Professional Documents
Culture Documents
The horrific crimes defendant stands convicted of, by themselves, mandate a life sentence.
The crime spree he committed within days of being released from prison, and his escalating
pattern of violent crime, all but guarantee that the defendant, if not in prison, will continue to
commit horrific, violent crimes. Perhaps most importantly, the impact defendant’s crimes have
had on those he attacked mandate the most severe punishment available to this Court, a life
sentence.
I. INTRODUCTION
K.T., B.T. and their five children live on Johns Island, in the City of Charleston, SC. The
couple has five children. K.T. is a member of the Coast Guard and is often away from home. B.T.
currently works as a nurse, though in February 2018, she and her family had just moved to
Charleston and she had not yet found a job in the area.
B.T. and K.T.’s children range in age, and in February 2018, two were in school and three
stayed home with B.T. At the time, K.T. was working in Virginia. Around 8:30 a.m., Tuesday,
February 12, 2018, B.T. dropped two of her five children off at school in West Ashley. B.T. then
1
2:18-cr-00256-DCN Date Filed 02/28/19 Entry Number 57 Page 2 of 12
headed back home, with her five month old, two year old and four-year-old all with her.
Unbeknownst to B.T., defendant began following her car. Surveillance cameras along
Savannah Highway in West Ashley first captured defendant’s car following B.T.’s near Savannah
Hwy. and Wappoo Dr. Defendant then followed B.T. along Savannah Hwy., and ultimately back
to B.T.’s Johns Island home. There, defendant waited until B.T. was inside the home, followed
her in, and brutally attacked her. Although B.T.’s memory was affected by the assault, she recalls
entering her home and noticing something behind her. She recalls going to put the car seat she
was carrying down, hearing steps behind her, then being grabbed by defendant from behind. When
defendant grabbed B.T. from behind he threw her face down onto the floor and repeatedly slammed
her face and head into the hardwood floor. He also punched her repeatedly in the face and neck.
B.T. fought back against defendant, but was unable to get him off her. B.T. recalls telling her four-
year-old daughter to run, and the four-year-old did so. The defendant continued to assault B.T.,
who continued to fight back, and who only slowed her resistance when the defendant threatened
to hurt her children if she did not. As a result of the attack, B.T. received extensive closed facial
fractures; facial fractures across her nasal bridge and sinuses; traumatic subarachnoid hemorrhage
with loss of consciousness; a closed fracture at base of skull; a fracture of the orbital floor (right
side and left side); a fractured jaw in 4 places; a fractured cheek bone; a broken nose; bruising to
her knees and wrists. During the physical assault, she was also sexually assaulted. Defendant
eventually tied B.T. up and left her on the kitchen floor, where she faded in and out of
consciousness.
With B.T. tied up, defendant went through the home looking for items he could steal. At
one point defendant attempted to clean up the blood from B.T.’s assault using bleach. However,
he determined that there was too much blood for him to clean and stopped trying. Defendant
2
2:18-cr-00256-DCN Date Filed 02/28/19 Entry Number 57 Page 3 of 12
ultimately only took a few items from the home, as he believed he had been in the house a long
time and was in a hurry to leave. Although defendant did not steal many items from the home, he
did decide to take B.T. and K.T.’s four-year-old daughter. The young girl had run up to a second
floor bedroom, as instructed by her mother, and was there trying to hide her two year old brother.
Defendant took her from there, took her out to his car, a red Honda Civic, and put her in the trunk.
B.T. was able to get herself untied. Despite her significant injuries and resulting cognitive
communication deficit, B.T. was able to maintain some consciousness and to instinctively provide
care to her two children still in the home. However, she was unable to complete most ordinary
tasks, like checking her phone, and lost track of time, remaining in the home in a semi-conscious
state until police arrived, including forgetting to get her kids from school. Evidence recovered
from the home indicates that B.T. managed to take the five month old to a crib, to feed both
children, and to set up a place for the two year old to watch a movie. She was able to clean some
of the blood from her face and to lie down, where it appears she lost consciousness for some time.
B.T. normally picked up her two school age children from school at the end of the day.
When that did not happen on February 12, 2018, the school called the Charleston Police
Department (CPD) requesting a safety check on B.T. A CPD officer, as well as a school
representative, went to B.T.’s home to check on her around 6:00 p.m. There they repeatedly and
loudly knocked on the door, peered in windows, shined flashlights into the house, and attempted
to find out if anyone was inside, never getting an answer. The responding officer was able to reach
K.T. on the phone, and K.T. made repeated attempts to contact B.T., as he had been doing
throughout the day. Eventually, B.T. answered the phone, and was told by K.T. that the police
were outside. B.T. then went to the door, where she met the responding officers. The significant
swelling and injuries to B.T.’s face made it clear that medical help was needed, and Fire and EMS
3
2:18-cr-00256-DCN Date Filed 02/28/19 Entry Number 57 Page 4 of 12
soon arrived.
