A Georgetown County judge is weighing whether to drop South Carolina's probation agency from a civil lawsuit accusing it of failing to keep a convicted sex offender away from children at a Pawleys Island church and school. Warren Perry, who pleaded guilty in November 2023 to sexual exploitation of a minor, continued volunteering at a church campus that also housed a school and child care facility, and he remains in the Georgetown County jail.
The hearing centered on whether the South Carolina Department of Probation, Parole and Pardon Services should be dismissed from the lawsuit, which parents filed after alleging Perry had contact with a child while volunteering at Pawleys Island Community Church and its school. According to WPDE, the agency is accused of failing to enforce conditions meant to keep Perry away from children, even though his probation terms prohibited him from having contact with minors or working at specified locations, including schools, daycares and playgrounds.
Plaintiffs' Attorney Pushes for Discovery
Bill Hopkins, the attorney representing the plaintiffs, argued in court that probation officers had a responsibility to monitor and supervise Perry and said the family should be allowed to obtain discovery into what the department knew and what actions it took. Hopkins questioned whether officers had documented their supervision of Perry at all, telling the court the plaintiffs do not know whether officers ever visited the church, who visited, when those visits occurred, what reports were made, or whom officers spoke to while there, the station's report notes.
Hopkins also told the court that one visit would have prevented all of this, underscoring the plaintiffs' argument that routine oversight could have caught the violation before it allegedly happened. The agency, for its part, said in a July statement that it approved Perry to volunteer at the church based in part on character witness statements from then-pastor Don Williams, as reported by WMBF.
State Argues for Dismissal
Nelson Chandler, the attorney representing the probation agency, told the court the department's duty is to the public and the court, per the same account from the hearing. The state argued that an exception within the Federal Tort Claims Act protects it from liability, as separate reporting from The Post and Courier describes the agency's argument.
The Post and Courier also reports that the agency argued the plaintiffs lacked standing because they had not identified an injury caused by the agency's actions. The judge did not indicate how he would rule on the dismissal request, according to that outlet's account of the proceedings.
No Ruling Yet, More Case Law Requested
After hearing arguments from both sides, the judge did not issue a ruling and did not set a timeline for when one might come. Instead, the judge asked both sides to provide copies of the legal cases they cited during the hearing, indicating he needs more time to review case law before deciding whether the agency stays in the lawsuit. The judge also has not ruled on a separate matter involving Perry's probation violation.
How South Carolina supervises sex offenders on probation depends heavily on risk classification. Per the agency's protocols, the frequency of required progress audits depends on an offender's assigned risk level, and WMBF's reporting on the state's supervision system describes the highest tier, known as SO-Containment, as requiring four progress audits per month, at least two of which must be home visits. The department's own materials state that its sex-offender management protocols include a specific risk assessment tool, revised supervision levels, agent-contact requirements, specific conditions, a treatment model, and GPS monitoring, according to the South Carolina Department of Probation, Parole and Pardon Services.
Legal Precedent Looms Over the Case
Questions of state liability for probation oversight have reached South Carolina's courts before. In a case stemming from a 1993 assault on a nine-year-old boy by a juvenile on probation, the South Carolina Supreme Court rejected the Department of Juvenile Justice's argument that a counselor's placement decision was a judicial act entitled to quasi-judicial immunity, according to the South Carolina Supreme Court. That opinion makes clear immunity for probation-related conduct applies only to functions courts deem judicial in nature, not to supervisory decisions generally.
A related federal lawsuit against the church, school and other defendants was dismissed without prejudice in September after a federal judge found the plaintiffs had not established federal jurisdiction, a ruling that did not resolve whether the underlying allegations were true, per WCIV's separate reporting. The civil case against the probation agency in Georgetown County remains pending as the judge reviews the case law both sides submitted.
