Crime & Courts

Richmond Co. | Columbia Co. | Aiken Co. |

Bond granted to former 4-H worker accused of sex with teen

  • Follow Crime & courts

A Superior Court judge granted bond Friday to a former 4-H worker accused of having a sexual relationship with a 15-year-old girl.

Jennifer Gayle Davenport, 26, of Augusta, was led out of an Evans courtroom Friday after a judge granted her a $25,000 bond. The former 4H worker is accused of having sex with a 15-year-old girl.   VALERIE ROWELL/STAFF
VALERIE ROWELL/STAFF
Jennifer Gayle Davenport, 26, of Augusta, was led out of an Evans courtroom Friday after a judge granted her a $25,000 bond. The former 4H worker is accused of having sex with a 15-year-old girl.


Judge Albert Pickett granted $25,000 bond to Jen­ni­fer Gayle Davenport, 26, of Augusta.

Davenport was arrested Monday after a Martinez mother told Columbia County sheriff’s investigators that she discovered Davenport “had been involved in a sexual relationship” with her daughter, according to an incident report and sheriff’s Capt. Steve Morris.

Davenport was charged with aggravated child molestation and aggravated sexual battery.

Assistant District Attorney Melissa Marks said the girl told her mother that Davenport performed oral sex on her and asked that she reciprocate. The girl’s mother said she found sexually explicit text messages from Daven­port on her daughter’s cellphone.

Conditions of Davenport’s bond are that she have no contact with the girl, an active 4-H participant, or her family and no contact with minors.

“This friendship, whatever it is or was, must end immediately,” Pickett said. “There must be no communication.”

Davenport worked with 4-H for about a year and quit as a program assistant about three weeks before her arrest, according to Shirley Williams, Columbia County’s 4-H coordinator.

Through her job, Daven­port had regular contact with children in and out of schools. More than 20 people, including some former 4-Hers, appeared in court in support of Davenport.

Marks opposed granting bond because she said Daven­port was a threat to intimidate witnesses and might have had inappropriate relations with minors before.

“She does have a close relationship to the kids in 4-H,” said Davenport’s attorney, Shawn Hammond. “But she denies these allegations.”

Comments (7)

Add comment
ADVISORY: Users are solely responsible for opinions they post here and for following agreed-upon rules of civility. Posts and comments do not reflect the views of this site. Posts and comments are automatically checked for inappropriate language, but readers might find some comments offensive or inaccurate. If you believe a comment violates our rules, click the "Flag as offensive" link below the comment.
JRC2024
6966
Points
JRC2024 04/06/13 - 09:41 am
1
0

Someone had to send those

Someone had to send those text messages and I am sure the detectives will check the origination number or ip address if from a computer. It does take two so I wonder who made the initial advances if any.

whyme
1089
Points
whyme 04/06/13 - 03:04 pm
1
0

follow-up

Again, we can only make our comments based on what was written in the paper. The first accusation listed was something that the teen told her mother that happened, so that is one person's word against the other. The other issue is the texts as you've mentioned, and you are right, I hope that they are investigated thoroughly, as this to me would be more "proof" than the other. It is interesting that the article only gave a brief mention to the defendant's side while the majority focused on the charges and reason for the arrest, etc. I try to be objective in these cases despite how heinous they may seem, as no matter what, everyone deserves a fair trial. It allows the alleged victim to get some justice if needed and it allows the alleged defendant to respond appropriately. Realizing that you can never really know someone, and that there are so many cases these days where crimes against children are happening too often, at the same time, a fair trial has to happen for all involved. We all try these cases in the media and amongst ourselves and it can be so damaging to everyone. We can't say that someone is guilty because of the way they look, the fact that a child is involved, or that if there are multiple reports it must have happened. Those who know the defendant indicate that while she may have been overly concerned about the welfare of those she mentored, she would never engage in such a behavior with anyone that she served. God bless all those involved.

Darby
19291
Points
Darby 04/06/13 - 11:43 pm
2
1

What I don't understand is why...

people keep getting caught doing this sort of thing. Don't they see the same things the rest of us do? Don't they see all those folks being sent up the river? Why isn't that enough to scare them straight?

whyme
1089
Points
whyme 04/07/13 - 12:34 pm
0
1

assumption

Once again an assumption of guilt is being made, and understandably so, because any crime involving such charges sound likely to be true. After all, why would they arrest someone if they were not? However, as Darby has written like others write on this and similar cases, the defendant is being considered guilty until proven innocent and not the other way around. This is not the way the law is supposed to work but in this age of instant information and the ability to freely comment, no longer does a defendant have a real chance. If guilty, a person should be duly punished. But if innocent, the person will still be punished because his or her life is now ruined thanks to forums such as these. I also don't think anyone can get a truly impartial jury because of the higher amount of publicity involved. So Darby and others like you, please keep my comments in mind before posting. One day it might be you or a family member who has made the news and guilty or innocent, you don't want to be tried in the media before you hope to get a fair trial in the courtroom.

Darby
19291
Points
Darby 04/07/13 - 09:53 pm
1
1

whyme - If you take the time to re-read

my post, I asked why "people" keep doing this sort of thing.

I made no judgment concerning the individual in this case.

You will agree that people do keep getting caught committing this same crime in spite of the notoriety won't you?

You may be the one who jumped the gun.

whyme
1089
Points
whyme 04/10/13 - 04:05 pm
0
1

hmmm

Sorry, Darby, but while you don't directly "make no judgment", you still indicate "why people" keep doing this sort of thing. If you expect people to refrain from "jumping the gun" then perhaps you should be more direct, such as "in some cases..." or "I have read other instances in which...". Any logical person would easily believe otherwise, and if that is your opinion, then stand behind it as I stand behind mine, as we are all entitled to them.

Darby
19291
Points
Darby 04/11/13 - 06:24 pm
1
0

Sorry, whyme, but I'll continue to

write in my own style while allowing folks like you and "Any logical person" to feel free to interpret my phraseology in any manner you chose.

I refuse to be limited in my thoughts and writings by some unknown person's propensity to twist my words.

If you have a thousand people, you might well have a thousand different ideas of what a "logical" interpretation of what a given phrase is.

Sorry about that!

Back to Top

Loading...