hot pink lipstick shaped one from Amazon for eight bucks. . .
Although, an examination of the Eutawville town minutes (or town minuets, as they are sometimes typed) may suggest that the Eutawville Town Council are a few frogs short of a healthy pond ecosystem: While all the investigation and preliminary trial proceedings relative to the Richard Combs’s case were making headline news, Council Member Roger Adkins stated “We have some of the finest police force I have ever known.” This regarding his one police officer, who was at that moment being investigated by the Feds.
Then again, these are the same May 2013 minutes in which the Eutawville Town Council proudly and unanimously announced, in honor of their fine police force, that all “Fags to be flown at half-staff.”
Interesting image. Interesting image indeed.
***************
Five hundred people attended Bernard Bailey’s funeral. (In a town of 307 people, keep in mind.) There were friends from work, people who knew him from his days as a Tennessee State Tiger … and lots and lots of family. There was his wife, Doris, his mother,
Annie, his sisters Dorothy, Margaret, Shirley, and JoAnne, his brothers William, Archie, and the Reverend Dr. Kenneth Bailey … there were, of course, his children, Briana (who will no doubt forever be haunted by her decision to call her father out that night), Kayla, Porcha, Charity, and Bernard, and lastly, his growing family of grandchildren: Kamero, Ryann, McKenzie, and Brooklyn. Now, they all must grow up without this warm and wonderful man in their lives, because of a malicious felony obstruction warrant, and a cop whose best plan was to shoot Bernard Bailey in cold blood rather than take any other available option. To gun down one more black man.
Rest in Peace, Bernard Bailey.
SOURCES:
Mistrial Declared for Ex-Police Chief Who Killed unarmed South Carolina Man” by Alan Blinder, New York Times, January 13th, 2015
“White South Carolina x-police chief charged with murdering unarmed black man”, by Glenn Smith and Thad Moore, December 4th, 2014 Post and Courier, Charleston, South Carolina
“Defense begins its case in ex-police chief's murder trial” by Stacy Jacobson, January 8th, 2015 KOKH TV, Oklahoma City
Judge declares mistrial in murder case of white South Carolina police chief who shot dead black unarmed man 2011, AP and Daily Email Reporter, January 13th, 2015 “Daily Mail, O.K.
YOUTUBE: Search “Richard Combs Trial” particularly “Times and Democrat” Channel
EPILOGUE: WHO IS RICHARD COMBS?
Since the trial(s) of the disgraced Richard Combs took over four years and God knows how many taxpayer dollars, it is only natural—and gratifying--that some reporters dug in hard, and got some illuminating and gratifying deep background. (“Pascoe: Open Chief’s record at murder trial”, by Martha Rose Brown. Times and Democrat. June 12th, 2015.) And while I could put this information about the history of Richard Combs back in the beginning of the chapter, somehow it seems more appropriate that I add it here, as a kind of Post Script, since it comes from an article published more than four years after the killing. More importantly, however, it reminds us that while the lives of the victims end, end hard and fast, the incompetence within police and sheriff departments that begins with the horrifically botched hiring practices seems to go on, and on, and on, with no end in sight.
With that said: Six incidents in Richard Combs’s career should have served as red flags. SIX. Six in six years. You’d think this might have tipped his superiors off, that a disaster was impending. That tragedy was an inevitability. Kind of the way we are all waiting to see what happens to George Zimmerman, and that infamous temper of his. The sins and follies of Richard Combs were laid out in a document filed by the case prosecutor, David Pascoe, referred to earlier in this chapter. (And it turns out that Combs’s deadly encounter with Bailey wasn’t the first time he’d inappropriately pulled his service weapon on an unarmed person inside of a vehicle.)
Let’s go in reverse chronological order, shall we, because it shows with increasing intensity the obvious extent to which Richard Combs was always a problem. Always, from the very beginning. And also, I assure you, it’s the most fun:
1.) Eutawville Mayor Jean Atkins issued Combs a reprimand (the report does not say what for) in March of 2011, just a couple of weeks after he had been appointed “Chief of Police” (aka, “Chief of Nobody”). This means that it was right around the time that the Bailey incident began, with the bizarre taillight stop that ended in a man’s death. We can only wonder what the hell that reprimand was about.
