7 Years Later, Michael Beaty, again.
Beaty’s new lawyer seeks autopsy, pathology reports
Convicted murderer Michael Beaty, of Clinton, seeking post conviction relief from a life sentence, won a discovery motion last Tuesday morning during a hearing in Laurens County General Sessions Court.
Beaty’s legal team asked for, and was granted, access to Emily Anna Asbill’s autopsy and pathology reports (autopsies are not public documents in South Carolina). These documents were part of the discovery and evidence at Beaty’s original trial. Normally, a PCR (post conviction relief) request implies that previous legal counsel was ineffective.
The move and granted motion was not surprising, but there was nothing of real substance done at the PCR hearing. Later, a judge will hear arguments in the PCR action; it is contested by the State Attorney General’s Office.
The mother of the victim, EA Asbill - Emily Joy - said, “That means that his new attorney will be looking at evidence an trying to find something wrong with it. This is how our laws work. He had no remorse, once again. Walked in the courtroom smiling. ... Unfortunately this is not over.”
The latest action comes just a few months before the 7th anniversary of EA Asbill’s strangulation death. Beaty is serving a life without parole sentence.
Beaty’s conviction has been affirmed by the South Carolina Supreme Court.
Justice’s ruled that there was no due process violation during the trial in which Beaty was convicted of murder. Beaty’s legal team at that time argued that Beaty tried to save Asbill’s life - as she allegedly tried to jump from her car that Beaty was driving - and, in the process, the collar of her T-shirt cut off her air. She also was found in a “positional asphixiation” position in the floor board of the car, Beaty’s defense argued.
The prosecution alleged that Beaty strangled Asbill to death, from behind, with a USB cord. Her body was found, unresponsive, in her car in the driveway of Beaty’s parents’ home, on Calvert Avenue in Clinton, late in the evening of June 29, 2013. She died at the Laurens hospital early in the morning of June 30. Emily Joy heard on her boyfriends police radio a call for help at the Calvert Avenue address, and recognized it as Beaty’s parents’ house. The county coroner at the time, the late Nick Nichols, told Joy at the hospital that her daughter had been murdered, according to testimony at Beaty’s 2015 trial - since her daughter’s murder, Joy has been a tireless advocate for anti-domestic violence laws and anti-strangulation laws at the State General Assembly and Federal Congressional levels. A standalone felony strangulation law remains pending in the South Carolina legislature.
In their 2018 affirmation of Beaty’s conviction, SC Supreme Court Justice found that Beaty got a fair trial, one not adversely affected by a presiding judge’s statement or by the way The State handled its closing argument, according to a Clinton Chronicle article.
That was the bottom line finding of the South Carolina Supreme Court in Beaty’s murder conviction appeal. The ruling was the latest chapter in a five-year saga of love and loss, strangulation, and courtroom drama, the newspaper reported.
All Supreme Court judges concurred with the opinion that kept Beaty serving a life sentence without the possibility of parole. The state’s highest court heard arguments twice in this appeal process. The second of those arguments was conducted June 17, 2017. On its decision web-portal, the Supreme Court says this:
“The Court affirms Appellant's (Beaty’s) conviction. We hold Appellant has not established prejudice resulting from the trial judge's opening remarks, and we hold Appellant was not denied due process during the closing argument stage of the trial. The Court instructs trial judges to omit any language, whether in remarks to the jury or in an instruction, which might have the effect of lessening the State's burden of proof in a criminal case. Although our state does not currently have a rule governing the content and order of closing arguments in criminal cases in which a defendant introduces evidence, trial courts must ensure in every case a defendant's right to due process is not violated.”
Beaty was convicted of strangling to death his on-again, off-again girlfriend Emily-Anna Asbill, as their friend, Will Alexander, was passed out in the back seat of Asbill’s car at Beaty’s parents’ house in Clinton. She was treated late in the evening of May 29, 2013, and died at the Laurens County Hospital early in the morning of May 30. Beaty and Alexander were arrested in June - Alexander is serving a prison sentence after being convicted of being an accessory after the fact of murder.
Neither Beaty nor Alexander testified at their trials.
Neither has expressed publicly remorse for the death of 19-year-old Asbill, who they both has known for several years.
The mother of EA, as she was known to her friends, Emily Joy of Clinton, has made it her life’s mission to counsel women in domestic violence situations. With others, she is encouraging the passage of an anti-strangulation-suffocation law in South Carolina. Forty-three states - but not SC - have a law that makes the crime of one person strangling another a felony.
The State proved before a Laurens County jury that Beaty strangled Asbill to death with a USB cord, after a night of drinking and arguing. She tried to jump out of her car that Beaty was driving, and suffered severe injuries to her arm. Beaty’s defense claimed he tried to pull her back into the car by grabbing the collar of her T-shirt, and that produced ligature-looking marks on her neck.
The 8th Circuit Solicitor’s Office used the USB cord-strangulation theory in its closing argument. That caused to Beaty defense to claim it was “sandbagged” by the prosecution.
