Back 
Twitter @ValerieRowell
Authorities arrested three people Wednesday for damaging campaign signs at the Lee Anderson for Congress campaign headquarters.
Angelique Bane, 29, of Crawford Drive in Martinez; Kyle Austin Hobson, 17, of Waylon Court in Martinez; and Haley Nicole Craft, 18, of Beech Lane in Grovetown, were charged with two counts of criminal trespass. They were being held Wednesday in the Columbia County Detention Center, each on a $2,700 bond, according to jail records.
The three were already in custody after being caught by a security guard for Target in the Mullins Crossing shopping center, Morris said.
The guard found the trio had used a ladder to climb onto the roof where they were spray-painting "sexually explicit graffiti," Morris said. When authorities learned of the damaged signs, they interviewed Bane, Hobson and Craft and connected them to the vandalism.
Overnight, the trio used red spray paint to deface numerous signs at the headquarters on Washington Road at Belair Road in Evans, according to a statement released Wednesday by Anderson’s communications director Ryan Mahoney.
Anderson/Romney campaign signs throughout Columbia and Richmond counties also were vandalized. Columbia County sheriff's Capt. Morris said 32 signs were damaged.
“This is what Democrats do when they are losing,” Mahoney said. “This is ridiculous, inexcusable, and down-right criminal and we intend to press charges for this juvenile and destructive behavior.”
The damage was reported to the Columbia County Sheriff’s Office early Wednesday.
expected
If it was done by democratic voters who believe killing unborn babies is okay what would seem wrong to them. If done by kids up to no good, then that is a different story.
Target
I wish ace reporter Valerie Rowell would flesh out the Target angle of the story a little more. How did they get up on the roof of the target (did they bring their own ladder? Is there a permanent ladder mounted on the back wall? Did an air conditioning crew accidentally leave a ladder lying about?) Also, how did police find them there (Were police tipped off? Were the vandals spotted from a patrol car?) Also, the time of day they were caught up on the roof would make the story more complete. And a description of the nature of the graffiti on Target's roof would add a human interest touch to the story. Was it artwork or merely words?
How do we know these vandals where....
How do we know these vandals are democrates? Heck one of them isnt old enough to vote yet. Ryan Mohoney and his ignorant statment seem to be alot with whats wrong with politics in Columbia County.
Questions answered, Little Lamb
Little Lamb: Good questions. We've now updated the story to answer them. Thanks!
Thank you
I appreciate the update.
nice update....
but you left the aweful quote by Ryan Mohoney in there...I guess you want your reader to think these vandals had something to do with the democratic party....sad!!!
Response to smaAShT
The story includes a response from the Anderson campaign because the signs belong to the campaign, and many of them were vandalized at their campaign headquarters. If you're unhappy with Ryan Mahoney's comment, I suggest you take it up with him.
Relevant
Ryan Mahoney's quote is responsive and relevant, and belongs in the story. What is fascinating to me is Mahoney's statement that the campaign committee intends to press charges. The story says they damaged campaign signs in Columbia and Richmond counties. That would be a hoot if they were convicted in both counties and had to serve consecutive sentences.
I never have quite understood the notion of "pressing charges" in criminal offenses. Sometimes the victim doesn't want to press charges and law enforcement just walks away. Other times the victim doesn't want to press charges, but law enforcement goes ahead and prosecutes. I guess it just depends on which side of the bed the DA got up that day.
Pressing charges
The idea of "pressing charges" typically depends on the charge, which specifies the victim, who decides whether to press charges. The confusion is that the "victim" sometimes is the state even when there is an actual human victim. (Murder or manslaughter, for example). If the vandalism in question were of street signs, the victim would have been the state.
Also, I'd assume because the signs are in the same judicial circuit, the charges likely will be consolidated.
Again
Thanks again, Barry. I guess it's entirely possible that Target won't press charges. At least the Anderson campaign is being responsible. I just thought of something. The Anderson campaign (win or lose) will be a thing of the past when this crime goes to court.
Target
Not sure about Target, but remember: They were already in custody for the Target vandalism/trespass when the cops asked them about defacing the signs.
Remain Silent
It is amazing how many criminals just have to talk. I'm flabbergasted; but I'm also thankful.
Going to court
I can readily see where it would be in Target's interest not to press charges. That way, with no charge, Target would not have to send witnesses to testify in a trial. They would be spending stockholders’ money for no bottom line benefit.