2.) Same Mayor gave the same fool, Cop Combs, another reprimand a couple of months before that. The reprimand was issued because Combs became angry and threw a fit about not being consulted over a design change to the town’s police vehicles.
Ah, but what about his august tenure while working as a deputy at the Orangeburg County Sheriff’s Department, prior to his being fired from there and then being named police chief of Eutawville? Again, we must state that if anybody had looked at Combs’s record, they never would have hired him as police chief. Three—THREE times—Combs had to be suspended from his duties for his behavior, before the Orangeburg Sheriff’s Department finally had the good sense to suspend him on August 8th, 2007.
On Aug. 17, 2006, Combs was reportedly suspended for threatening to “kick the Sergeant’s ass” during a training exercise.
On April 4, 2007, Combs was placed on administrative leave and ultimately suspended for reporting to work intoxicated and driving his county-issued vehicle while under the influence of alcohol, the filing said. Combs “drove and reported to duty with a blood alcohol level of .089.”
On Aug. 8, 2007, Combs reportedly received another reprimand after becoming irate with a supervisor during a disagreement over an office chair.
But I have, as promised, saved the best for last.
Combs was a deputy with the Orangeburg County Sheriff’s Office, he was once suspended for three days (wait till you read this and you’ll go “only three days?!?), back in 2005, after he chased down a person and ordered the driver of the vehicle out at gunpoint. Combs was off-duty when he used a county-issued vehicle to chase the person. Orangeburg County Sheriff’s Office records show that Major Barbara Walters conducted an internal investigation of Combs’s actions of June 23, 2005 and stated, “I found no evidence or reason that would have caused Sgt. Combs to believe that someone was so perilously in danger that it would necessitate a response in the manner he gave it.” But it gets richer still: According to the report, Combs was only wearing only bedroom slippers and boxer shorts when he pulled the person over and demanded that they get out of the car. (Now just picture that in your head, and see if you don’t bust out laughing.) (But on the other hand, think how unbelievably grateful the driver of that car is, right about now, that he isn’t dead.)
And that, ladies and gentlemen, is Richard Combs, the man who gunned down Bernard Bailey. That, ladies and gentlemen, is the man who was empowered to carry and use a deadly weapon.
And they wonder why we are all, always, so very angry.
SECURITY GUARD. GUARDIAN ANGEL. DOWN AND DEAD.
Eutawville, South Carolina. March 25th, 2011.
It started out simply enough. A panicky girl called her father because she had been pulled over late at night for a faulty tail light, and she needed her father to come and help her with the insurance information. And, Briana Bailey told her father, she did not feel safe around this particular law man.
Her father, fifty-three year old Bernard Bailey, is one of the good guys. A Walmart manager, he had recently retired from a lifetime of service to his government as a guard at the Department of Corrections. He was a 1978 graduate of Tennessee State. He had no criminal record, was admired and respected in the community (as the outpourings from hundreds of mourners at his funeral would clearly attest), and Bernard was also father to a large and loving family of five kids. He and his wife Doris had been married for twenty-five years. They were a devoted, churchgoing family. Bernard had been a lifelong member of Springfield Missionary Baptist Church.
Bernard Bailey’s daughter was pulled over by a man named Richard Combs. It is worth noting that Police Chief Richard Combs was the lone cop—did you get that?—the only cop working for the tiny town of Eutawville. As in, he wasn’t technically “Chief” of anybody. Perhaps the townspeople would not have been so quick to let him be the only person in charge of law and order, had they known that he had been fired from his last job in law enforcement.
Bernard Bailey—a black man--came to the rescue of his daughter, and what happened after that was all captured on the cruiser’s dash cam. The local paper, The Daily Herald, offers an analysis of the dash cam footage of that traffic stop:
“No physical confrontation is seen and most of the video simply shows Bernard Bailey on his cellphone or standing by his daughter’s car. Briana testified that her father was calling her mother [it was her birthday] and the Orangeburg County Sheriff’s Department to have a deputy come to the scene.”
