South Carolina Father Accused of Killing Unarmed Teen at Party

Lexington, South Carolina authorities are dealing over a difficult criminal case this week. Francis Marion Reeves III, 62, is charged with murder in the Friday shooting death of 17-year-old Deshaun Rashad Clark. The case could turn on very murky facts involving a theft, beating, retaliation, and a drive-by — and one irate father. It also bears some resemblance to the recent controversial White case in New York.

The case began with a party thrown by Reeves’ kids at his lake home over the weekend. During the party, someone claimed to see Clark stealing the cellphone of one of Reeves’ children and another person grabbed Clark, who was struck several times. Clark vowed to return with friends to get even. Reeves’ son went to his father’s nearby house and told his father that that his daughter was attacked and the culprits were coming back. The father grabbed a loaded handgun and an unloaded shotgun.

Clark then returned with friends and Reeves shot him. He later bled to death at a firehouse. When Reeves went back to his house and sat on the front porch, one of Clark’s friends, Breon Jacoby Mayers, 17, allegedly drove by and shot at his home. He has also been charged.

The case has some similarities to the John White case, here. White was convicted in a racially charged case.
One of the more interesting aspects of this case is whether the court will exclude the drive-by shooting that occurred after the fatal shooting of Clark. The prosecution is likely to file a motion to suppress the attack as immaterial and potentially prejudicial to Reeves’ case. Yet, Reeves’ attorney could still call Mayers as a fact witness. He would likely invoke his privilege against self-incrimination, which could help his defense in the eyes of the jury.

For the full story, click here

14 thoughts on “South Carolina Father Accused of Killing Unarmed Teen at Party”

  1. Micheal writes: Your point is well taken. My perspective is that the problem with owning a gun is that it multiplies one’s excuses to use it.

    In theory, sure. But I don’t live in theory; I live in Minnesota, one of the forty-odd states where getting state permission not only to own but to carry a gun in public is as easy as or easier than getting a drivers license, and while bad behavior by permit holders isn’t unknown in those states, it is rare — much rarer than the use of a gun in self-defense (see Kleck, et al). I’m not going to second-guess your decision not to own or carry a gun, particularly since you’re on the side of the Good Guys in terms of the right; I figure that, as in so much, I really could make better decisions for others than they can for themselves, the Constitutional amendment making me King seems to have been stalled in committee.

    Jonathan: good call on banning the Nazi idiot; his civil rights remain intact, and the air here is fresher and cleaner.

  2. “The sad part is that he is not stupid with a degree in psychology from the University of Maryland, just warped.”

    Mespo,
    It is pathetic that intelligence has nothing to do with the psychopathy of hate. Mr. Corsi of recent note is a Harvard Grad.
    Thank you for your information on this guy though, it fills in the picture.

    JT,
    While I have qualms about banning anyone, as stated above, there was nothing of redeeming content to be found in his post.

  3. JT:

    Bill’s a rather notorious racist and anti-Semite who hails from my State. He’s not a native I am told being born in Maryland but depositing himself in Roanoke much to the consternation of reasonable folk there. He runs a real estate business in a predominantly African American section of town but his true avocation is a white supremacist web site whose name I will not utter. The Southern Poverty Law Center has a blurb about his “group” on their Hate Groups web page. He frequently turns up spewing that vile stupidity. The sad part is that he is not stupid with a degree in psychology from the University of Maryland, just warped.

  4. Bill White:

    I only just came across your racist entry this morning using the n-word and making a vile point with regard to his case. You now have the distinction of the first person barred from this blog. There are any number of hateful and racist sites for you to frequent. This site is dedicated to civil and thoughtful discourse. I only hope that you have the presence of mind to stop and consider how your racial animus has corrupted not just our judgment but your very being. Regardless, you are no longer welcome on this site.

    JT

  5. Cro Magnum Man,
    Perhaps there is some benefit in allowing this post, in that it allows us to see how the Republican/Conservative meme that racism is over, is yet another cover for their racist politics.

    Joel,
    I might add the above as the reason I link Martha with White. Her points usually avoid the appearance of epithets, but yet project a clear message that leads to similar distortions and conclusions.

  6. Joel,

    I would think the argument would be a personal one. Maybe something along the lines of “I couldn’t handle the consequences of having shot someone, so I don’t want the temptation to be there.”

  7. Joel,
    Your point is well taken. My perspective is that the problem with owning a gun is that it multiplies one’s excuses to use it. Statistics seem to affirm that guns play a very small role in protecting anyone, while they play a far larger role in unneeded shootings. While I believe that citizens have the right to bear arms, I don’t choose to exercise that right for myself.

  8. You know, I question Professor Turley editing this blog, being his being a highly visible vocal proponent of free speech.

    But if EVER there was a post that deserved to be deleted, it was the post by that festering bucket of slime calling itself Bill White.

    I cannot believe that word would be tolerated when I’ve seen others deleted for simple profanity. That word should never be tolerated in a blog. Nor those sentiments that he included with it.

    He is speaking of murder. Lynching. Advocating the killing of a people for the color of their skin. He’s a criminal.

  9. I’m trying to figure out why this story is an argument against having a gun. Assuming it wasn’t self-defense, it’s certainly an argument against shooting somebody for insufficient reasons, but that isn’t exactly part of the advanced course.

    As to Martha and the moron Nazi (yeah, I know: that’s redundant) having a lot in common, I don’t see that here. The facts, as presented, are entirely consistent with self-defense; they’re also consistent, of course, with the dead guy having returned to apologize for previous misbehavior and being shot by an enraged father. She’s leaped to one conclusion, consistent with the facts; the moron Nazi has leaped to the stupid conclusion that the black guy deserved to die because, well, he’s black. That’s kinda different.

    I guess maybe before we decide if the shooter did the right thing or the wrong thing, maybe we should, you know, kinda wait for enough facts to come out?

  10. Bill White:

    Ah a “chime in” from our resident Virginia Nazi. How’s the real estate business? Your situation may be the lone saving grace of the mortgage crisis. A little tip: using vulgarity makes you neither shocking nor credible–it merely confirms what most of us believe about you in the first place. Seig Heil!

  11. The police don’t show up for 20 minutes after you place the call. Ask the 80 year old lady who held a burglar at gunpoint with her 22 caliber revolver, made him call the police on her phone, and sat twenty minutes waiting for the police to show up.

    GOD BLESS this guy. Sometimes parents gotta do what they do.

  12. I am not a supporter of gun control, for constitutional reasons, but the above story is a great example of why I wouldn’t own a gun myself. Didn’t anyone think about calling the police, before the fact?

Comments are closed.