Issac J. Bailey | If guilty, hold Viers accountable this time

If the allegations against him prove to be true, S.C. Rep. Thad Viers has a problem.

I can’t tell you how deep-seated it is, or what the odds are that it will manifest itself in uglier ways.

Less than a week after sharing a bond hearing in Myrtle Beach with a man charged with public intoxication, Viers took his place in Columbia among those who will set the legislative direction for South Carolina in 2012.

Viers was arrested last week, this time for allegedly harassing an ex-girlfriend over several months, a misdemeanor that carries a maximum sentence of three years in prison. He would not stop trying to rekindle a relationship she wanted no part of and continued to aggressively pursue her, according to the police report.

She asked him repeatedly to be left alone and had her father to speak with him and only reluctantly went to police – she didn’t want to adversely affect his career -- after he wouldn’t quit, according to the report.

He kept showing up at her house and work.

At best, his alleged actions raise questions about his intelligence.

Though she broke up with him last summer, a few weeks ago he asked for her hand in marriage.

He knew she worked in the solicitor’s office.

But Viers is not unintelligent, which means something else is at play.

If true, his actions represent a pattern, one that would be bad had they been committed by someone not in the public eye, but are much worse because he’s one of our area’s most influential young politicians. Leaders should be held to the highest standards and demand nothing less from themselves.

In 2007, Viers was convicted on an unlawful communications charge. He paid a $500 fine.

He should not have received a long prison sentence for those actions or been demonized, but such a small penalty sent a powerful message.

In isolation, it can be argued that the new charge is little more than a low-level crime. If being stupid in love was a crime, we’d all have spent time behind bars at some point.

But this shouldn’t be viewed in isolation.

During the summer of 2006, Viers and a small group of his friends verbally terrorized a man in a series of phone calls that were so threatening and ugly the man began sleeping with a shotgun. Viers and his friends said they planned to hurt the man and sexually assault his mother.

At first, Viers denied the calls. He told The Sun News it was “nothing more than a political hit job.”

He changed his tune when the victims provided the police and the media with copies of the voicemails.

The language on them was vile and disgusting.

The man being threatened by Viers was seeing Viers estranged wife.

Viers and his supporters argued that he should have been all but excused: He was simply a man in love who had lost control of his emotions.

I said then it was evidence of domestic violence, the crime that infects this state like no other. Physical abuse isn’t the only hallmark of that crime. Verbal intimidation and threats are sometimes more dangerous because they slowly destroy the victim mentally while leaving the abuser under the mistaken belief that the behavior is OK because it didn’t involve a physical attack. .

Can you imagine the aggravation and mental anguish, if not outright fear, such a situation can illicit? Would it be OK for me to repeatedly show up at your house and work and call and text and email you after you’ve told me to leave you alone?

Only those who’ve never experienced such threats can claim that such incidents are inconsequential

Quite a few of Viers’ supporters angrily contacted me in 2007 and said Viers had every right to do what he did, as though a woman, once married, has no right to leave her husband without being harassed.

Viers’ colleagues in the General Assembly did nothing, not even a censure to make it clear to Viers that such behavior is beneath – or should be beneath – the standards of those charged with leading South Carolina.

Voters in his district promptly sent him back to Columbia as though nothing happened.

The National Republican Campaign Committee elevated Viers to political rising star status by naming him to its “On the Radar” list, which made him a favorite to be the first person to represent the 7th Congressional District. He announced he would drop out of the race before he turned himself in to police.

What message did that send to those on the receiving end of such threats? That they will not be taken seriously until they’ve been shot or maimed or killed.

What message did it send to Viers? That such actions are excusable because of the pressures of a tough divorce, that legislative leaaders, instead of demanding a higher level of accountability essentially looked the other way.

Is it any wonder why victims are reluctant to seek help?