Yet, in spite of this video evidence of the almost boring traffic stop, Police Chief Combs would later write the following in his official statement of events:
“Because Mr. Bailey was so aggressive at his daughter’s traffic stop, I felt confident Mr. Bailey would become physically violent and combative if he was approached at his home with a felony arrest warrant.” (Emphasis added)
Interesting: by the end of this entire incident--this minor tail light traffic stop--more officers had appeared, per the phoned in requested of both Bailey and Combs, yet none of these officers saw anything troubling in Bernard Bailey’s behavior. They saw no need to warn him, restrain him, or arrest him. It is also worth noting, as came out in the murder trial that erupted out of all of this, that Bernard Bailey was able to fix the tail light just by jiggling it, causing some to theorize that the Police Chief himself had sabotaged it while walking from his patrol car to Briana’s car.
May 2nd, 2011.
Six weeks later, Bernard Bailey went down to the courthouse, the day before his daughter’s court date, to see if he could just pay the ticket then and there, or at least get the court date for the ticket changed: his daughter had not been able to make it back from college for the hearing. And yet, perversely enough, Police Chief Combs refused to discuss the matter with Bernard Bailey. He said he would only discuss it with Bailey’s daughter.
Seriously? A father goes down to say his daughter is in college and isn’t able to get away, and instead of the officer just handling it, like most other normal people in his position in any other jurisdiction in the entire country would, he refuses to even discuss it with concerned father Bernard Bailey? Is it just me, or are we getting the feeling that this guy is a total jerk, not suited for law enforcement? Whatever happened to community good will? Not only was Briana not expected in court for anything criminal, it was a tail light fix-it ticket. It’s not even a moving violation. Seriously? Seriously? But according to witnesses who worked in the courthouse, Police Chief Combs wouldn’t even discuss a change of date with Bernard Bailey, nor would he let Bernard pay the ticket. We have to consider what would have happened had it been the white mayor’s daughter.
It was then that Combs told Bailey he was under arrest: Felony Obstruction of Justice, for the incident on the side of the road a month and a half earlier. Arrested. As in, Combs intended to cuff Bailey and throw him in jail, right then and there. It was then that a dumbfounded Bernard Bailey had had enough, refused to accept the warrant, huffed out the door, through the parking lot, and to his truck, Combs following behind.
(Whoa. Back up. The father comes down to sort out a traffic stop involving his daughter …the dash cam footage from that traffic stop six weeks ago with Bailey’s daughter showing no physical confrontation between Bernard Bailey and Chief Combs, absolutely no profanity or threats of any kind, even the other officers called in as back-up clearly seeing the tail light imbroglio as a non-event … and this cop swears out a felony arrest warrant? The very essence of law enforcement’s job, which is to first of all de-escalate and diffuse, has been completely ignored and disrespected by Combs’s ridiculous and arrogant actions. Instead, this cop’s plan is a felony warrant for a dad who came to help a frightened daughter. )
It is worth noting that Combs had just completed his police chief’s training in Eutawville four days before the fatal shooting. Even more damning, according to the South Carolina Criminal Justice Academy, Combs was discharged from the nearby Orangeburg County Police Department in 2007 for “unsatisfactory performance”.
But back to the drama unfolding that day at the courthouse.
It is agreed that Bernard Bailey got in his truck. It is agreed (even by Combs himself) that Combs got right up in Bernard Bailey’s face, in the truck cab, as Combs stood just outside the truck. And it is agreed that Combs shot Bailey dead. The particulars: Combs testified that he reached into Bailey’s truck and tried to turn off the ignition. But (according to Combs) Bernard was in the process of backing out of the parking space when Combs attempted to get the keys--Bernard’s truck moving at a measly three miles per hour, according to forensics experts--so Combs felt his life was threatened, and he shot Bailey three times.
There you have it.
Now, even if I play devil’s advocate, and argue in favor of the police officer—I would have to ask Chief Combs: if you think this man is so dangerous, so volatile, as you have sworn in a written statement, why are you following him to his car, and then aggressively leaning into that car, where Bernard Bailey could have easily retrieved a weapon and shot you? He has refused to accept your arrest warrant, so this is precisely the time to call for back-up and serve him in a different context, a different location. Instead, your decision is to open the door of his truck and place yourself between the truck door and the now moving vehicle. Unprofessional--no, stupid. Your next decision is even worse. Finding yourself off balance with your adrenalin pumping, you discharge your weapon three times, in a public place, on a busy day. Stupid. Stupid, dangerous, and deadly.