Although B.T. was still suffering from her injuries, she remembered that she had told her
four-year-old daughter to run, and it soon became apparent that the four-year-old was not in the
house. Investigators initially believed the four-year-old may have run outside, and an intensive
search began for her in the neighborhood and surrounding areas. CPD and a multitude of local
agencies converged on the home and immediately started a methodical search. An outpouring of
support from neighbors and concerned citizens followed as well, with everyone working together
to locate the missing four-year-old girl. However, when B.T.’s bankcard was used the next day in
Georgia, it became clear that the defendant was likely well out of the area, along with the
Defendant drove west when he left the Charleston area. Defendant would later tell
investigators that he drove to the Aiken, S.C., area where he stopped and broke into a house.
Defendant claimed that he tied up the homeowner, beat him with a hammer and stole drugs from
the house. 1
On Wednesday, February 13, at around 6:10 p.m., a residential burglary was reported to
the Morgan Co. Sheriff’s office, which covers Rutledge, Georgia. Rutledge is located between
Atlanta and Augusta, just off of I-20. Four residents of the home, who worked at a farm, reported
that they returned to the house and found it broken into. They also reported that a red Honda Civic,
later determined to be the car defendant was driving, was abandoned behind the home. Largely
household items, such as a razor, clothing, a watch and a TV, as well as $500 cash, were taken
1
Agents investigated defendant’s claims, and were not able to find any evidence to corroborate
this claim.
4
2:18-cr-00256-DCN Date Filed 02/28/19 Entry Number 57 Page 5 of 12
from the home. A blue Chevy Impala, belonging to the residents’ employer was also stolen using
The business owner was able to provide GPS coordinates for the Impala, since it was
equipped with GPS tracking. At that time, the Impala, was headed west on I-20, near the
Birmingham, Alabama area. After leaving Georgia, defendant headed towards Alabama, and
stopped in Riverside. Railroad workers noticed the Impala parked near some railroad tracks
around 4:00 p.m. on February 14, 2018. They found this suspicious, and contacted the police.
Riverside Police Chief Rick Oliver responded and found the Impala parked near the tracks,
running, with defendant asleep in the driver’s seat and the four-year-old girl inside. The four-year-
old was dressed in adult clothing, which turned out to be some of what was stolen from the
Chief Oliver was concerned by what he saw and knocked on the car window, waking
defendant up. He asked defendant for identification and to get out of the car. Although defendant
did not have any identification, he gave Chief Oliver his name. Chief Oliver asked defendant what
his relationship was with the four-year-old, and defendant said that she was his stepdaughter. Chief
Oliver told defendant to come with him to the police station, where they could contact the girl’s
mother and determine whether defendant’s claim was true. Defendant asked Chief Oliver whether
he could just let them “go back to South Carolina” and Chief Oliver said no. Defendant asked if
he could follow Chief Oliver back to the police station by car, and Chief Oliver again said no, that
they could walk. Defendant asked if Chief Oliver would carry the child for him, and Chief Oliver
agreed. As soon as Chief Oliver had the child in his arms, the defendant quickly returned to the
5
2:18-cr-00256-DCN Date Filed 02/28/19 Entry Number 57 Page 6 of 12
Once Chief Oliver had the child, he requested a records check for any missing children
then took the girl to City Hall. There, she was comforted by a local Magistrate who talked with
her, and the Fire Chief who brought her food. Medical assistance was requested and the four-year-
old was quickly taken to the Children’s Hospital. The Impala was vehicle was soon located in
Lauderdale County, Mississippi, near Jackson, where State Troopers attempted to stop defendant.
Defendant initially led Troopers on a high speed chase, but eventually crashed and was arrested.
