Mark Sanford, Jenny Sanford Settle Family Court Dispute

Congressman-elect won't appear in court Thursday on trespass allegation.

Congressman-elect Mark Sanford won't appear in Charleston County Family Court Thursday on a trespassing allegation.

A Family Court clerk confirmed the contempt of court hearing had been cancelled, and the judge is withholding sentencing. See the latest court filing.

Mark Sanford in court papers admitted to trespassing at Jenny Sanford's beachfront Sullivan's Island home when he visited his son on Feb. 3 to watch the Super Bowl. He has agreed to pay his ex-wife's attorney's fees.

Jenny Sanford had alleged that the former Republican governor repeatedly entered her beachfront Sullivan's Island home without her consent. She caught him leaving the house following the Super Bowl on Feb. 3, according to a court filing. See the court filings.

Jenny Sanford had sought to close Thursday's proceedings to the public. The judge refused that request, reporters had planned to cover the hearing, which would have been similar to bench trial, said one local lawyer.

"The judge (would have been) deciding guilt on the contempt of court charge and whether (Mark Sanford) violated the previous court order," said Colleen Condon, a family court attorney and Charleston County Councilwoman.

The judge could have issued a warning, ordered community service, imposed a fine or even sentenced Sanford to jail time, though stiff penalties were not likely.

The trespassing case was not the couple's first time in family court. Records show a handful of family court appearances on various matters relating to the terms of their divorce.

"It's not unusual to go back to court at least once in these contentious types of divorces," said Condon, who does not represent either Sanford.

It's also not unusual for couples to be banned from each other's homes, Condon said. That's a typical requirement, and it's sometimes violated. Judges usually only order jail time or stiff penalty if the trespassing seems malicious or presents harm to one of the parties.

"If the judge thought the trespassing was being done in a threatening manner, jail might be a possibility," Condon said.

Mark Sanford in 2009 split with Jenny Sanford when it was revealed that he used taxpayer money to fly to Argentina to visit his mistress. The couple's divorce was finalized the next year, and Mark Sanford has since proposed to his once mistress, Maria Belen Chapur.

Chapur was at Sanford's side Tuesday when he reclaimed a seat he held in Congress in the 1990s.

The affair was widely seen as a career-ender for Sanford, who was once thought to be a contender for the White House. The revelations that he violated the terms of his divorce when he trespassed at Jenny Sanford's home nearly sidelined his political comeback.

Though donors withdrew funds, Sanford still handily won Tuesday's race in a 55 to 45 margin against Democrat Elizabeth Colbert Busch.