To quote Circuit Court Judge Edgar Dickson, when Combs’s defense asked for immunity from prosecution on the shooting charges:
“There was no need for Mr. Combs to act as he did on May 2nd, 2011, when Mr. Bailey refused service, as Mr. Combs expected would happen. Mr. Combs should have allowed Mr. Bailey to leave and then enlisted the assistance of other officers or served the warrant at court as he originally planned.”
It is worth pointing out one other small detail regarding the endgame of that tragic morning in front of the court house: Combs claimed that Bailey was backing up when he chose to shoot him three times. Yet forensic analysis told the sad and simple truth: Bernard Bailey was found with his foot on the brake. According to experts analyzing the scene, Bernard had started to back out, but then stopped as soon as the altercation began.
There is ample evidence that Combs was not telling the truth about the nature of the shooting: and this is the crux of the matter, because Combs claimed that he had fallen down and that Bailey was “coming towards me” when Combs fired the three shots. But Combs’s story, like the magic Kennedy-Connally bullet, requires that we suspend the laws of physics. The forensics evidence, the ballistics, simply don’t support Combs’s version of reality. He claims that Bailey was coming at him, yet the bullet that killed Bailey entered through the left shoulder, shot through the jaw, and lodged in Bernard Bailey’s skull. Impossible to do, if somebody is looming over you.
Here is an excerpt of transcripts from Combs’s trial. In this part of the trial, Prosecutor David Pascoe questions Combs about his recounting of the shooting, and it is clear from his tone that he doesn’t believe Combs:
(https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BvblM4iDWE
OR YOUTUBE: “Stand Your Ground pretrial hearing for former Eutawville Police Chief”, on the Time and Democrat channel.)
PROSECUTOR PASCOE (to Combs): Alright. First two shots are going to be to the chest area, correct? And that’s consistent with the autopsy report that you’ve looked at, correct? One shot, almost point blank range, right here in the chest. Alright? Another shot right down here, near the abdomen, near the chest, correct? Those obviously are going to be your first two shots. Now the third shot goes through the shoulder, right here, correct, goes into his jaw, correct? Through his jaw, and is found back here in the back, towards the back of the head.
COMBS: I wasn’t aware of that.
PROSECUTOR: Well, if that’s true, then none of the slugs would have caused that. The other thing I’d like for you to tell me is how that shot occurred if he’s coming toward you?
COMBS: As far as what? I mean, you’re standing, I’m below him, I’m not on the ground at that point.
PROSECUTOR: Well, I’ll be right here, (Prosecutor Pascoe gets on the floor, near the man who is posing as Bailey in the courtroom re-enactment). So I’m below him. And you’re saying he rose up toward you?
COMBS: When I fired, he was coming towards me, yes.
PROSECUTOR: (incredulous) You’re telling the court that he’s coming towards you after you shot him two times at point blank range with a forty caliber pistol, in the chest?
COMBS: Yes sir.
PROSECUTOR: That didn’t knock him back? He came toward you?
COMBS: He came towards me.
PROSECUTOR: (Sarcastic) Gotcha. Good. That makes sense. Now tell me also how you got the third shot in?
COMBS: Like I said, I mean he was coming back at me, that’s when I fired the third shot.
PROSECUTOR: (clearly skeptical) I just wanna make sure. Double check. Are you sure the third shot didn’t happen as you’ve already stuck two bullets in his chest forty caliber, which would knock him back that way, (Pascoe indicates Bailey’s body slumped away from the door, towards the passenger seat), that third shot didn’t go through his shoulder, through his jaw and into the back of his head?. .. (Sarcastic) That’s not how it happened?
Note that the autopsy contradicts Combs’s assertion that Bailey was coming towards him in a threatening manner, while Combs was knocked down on the ground. Also, the third shot that killed Bailey came from the side, went through his left shoulder, through his jaw, and lodged in his skull, suggesting that Bailey was not looming over him, as Combs alleges. Combs clearly did not need to fire “the kill shot”. Bernard Bailey surely was slumped over at that point. Bernard Bailey died needlessly.