C. Interview
Defendant was interviewed by CPD Detective Mark Mellette and FBI Special Agent Ed
Klimas. Defendant told investigators that he had been released from prison on February 1, 2018,
then went to Boiling Springs, SC, where he stayed with Sharon Hayden. Later investigation would
show that Hayden and defendant communicated while Evans was still in prison and the two
intended to have a relationship once Evans was released from prison. Defendant told investigators
that he chose B.T. and her family at random, and that he initially planned to rob them. He said he
saw them as a perfect family that he wished he had and that he hated anything that looked like a
perfect family. He said that he ran up from behind B.T., and she fought him. Defendant said he
attacked B.T. and slammed her head against the floor multiple times and hit her in the face with
his fists several times. He said he tied her up with a cord, but she kept breaking out and he kept
tying her up. He said she stopped fighting him when he told her if she did not stop fighting, he
Defendant said that he stayed in the house for a while, but determined that he did not have
time to take many things. Defendant said he attempted to clean up B.T.’s blood with bleach, but
realized there was too much of it so decided to leave. When he decided to leave, he said he decided
6
2:18-cr-00256-DCN Date Filed 02/28/19 Entry Number 57 Page 7 of 12
Defendant told investigators that somewhere in Georgia he sexually assaulted the four-
year-old. He said that he knew it was wrong, but did it anyway. Defendant admitted that he broke
into the house in Rutledge, Georgia, and took the Impala. He said that he had the four-year-old
shower at the home, and then he continued driving. Defendant gave agents a general location of
where he dumped clothing and other evidence, which was later located in Alabama. This included
D. Sharon Hayden
Defendant also admitted to killing Sharon Hayden. Defendant said he got in an argument
with Hayden about money, involving accusations that Hayden was using defendant’s financial
information for fraudulent purposes. Defendant told agents that Hayden pulled a knife on him in
the Boiling Springs home, and that he got the knife away from her and stabbed her in the side, he
believed collapsing her lung. Defendant said that Hayden left the house and ran into some woods
behind the house. Defendant said that he thought Hayden died there, but he never saw her body.
He said that he began to notice a smell consisted with what he thought was her decaying body, and
decided to leave the house. For three days defendant said he stayed in the house, living there.
When he left, he took Hayden’s Honda Civic and her cell phone.
After defendant’s statement, investigators thoroughly searched the property near Hayden’s
home but could not locate a body. However, consistent with defendant’s statement, all of the
typical activity Sharon Hayden engaged in ended around February 3, 2018. Sharon Hayden
worked at a local Pizza Hut, and stopped showing up to work on February 4, 2018. Defendant,
using Hayden’s phone, called her employer and said she would not be in. This happened again on
February 5 and 6, 2018. Further, Hayden’s financial activity, social media activity and contact
7
2:18-cr-00256-DCN Date Filed 02/28/19 Entry Number 57 Page 8 of 12
with others all stopped at that same time. Finally, defendant began using Hayden’s car and her
cell phone around that time and was later found in possession of her laptop computer. Activity on
the computer after around February 3, 2018 was not consistent with Hayden still using it either.
Taking all of this into account, the government submits that defendant killed Sharon Hayden,
though he has not been truthful regarding the circumstances surrounding her killing.
activity, and aggravated sexual abuse. His total offense level is 43 (reduced from 48 under USSG
Chapter 5, Part A (comment n.2), and his criminal history category is III. The corresponding
advisory guideline range is life imprisonment. Although the government will provide additional
comment at sentencing, and anticipates that individuals affected by defendants crimes will want to
speak, the government believes a life sentence in this case is necessary to accomplish the objectives of
18 U.S.C. § 3553(a), including to punish defendant for his crimes, to protect the public, and to
In determining the appropriate sentence, “a district court must begin by correctly calculating
the applicable Guidelines range.” United States v. Evans, 526 F.3d 155, 160 (4th Cir. 2008). The
advisory Guidelines are “the starting point and the initial benchmark.” Gall v. United States, 552
U.S. 38, 49 (2007). The Guidelines “seek to embody the § 3553(a) considerations, both in principle
and in practice. . . . [I]t is fair to assume that the Guidelines, insofar as practicable, reflect a rough
approximation of sentences that might achieve § 3553(a)’s objectives.” Rita v. United States, 551
U.S. 338, 350 (2007). “[A] Guidelines sentence will usually be reasonable, because it reflects
both the Commission’s and the sentencing court’s judgment as to what is an appropriate sentence
8
2:18-cr-00256-DCN Date Filed 02/28/19 Entry Number 57 Page 9 of 12
for a given offender.” Id. at 351. Ultimately, however, the appropriate sentence is for the District
Court to determine based on the factors enumerated in 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a), and “any sentence,
United States v. Diosdado-Star, 630 F.3d 359, 365 (4th Cir. 2011).