Tony May 08, 2013 at 09:35 PM
It think you are correct; something about him tripping and his pecker ended up in Maria and he found his true love.
Tony May 08, 2013 at 09:43 PM
Well they got hurt by Mark being a dumb a s s, nothing more! Some of us may have cheated on our wives and ex wives, but only a few of us have done it with taxpayer funds. BTW, I didn't cheat on my ex of any of the women I was in a relationship with, but at times I have been a dumb a s s and have and ended up in the sack with some real winners.
Ambassador May 08, 2013 at 09:50 PM
You really wonder about the "timing" of all of the private matter that became a public matter. Personally, Ms. Sanford says it was suppose to be private and what was it all about from what I gather?---he watches a super bowl game with his son at someone else's house and then the son wants to go home so Mr. Sanford tries to call Ms. Sanford and cannot reach her so he brings the son home to the house and meets up with Ms. Sanford as he is leaving. This gets blown up almost to the point of Mr. Sanford being some kind of burglar/rapist who deserves the death penalty--all happening conveniently right before the election. If you believe this crap as being some kind of horrible felony you believe pigs fly---in my book it never deserved an ounce of press and is an insult to everyone concerned. I would like to know who made a private matter public--that is the person who should be held accountable for this. Listening to those despicable and sleazy democrat ads I can only guess where the blame lies.
Tony May 08, 2013 at 10:03 PM
You know one side always say it a private matter and the other side will say it public matter due to person running for elected office. Guess what, the two parties are on both sides of the issue depending if it is their candidate. Now as far as this being a simple matter, I don't think so; that what you normally see during a divorce. Not afterwards. Should we be hanging from tree on a contempt hearing; most of time no, but from what has been put this isn't the first time. The problem I have with this whole thing is that he hid this during the primary and try to keep it from the people during election and use his pull to get the court hearing held the day after the election.
Donald May 08, 2013 at 11:24 PM
Cathy, you moron.. Why wasn't Colbert-Bush's night in jail yacked about??? Perhaps it's a given that the democrackers ( a cute description from a kindergartener several years ago) are going to break the law, stretch the truth, throw the brick then hide their hand. All the negative adds on tv from the Colbert-Bush camp made me concerned for God. Who knows she may go after his job next...
Donald May 08, 2013 at 11:32 PM
Glad to see all the comments from so many self righteous/Sunday Christians on here, Dems and Reps alike.... With so much perfection on here it's a shame that Jesus had to die. Hey, I've got a pile of rocks here, anyone want ot buy one??? Hey Stanley Seigler, or any of you moralist, do you know his heart?? I think only God would know that unless of course you've taken God's job.. Remember Stanley, the eye of a needle.
Tony May 08, 2013 at 11:42 PM
Donald, do you give all politicians a pass or just the one you like? I judge the man on more than his private life; the fact remains he ran for this office to get his political career back on track. He attempting to regain his political ambitions on the taxpayer back. I don't like being used.
joe May 09, 2013 at 12:15 AM
Yes indeed. Great post.
joe May 09, 2013 at 12:40 AM
lol Stanley.Election is over. Busch-League was a horrible candidate and the ONLY debate she would agree to showed her to be angry,bitter,entitled,uninformed and frankly unqualified to serve SC 1. Her campaign staff was as inexperienced and incompetent as she was. A hapless mesh of OWS types,college students and interns.From the racist radio ad with the 'Shaft" theme,to the "odd" timing of the release of the family court petition/motion to the media/public,her unwillingness to engage voters of SC 1 on the issues,the debate debacle and her "mug shot" showing HER to be a hypocrite, the voters decided they could not trust her. Horrible candidate+horrible campaign strategy and messaging= DEFEAT in a landslide. Thanks to you and reg for playing such a big role in her defeat. In my opinion both of you actually defined her 'type' of voter in SC 1 and apparently it was not appealing to those that voted.
Bernie Gay May 09, 2013 at 12:56 AM
More repetition of lies, Patch. "Mark Sanford in 2009 split with Jenny Sanford when it was revealed that he used taxpayer money to fly to Argentina to visit his mistress." You know full well that his visit to Ms. Chapur was incidental to the properly funded trip to Argentina. Let it go. It just shows your own lack of character.
Tony May 09, 2013 at 01:16 AM
What? They split after Jenny found out that her husband was screwing around on her. Properly funded? What came out of that trip that benefited SC? I really don't know! What we all know, Mark was chasing tail when he was suppose to be on business on the behalf of the SC people. I guess you can say properly funded; if by that you mean Mark was able to romance Maria on the taxpayer dime.
maizenbluedoc May 09, 2013 at 01:19 AM
Don't assume that everyone posts something you dislike is a christian or self-rightous.
Lisa Fox May 09, 2013 at 01:50 AM
I hope that now he got elected to the house by a bunch of people that can't tell right from wrong. Now maybe the giglo will be more ethical. I seriously doubt that. Ya'll elected him now SC 1 has to live with it.
Donald May 09, 2013 at 01:55 AM
maizenbluedoc, I don't assume anything, you know the old ass-u-me adage. Read the posts and you will find that most of the haters, finger pointers are bringing up issues they have done or at least thought about. No one posting here including myself is so pure or unadulterated... Pardon the pun.
Jim Tillman May 09, 2013 at 02:06 AM
JOE ....you got to the true fact of it all. Colbert Busch was unwilling to engage the voters on the issues. You have to give me a reason to vote for you. Pelosi's trail/Argetina ads were ok the first 10 times I saw them, but, the shear volume of same negativity made me feel bad about her. I do not think running them that much was her idea. Pelosi made a close race a landslide. I actually expected Mark Sanford to throw mud back by bringing up her 1988 mug shot for Contempt of Court during her divorce. I applaud him for not doing so because those details are their private business.