It is also worth noting that Combs was tongue tied and inarticulate when the prosecutor tried to make sense of why Combs would serve up a felony warrant in the first place, carrying with it a possible ten year prison sentence, for a man who simply came down to help his confused and frightened daughter with a traffic stop at 2:15 in the morning. Below are the direct trial transcripts, and a link to the action:
(https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kw6E3YSRjE0
OR YOUTUBE “Former Police Chief Takes The Stand”, Times and Democrat channel.)
PROSECUTOR: Exactly when was Mr. Bailey obstructing justice?
COMBS: During the traffic stop, sir.
PROSECUTOR: Was he obstructing justice when he fixed the tail light that you said was broken?
COMBS: I don’t know that he fixed the tail light, sir.
PROSECUTOR: Was he obstructing justice when he called 911 because he didn’t trust you? Was that obstructing justice?
COMBS: I didn’t know that he called 911.
PROSECUTOR: Or was he obstructing justice when he said thank you, sir, have a good night?
COMBS: I don’t recall that he said that.
PROSECUTOR: It’s on the video. You didn’t hear it?
COMBS: I didn’t recall that.
PROSECUTOR: Is it possible that you didn’t recall a lot of things from that night? And that’s why you made the bad decision to get the Obstruction of Justice Warrant?
(Unintelligible from other lawyers in background.)
PROSECUTOR: Let me ask you this? What were you thinking? Charging someone with the ten year crime of Obstruction of Justice over a broken tail light?
COMBS: Sir, the events that occurred that night fit the charges of Obstruction of Justice
PROSECUTOR: That’s right, I forgot. You actually took the time to look at the statute of Obstruction of Justice.
COMBS: I checked the statutes.
AUTHOR’S NOTE: And, just for the record. South Carolina has no “statutes” regarding “obstruction of justice.” It is common law, and, one might add, common sense. It is hard to believe that there is a reasonable and just police officer out there—and I believe there are many such men and women—who would think that a father visiting his daughter at a traffic stop at two a.m. rises to the level of obstruction of justice, much less a felony. Both the dash cam, as well as the other officers who arrived on scene, corroborate the fact that Bernard Bailey’s presence there was, for all intents and purposes, a non-event.
***********
What happened out of all this? Was justice meted out? I leave it to you:
--The United States Department of Justice investigated the shooting, but chose not to file charges.
--On December 3rd, 2014, a grand jury indicted Combs for murder. On January 13th, 2015, a mistrial in the murder trial against
Combs was declared, as a jury could not come to a unanimous decision about Combs’s guilt. Nine people of the twelve person jury (seven blacks, five whites) found him guilty. But ultimately, all twelve could not agree on a verdict. Combs was once again a free man. And Bernard Bailey was still a dead man.
--In the summer of 2015, the prosecution decided to re-try Combs. Again, a hung jury.
--In September of 2015, rather than go through a third trial, Combs agreed to a plea deal. The murder charge was dropped and he pleaded guilty to misconduct with a penalty of one year house arrest.
Disappointing, of course, in fact “disappointing” does not begin to describe it. One wonders what these two and a half trials cost the taxpayers. And much of the public has been quick to ask why everything took so long. A homicide in 2011, and a mistrial in 2015? As it happens, the Prosecutor Pascoe (who, if you study the video of the trial, actually is doing everything in his power to hold Combs accountable for killing Bernard Bailey) will tell you that it took seemingly forever to get Combs’s first defense thrown out. Are you ready for this? Combs’s first defense was … wait for it …“Stand Your Ground”. He issues a felony warrant, pursues the guy out to his truck, leans in, grabs for the keys, but then defends the three gunshots he fired that killed the man as “Stand Your Ground.”
AUTHOR’S ASIDE In cases like this, the lily white among us, of whom I am one, are quick to engage in Monday morning quarterbacking and say “Well, just don’t resist arrest.” Sounds like good advice at face. But in a world of camera phones, where evidence of excessive force, police brutality, and even the planting of evidence are all rampant, anybody who doesn’t understand the yawning terror that a black man experiences at the thought of submitting himself to a pack of white officers just isn’t using his imagination, his sense of history—or, perhaps most importantly, his compassion. But we will cover this more in a chapter on “resisting arrest” containing some very enraging YouTube footage. Hey, I’m not saying resisting arrest is a good idea. I’m just saying that the system’s failure to ever—or at least, almost never--convict police for anything is a travesty. It is disingenuous, and it has disinspired certain factions of minorities from obeying the law. Why should they, when the law doesn’t seem to apply to authority figures? There is abundant proof that some police officers think they can get away with just about anything. And if you don’t believe me, just ask Isaac Woodard.