The 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a) factors dictate a life sentence for defendant. While the post-
Booker sentencing regime affords the sentencing court discretion in selecting the appropriate
sentence, “[a]s a matter of administration and to secure nationwide consistency, the advisory
Guidelines should be the starting point and the initial benchmark” in determining the appropriate
sentence. Gall v. United States, 522 U.S. at 49. The Fourth Circuit has stated it even more strongly,
describing the Guideline offense level as “the crucial ‘starting point,’ as well as the ‘initial
benchmark’” in the sentencing process. United States v. Lewis, 606 F.3d 193, 199 (4th Cir. 2010)
The nature and circumstances of the offense are horrific. Defendant chose a family at
random, brutally assaulted B.T., and kidnapped and sexually assaulted a four-year-old girl.
Defendant had just been released from prison after serving ten years for Burglary and Armed
Robbery, and by all accounts killed Sharon Hayden in the weeks prior to his current offenses.
Despite the brutal assault on B.T., defendant took very little personal property from the home.
He could have easily done so. Instead, he chose to take something that was priceless, a four-
year-old child. And the sexual assault committed against her the following day shows
Defendant’s crime spree began within days of being released from his ten-year prison
term for Burglary and Armed Robbery offenses that occurred in 2009. These offenses involved
the burglary of one gas station and the robbery of another gas station using a gun. While serving
his ten-year sentence, the defendant had numerous infractions while in prison, including holding
an individual at knife point. Defendant’s crime spree includes killing Sharon Hayden, breaking
into a home in Rutledge, Georgia and fleeing from State Troopers at the time of his arrest. This
spree does not take into account defendant’s uncorroborated claim that, while he was fleeing
Charleston, he broke into a home, tied up the occupant, beat the occupant with a hammer, and
robbed him. Defendant literally began committing serious, reprehensible crimes the moment he
got out of prison and did not stop until he was arrested. Finally, the impact of these crimes on
others is immeasurable. The government has provided the Court with victim impact statements,
Defendant has been given several opportunities within the criminal justice system to
change his behavior. However, defendant has only become increasingly violent. Defendant first
became involved in the criminal justice system at 18, obtaining convictions for Possession of
Marijuana. He soon after was convicted of felony offenses, including breaking and entering
automobiles, at age 19, resulting in a 90 day sentence and three years of probation. The same
year, defendant was convicted of Assault and Battery of a High and Aggravated Nature, though
he was originally charged with Criminal Sexual Conduct with a Minor, specifically, a fifteen year
old minor female. In 2002, defendant was convicted of Strong Arm Robbery, where defendant
stole groceries by force from a woman in downtown Charleston. This time, defendant was
10
2:18-cr-00256-DCN Date Filed 02/28/19 Entry Number 57 Page 11 of 12
sentenced to 127 days time served and 2 years probation. Defendant has also been convicted of
a variety of traffic and driving offenses, both before and after the above convictions. Finally, in
2009 he was convicted of Burglary and Armed Robbery that resulted in a ten-year prison
sentence. What emerges from all of this is a defendant who has been in front of Judges time and
time again and given minor sentences time and time again, only to commit increasingly violent,
and ultimately appalling, crimes. Even when defendant was sentenced to ten years for Armed
Robbery, the sentence represented the mandatory minimum sentence allowed for such a crime.
What is missing from defendants criminal history is a sentence that recognizes that defendant’s
criminal activity has consistently escalated despite increasing consequences. Although this
Court’s opportunity to protect the public is tragically late, it is now clear that the defendant, if not
locked up, will commit further violent crimes. His history, and the need to protect the public,
C. Seriousness of the Offense, Respect for the Law, and Just Punishment
As noted above, defendant committed horrific crimes that mandate a life sentence.
Defendant’s conduct traumatically impacted several individuals and families, and affected an entire
community and city. Defendant’s sentence must recognize the significant harm his crimes have
caused his victims, and the government anticipates providing information regarding this harm at
The Court must also fashion a sentence that will afford adequate deterrence to criminal
conduct. There are two forms of deterrence, specific and general. Relative to defendant, he has
clearly shown himself incapable of being deterred. Defendant’s horrific crimes require deterrence
11
2:18-cr-00256-DCN Date Filed 02/28/19 Entry Number 57 Page 12 of 12
that only can be accomplished through a life sentence. The government also believes that a life
sentence is needed to keep defendant away from the public – to protect the public from a
defendant who has shown time and time again that he will commit horrific violent crimes if he is
not in prison. Only a life sentence can deter this defendant and keep the public safe from him.
For the above stated reasons, the government requests that this Court follow the guideline
Respectfully submitted,
SHERRI A. LYDON
UNITED STATES ATTORNEY
12