OMG...the Kenneth Hinson trial


Well-Known Member
They acquitted him! I cannot believe it. Here is the story from my local news station.

Hinson found not guilty, but still faces a federal charge
4/23/2007 2:06:55 PM
A South Carolina man accused of raping two teen girls in an underground bunker has been found not guilty of kidnapping, sex crimes and assault with intent to kill.
Kenneth Hinson was found not guilty on all 6 charges against him. Jurors deliberated for four and half hours today before reaching that decision.

Hinson appeared to shed tears before the verdict came down. He was charged with kidnapping and raping two teenage girls in an underground room he built last March.

As he left the courtroom Hinson told reporters, "The verdict said it all. They robbed me of everything I own."

The accusers and their families were visibly upset and cried over the verdict. Attorney General Henry McMaster told us he's very disappointed and believes the state presented a very good case against Hinson.

Hinson is not a free man just yet, he's now in federal custody because police say he had a gun on him when arrested last March. He's a convicted felon and is not supposed to have a gun.

We're told because of his prior record he could face life in prison. He still faces burglary charges in this case.

The state could also file drug trafficking charges against because he admitted under oath that he sold and transported drugs. Right now he's in jail at the Darlington County Detention Center.


Well-Known Member
Can you believe that Janet??? I am stunned. The jurers were from my county. My sister was called to duty but had to have surgery this week and got dismissed. Wow. I will be sure and watch the news for reasons why????


Well-Known Member
I cant for the life of me figure out how they could find the man not guilty. Makes me sick! I dont live very far from where this happened and he kept those girls in a bunker in the ground. Now I dont care if they "made up" the fact that he had a gun when he raped them or not as the defense attorney claimed. Who cares. They were scared, they were under-aged and he was grown and a sex offender...convict the monster!


New Member
I live in SC. The court system here is so corrupt! If you've got enough cash, u can walk away from anything. Been through the courts here and I got screwed. Had a judge make up law to support her decision. Its scary to have a court hearing here


Well-Known Member

This guy admitted to keeping the dungeon secret from everyone but the two girls, admitted to having sexual relations with the two girls, and admitted to using the dungeon to "pack dope" but he claims the sex was consensual so that makes everything just hunky dory I guess.


Well-Known Member
I haven't followed that case but once again I was shocked on Court TV when the Nurse was found guilty of murdering her husband
drugging him and cutting his body in three parts before tossing
the three suitcases in the Bay. They had no witnesses. They
had no DNA. The nurse was maybe 5'4" and 100 lbs soaking wet.
The circumstantial case seemed to be limited to the fact that
she had a boyfriend of three years, that the suitcases belonged
to her family and that nobody else seemed to have a motive. The
defense proved he was a compulsive gambler and suggested that
the murder seemed more like a mob retaliation.

A couple of months ago a woman in her 30's was also found guilty
based on similarly weak evidence. The prosecution provided an expert that said her husband had arsenic in his system. The
defense provided an expert that said it was a trace, ie normal,
amount only. The whole circumstantial case appeared to be that
after her husband was dead she had multiple sex partners and had
a boob job. Evidence was provided that she and her husband were
into "swinging" as a couple and there was proof he was in favor
or the boob job when they had the money.

I've served on juries and I know it is hard. on the other hand I just don't
get how people are convicted to life sentences because they
could have done something and the man you all are talking about
get off because not every aspect can be proven. Weird! DDD


Psycho Gorilla Dad
Okay, I'll get blasted for this I know, but...

There may be some truth to what was said. What are the laws in SC about the age of consent? Can a 17yo girl consent to sex with an adult? I don't know.

But from (indirect) personal experience, the man's story does have the possibility of being true. My son's former girlfriend was a big time drunk and drug addict. She got busted at a house party during the day by truancy officers and the police; her and a bunch of her friends were arrested for MIP, truancy, and other various things. She was put on probation, limited house arrest, and forbidden to "hang around" anyone else involved in the incident.

Which meant she no longer had access to drugs or booze.

So how did she make up for her loss? This creative 16yo started meeeting anonymous men in the local park, and traded oral sex for drugs, cigs, and booze. Lucky for her, her parents caught on before the police did, and now she's in a boarding school in another state until she graduates (probably an EGBS).

I say all this because in this case, it's entirely possible that the man was trading pot for sex, that the girls were then afraid of being caught and lied to save themselves.

Does that make it right? No, especially not for someone already convicted of raping a 12yo. But as disgusting as it may be, if his story is true then it may not be a crime in SC.

Okay, blast away.



New Member
In SC 16 is that grey area. If its consensual, then its ok, but if not then statutory rape. To me, age shouldnt make a difference once both parties are older than 20. I dont think that a 20 year old should date a 16 year old, etc, etc


Psycho Gorilla Dad
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: momof4insc</div><div class="ubbcode-body">In SC 16 is that grey area. If its consensual, then its ok, but if not then statutory rape. To me, age shouldnt make a difference once both parties are older than 20. I dont think that a 20 year old should date a 16 year old, etc, etc </div></div>

It's the whole "Romeo and Juliet" thing. In a state where I previously lived, the law was called "16+2". 17 was the age of consent, but also when it became illegal to have sex with anyone under that age with the following execption: if you were 17, and they were within 2 years of your age, and the sex was consentual, the DA had the option of dropping the charge to a misdemeanor or not filing charges at all.

If you were 19 or over, and they were under 17, game over.

And I agree with you. Consentual or not, I wouldn't want my 17yo daughter "associating" with a much older man, regardless of whether it was legal or not. As I'm finding out with my difficult child son, though, what I want doesn't always count for much. I can only hope that my daughter keeps the clear head and good heart she has now when she reaches that age.