*****************
Oh, and here is one last question that is needling me. Did we really have to shoot Mr. Bailey dead with a 40 caliber weapon? Had Mr. Combs never heard of mace? Pepper spray? A Taser? Some cops seem in love with their Tasers, and while I think it sounds like a ghastly experience, to be on the receiving end of a Taser shot, I think we would all agree that it is not as ghastly as being dead. The town of Eutawville bemoans that their struggling small town budget is inadequate to properly outfit their tiny police force, but I looked it up, and a Taser is about sixty bucks. Mace is twelve. You can even get a lipstick size mini shot for eight bucks.
Eutawville did not have eight dollars to save a black man’s life. To give their police chief an option other than a 40 caliber weapon.
I find this odd, because in the years since Bernard Bailey’s shooting, what they have had money for is: $455 bucks for a village wine tasting, a town administration annual budget totaling $131,988 dollars, $135,000 dollars for a park and walking trail, $2500 dollars for (what must be a glaringly ugly) LED sign that flashes and tells you when the next town council meeting is, and lastly, an undisclosed sum to be spent on a public address system with eight microphones for the members of the town council to use at their meetings. We should note that the population of Eutawville is 307 people. So assuming that the entire population attends the scintillating town council meeting (which has never happened in the history of town council meetings in the entire history of the world, town council meetings being about as interesting as watching a scab form), and further assuming that 8 of those 307 are on the speaking person’s side of the mic, that is basically one microphone for every 37.375 people. Really? You need a microphone so that 37 people in the first two rows can hear you? Seriously? It would have been much easier and cheaper to just have the local drama teacher come in and give everybody in the town council a few lessons in how to project your voice.
So. Money for microphones and parks and wine tastings.
But, no money for non-lethal weapons. Not even that hot pink lipstick shaped one from Amazon for eight bucks. . .
Although, an examination of the Eutawville town minutes (or town minuets, as they are sometimes typed) may suggest that the Eutawville Town Council are a few frogs short of a healthy pond ecosystem: While all the investigation and preliminary trial proceedings relative to the Richard Combs’s case were making headline news, Council Member Roger Adkins stated “We have some of the finest police force I have ever known.” This regarding his one police officer, who was at that moment being investigated by the Feds.
Then again, these are the same May 2013 minutes in which the Eutawville Town Council proudly and unanimously announced, in honor of their fine police force, that all “Fags to be flown at half-staff.”
Interesting image. Interesting image indeed.
***************
Five hundred people attended Bernard Bailey’s funeral. (In a town of 307 people, keep in mind.) There were friends from work, people who knew him from his days as a Tennessee State Tiger … and lots and lots of family. There was his wife, Doris, his mother,
Annie, his sisters Dorothy, Margaret, Shirley, and JoAnne, his brothers William, Archie, and the Reverend Dr. Kenneth Bailey … there were, of course, his children, Briana (who will no doubt forever be haunted by her decision to call her father out that night), Kayla, Porcha, Charity, and Bernard, and lastly, his growing family of grandchildren: Kamero, Ryann, McKenzie, and Brooklyn. Now, they all must grow up without this warm and wonderful man in their lives, because of a malicious felony obstruction warrant, and a cop whose best plan was to shoot Bernard Bailey in cold blood rather than take any other available option. To gun down one more black man.
Rest in Peace, Bernard Bailey.
SOURCES:
Mistrial Declared for Ex-Police Chief Who Killed unarmed South Carolina Man” by Alan Blinder, New York Times, January 13th, 2015
“White South Carolina x-police chief charged with murdering unarmed black man”, by Glenn Smith and Thad Moore, December 4th, 2014 Post and Courier, Charleston, South Carolina
“Defense begins its case in ex-police chief's murder trial” by Stacy Jacobson, January 8th, 2015 KOKH TV, Oklahoma City
Judge declares mistrial in murder case of white South Carolina police chief who shot dead black unarmed man 2011, AP and Daily Email Reporter, January 13th, 2015 “Daily Mail, O.K.