The defense also claimed that Presiding Judge Jeffrey Young’s opening statement to the jury that the trial would be a “search for the truth” was an illegal charge to the jury. The defense said the sole purpose of a trial is for The State to proof the facts of the case before the jury - and only that case - “beyond a reasonable doubt” and not as a “search of the truth.”
The Supreme Court’s ruling encourages judges not to use the “search of the truth” language. It also says The State, in this case, was within its rights under current SC law to offer its theory of how Asbill died in its “last word” to the jury.
The high court said it cannot change that process, even if it wanted to. Only the Legislature can make that change, the ruling says (the complete ruling in PDF form is on The Clinton Chronicle’s website, MyClintonNews.com, in an article under the Breaking News section).
Justice George C. James Jr., of Sumter, wrote the opinion.
This has been an unusual case because the Supreme Court already affirmed Beaty’s conviction once - on Dec. 29, 2016. As a result of a first hearing, the high court told judges not to use the “search for the truth” language, and wrote a rule about proper form for closing arguments.
Neither side was satisfied, and the matter was scheduled for a re-hearing. The narrative about the latest conviction affirmation says, in part:
“Appellant raised the following issues: (1) whether the State presented substantial circumstantial evidence proving Appellant committed murder; (2) whether the trial judge erred by denying Appellant's request to charge the lesser-included offense of involuntary manslaughter; (3) whether the trial judge erred in using certain language in his opening remarks to the jury; (4) whether the trial judge erred during the closing argument stage in not (a) requiring the State to open fully on the law and the facts of the case and (b) limiting the State's final closing solely to reply to new arguments presented during Appellant's closing arguments; (5) whether the trial judge erred in charging the law of circumstantial evidence as set forth in State v. Logan, 405 S.C. 83, 747 S.E.2d 444 (2013); (6) whether the trial judge erred in excluding testimony concerning a prior incident when Victim threatened to jump from an automobile; (7) whether the trial judge erred in denying one of Appellant's voir dire requests; and (8) whether a new trial should be ordered based on the cumulative error doctrine.
“In affirming Appellant's conviction in our prior opinion, we found two of the issues Appellant raised merited discussion. State v. Beaty, Op. No. 27693 (S.C. Sup. Ct. filed Dec. 29, 2016) (Shearouse 2017 Adv. Sh. No. 1 at 14–17). First, we addressed the trial judge's use of certain language in his opening remarks to the jury and the content requirements and order of closing argument. We affirmed Appellant's conviction but instructed trial judges to avoid language urging jurors to ‘search for the truth,’ find ‘true facts,’ and render a ‘just verdict.’ Second, we adopted a rule for closing argument in criminal cases, requiring the party with the right to open and close to open fully on the law and facts and limit its reply to those matters raised by the other party in its closing argument. We affirmed all of Appellant's remaining issues under Rule 220(b), SCACR.
“We granted the parties' petitions for rehearing and have heard further argument. We issue this opinion to again address both the trial judge's use of certain language in his opening remarks to the jury and the rules governing the content and order of closing argument. We affirm Appellant's conviction.”
The Beaty appeal could have set a new legal precedent in South Carolina.
A Feb. 26, 1985 addition to the State Constitution put the power to make rules regarding court procedures in the hands of the General Assembly (legislature).
Based on the Beaty case, and the first affirmation of his conviction, the Supreme Court on Jan. 28, 2016 sent to the Judiciary Committees of the State House and Senate a new rule governing how closing arguments are to be done, when the defense does present evidence.
Right now, the most recent affirmation says, this procedure is “a patchwork.”
When the SC Supreme Court (judicial branch) wanted a new rule, the full General Assembly (legislative branch) chose not to adopt one.
The Legislature rejected this rule (Rule 21) in April 2016.
Once the new rule was rejected, the SC Supreme Court scheduled a second round of arguments in the Beaty appeal. While the court is not granting Beaty a new trial, the latest ruling does say - and all justices concurred with the ruling - that a law to set up new rules for closing arguments should be adopted by the state legislature. Justice James writes:
“We remain mindful of the need for clearly articulated rules governing the content and order of closing arguments in cases in which a defendant introduces evidence. The uncertainty resulting from the absence of such rules is unfortunate. We hope the day will soon come when such rules are firmly in place.”
Joy, formerly of Clinton now of Coronaca in Greenwood County, has made it her life’s mission to counsel women in domestic violence situations. With others, she is encouraging the passage of an anti-strangulation-suffocation law in South Carolina. Forty-three states - but not SC - have a law that makes the crime of one person strangling another a felony.
Joy has said she is going to write a book about EA’s life and death. Minutes after Beaty was convicted in court in Laurens in 2015, EA’s grave at Rosemont Cemetery in Clinton was vandalized. No one was arrested.
The foundation that Joy founded is the EA’s LOVE for Life Foundation.
