2:18-cr-00256-DCN Date Filed 02/28/19 Entry Number 57 Page 1 of 12

IN THE DISTRICT OF SOUTH CAROLINA

DISTRICT OF SOUTH CAROLINA
CHARLESTON DIVISION

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA ) Criminal No. 2:18-CR-00256-DCN

)
v. )
)
THOMAS LAWTON EVANS, JR. )
)

GOVERNMENT’S SENTENCING MEMORANDUM

IN SUPPORT OF A LIFE SENTENCE

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

A. Assault and Kidnapping

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

possibility that the four-year-old girl was with him.

B. Flight Through Georgia and Arrest in Alabama

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

keys that were in the home.

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

Rutledge, GA, home.

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

car and drove off at a high rate of speed.

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.

He was then taken into custody.

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

would hurt everybody.

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

to take the four-year-old for company.

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

items belonging to B.T.

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.

II. DEFENDANT’S CONVICTIONS

Defendant pleaded guilty to kidnapping, transportation of a minor to engage in sexual

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

prevent him from committing similar crimes in the future.

III. LEGAL ANALYSIS

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,

within or outside of the Guidelines range, as a result of a departure or of a variance, must be

reviewed by appellate courts for reasonableness pursuant to an abuse of discretion standard.”

United States v. Diosdado-Star, 630 F.3d 359, 365 (4th Cir. 2011).

IV. THE § 3553(a) FACTORS DICTATE A LIFE SENTENCE

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)

(quoting Gall, 522 U.S. at 49) (emphasis added).

A. Nature and Circumstances of the Offense

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 intentions in kidnapping the child.

9
 2:18-cr-00256-DCN Date Filed 02/28/19 Entry Number 57 Page 10 of 12

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,

and intends to provide additional evidence at sentencing.

B. History and Characteristics of Defendant

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,

mandate a life sentence in this case.

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

sentencing through the statements of those affected.

D. Adequate Deterrence and Protection of the Public

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

range of life and impose sentence of life imprisonment.

Respectfully submitted,

SHERRI A. LYDON
UNITED STATES ATTORNEY

By: s/Nathan S. Williams

Nathan S. Williams (#10400)
Assistant United States Attorney
151 Meeting St., Ste. 200
Charleston, SC 29401
(843) 266-1671

Charleston, South Carolina

February 28, 2019

12