YOUTUBE: Search “Richard Combs Trial” particularly “Times and Democrat” Channel
EPILOGUE: WHO IS RICHARD COMBS?
Since the trial(s) of the disgraced Richard Combs took over four years and God knows how many taxpayer dollars, it is only natural—and gratifying--that some reporters dug in hard, and got some illuminating and gratifying deep background. (“Pascoe: Open Chief’s record at murder trial”, by Martha Rose Brown. Times and Democrat. June 12th, 2015.) And while I could put this information about the history of Richard Combs back in the beginning of the chapter, somehow it seems more appropriate that I add it here, as a kind of Post Script, since it comes from an article published more than four years after the killing. More importantly, however, it reminds us that while the lives of the victims end, end hard and fast, the incompetence within police and sheriff departments that begins with the horrifically botched hiring practices seems to go on, and on, and on, with no end in sight.
With that said: Six incidents in Richard Combs’s career should have served as red flags. SIX. Six in six years. You’d think this might have tipped his superiors off, that a disaster was impending. That tragedy was an inevitability. Kind of the way we are all waiting to see what happens to George Zimmerman, and that infamous temper of his. The sins and follies of Richard Combs were laid out in a document filed by the case prosecutor, David Pascoe, referred to earlier in this chapter. (And it turns out that Combs’s deadly encounter with Bailey wasn’t the first time he’d inappropriately pulled his service weapon on an unarmed person inside of a vehicle.)
Let’s go in reverse chronological order, shall we, because it shows with increasing intensity the obvious extent to which Richard Combs was always a problem. Always, from the very beginning. And also, I assure you, it’s the most fun:
1.) Eutawville Mayor Jean Atkins issued Combs a reprimand (the report does not say what for) in March of 2011, just a couple of weeks after he had been appointed “Chief of Police” (aka, “Chief of Nobody”). This means that it was right around the time that the Bailey incident began, with the bizarre taillight stop that ended in a man’s death. We can only wonder what the hell that reprimand was about.
2.) Same Mayor gave the same fool, Cop Combs, another reprimand a couple of months before that. The reprimand was issued because Combs became angry and threw a fit about not being consulted over a design change to the town’s police vehicles.
Ah, but what about his august tenure while working as a deputy at the Orangeburg County Sheriff’s Department, prior to his being fired from there and then being named police chief of Eutawville? Again, we must state that if anybody had looked at Combs’s record, they never would have hired him as police chief. Three—THREE times—Combs had to be suspended from his duties for his behavior, before the Orangeburg Sheriff’s Department finally had the good sense to suspend him on August 8th, 2007.
On Aug. 17, 2006, Combs was reportedly suspended for threatening to “kick the Sergeant’s ass” during a training exercise.
On April 4, 2007, Combs was placed on administrative leave and ultimately suspended for reporting to work intoxicated and driving his county-issued vehicle while under the influence of alcohol, the filing said. Combs “drove and reported to duty with a blood alcohol level of .089.”
On Aug. 8, 2007, Combs reportedly received another reprimand after becoming irate with a supervisor during a disagreement over an office chair.
But I have, as promised, saved the best for last.
Combs was a deputy with the Orangeburg County Sheriff’s Office, he was once suspended for three days (wait till you read this and you’ll go “only three days?!?), back in 2005, after he chased down a person and ordered the driver of the vehicle out at gunpoint. Combs was off-duty when he used a county-issued vehicle to chase the person. Orangeburg County Sheriff’s Office records show that Major Barbara Walters conducted an internal investigation of Combs’s actions of June 23, 2005 and stated, “I found no evidence or reason that would have caused Sgt. Combs to believe that someone was so perilously in danger that it would necessitate a response in the manner he gave it.” But it gets richer still: According to the report, Combs was only wearing only bedroom slippers and boxer shorts when he pulled the person over and demanded that they get out of the car. (Now just picture that in your head, and see if you don’t bust out laughing.) (But on the other hand, think how unbelievably grateful the driver of that car is, right about now, that he isn’t dead.)
And that, ladies and gentlemen, is Richard Combs, the man who gunned down Bernard Bailey. That, ladies and gentlemen, is the man who was empowered to carry and use a deadly weapon.
And they wonder why we are all, always, so very angry.