stanley seigler May 09, 2013 at 02:21 AM
@joe needless to say i disagree with joe's mindless, vitriolic, characteristic of ECB...and have no idea re the quality of her campaign...but as a citizen voter saw nothing wrong with it... the bottom line it was not effective as she lost...will leave the campaign critique up to professional political consultants like joe...he is a pro right???...tho based on his past analysis and conclusions have serious doubts he is reasonable informed on any subject... re: 'Thanks to you [stanley] and reg for playing such a big role...' this a prime example of joe's erroneous conclusions and/or failed attempts at humor...stanley certainly had no role in ECB's loss...just as joe had no role in 'the hikers' win...except that he baabaa-ed in concert with the other hypocritical, christian, GOP sheep...
stanley seigler May 09, 2013 at 02:53 AM
@Donald donald's disjoined comments are above my pay grade...eg rock pile...only God knows...the eye of the needle... i am familiar with the words/phases...but see no dot connect or relevance to 'Mark Sanford, Jenny Sanford Settle Family Court Dispute.' ohand the only self righteous Christians here are the hypocrites who voted for the family hiker... in case donald assumed (making an ass outta don) i am a christian...i am not a Christian, as defined by SC's religious right...nor a fan of any organized religion...havent been inside a church in 40-50 years...but 'pray there aint no hell'...
stanley seigler May 09, 2013 at 03:13 AM
@Donald re: I don't assume anything really now! you assume what others have done...eg; you say, ' bringing up issues they have done ...' speak for yoself donald...but dont tell your wife...ASSUMING you have one...
Robert Kelly May 09, 2013 at 03:29 AM
It's too bad Sanford's affair with his soul mate got so much coverage. Like most of the voters on the progressive side, the affair was never the issue. The issue was Sanford's politics, his ethics as they pertained to taxpayer money, and his cavalier attitude towards his commitment to public service. He was a failure on all those counts. Ironically his defenders focused more on the adultery aspect, mostly by saying that other politicians had done it, so why not Sanford? Not a very ringing endorsement, but also not very germane to the issues. FDR and Eisenhower had mistresses, so why persecute Sanford! If Democrats have problems with his decision-making and lack of positive policies, and GOP keeps claiming that DEMS are the party of adulterers, then NO ONE actually supports Mark Sanford, the GOP simply says "hey, why not?". The short story is that Mark Sanford was ineffective as a congressman (although he did vote 'yes' on the Defense of Marriage Act), generated no progress for South Carolina as governor, and was fined by the SC Assembly (controlled by his own party) for major ethics violations. A GREAT GOP candidate. And YOU chose him above all others!
stanley seigler May 09, 2013 at 03:37 AM
@Bernie Gay re: You know full well that his visit to Ms. Chapur was incidental BG is kidding...right? or perhaps he will post facts...wont google but seem to recall hiker repaid the trip expenses... if it was incidental and was a secret mission for SC with cover story, hiking on the A-trail...why would he repay the trip expense... the mind of the hypocrite is a peace of work...but begin to understand why the hiker won... BTW BG, wantta buy a bridge...in brooklyn or san francisco
Donald May 09, 2013 at 06:05 AM
@Stan ...Matthew 23:15 /Jesus say: 'Woe to you, scribes and Pharisees Your words not mine.. See ya in hell
maizenbluedoc May 09, 2013 at 10:46 AM
For all of those with their 'panties in a wad', consider Mark Sanford a place holder until a viable Republican candidate is selected.
stanley seigler May 09, 2013 at 11:16 AM
@Donald re: 'Woe to you, scribes and Pharisees, HYPOCRITES actually Christ's words and my reference to them was re GOP family values hypocrites... donald omitted 'hypocrites' in his post...which, as usual, had no relevance to his statement ' I don't assume anything' then assumes 'what others have done'
SAHMOM May 09, 2013 at 12:26 PM
Has anyone forgot that he was only going by example, The President's took a second jet for his dog Bo for a lil vacation ALL ON THE TAX PAYERS MONEY! but the "people are not as luxurious with our money as the President. Do you know that it is no longer a law that you get a lunch at work or that you get vacation, or sick time, The Government says they are not a requirement at the work place. OK, so why does President get one on us??? Before you go after the little guy, take a good look at what boss is doing with your hard earned $ money! Lol Giving his dog a plane ride!
Tony May 09, 2013 at 01:56 PM
Well I like seeing both sides blind to their own party failures, putting blame on the woman, and now I guess the boy was wrong for inviting his father in. Neve mind the father is a grown man who knows the condition of his divorce. Now, if Mark thought he was so right in what he did; why did he try to hide during the election, did hide during the primary, and was caught sneaking out the backdoor? These are not the actions of ethical man. As far democrat/republican and morals/ethics you have a "great" number on both sides who have fail and will continue to fail because of the voters. Let see you have footsie play in bathroom stall, cheating on your spouse, doing that while on a taxpayer paid trip, word play to get around the truth, and taking extreme ends of an issue for political gain. That should be plenty to start with here and both parties are guilty of all of these, but the people pick and choose what they willing turn a blind eye too when supporting their party or candidate. Until the people began to hold their own party to the values they claim the other side is lacking then nothing will change.
Honus henserligenfudnacht May 09, 2013 at 02:12 PM
The Issue was kept alive by 3 stooges, who devoted their time to throw dung at Sanford in hope that some of it will stick, they only contributed to energize Sanford base hence his win with a Landslide.
john cox May 09, 2013 at 05:59 PM
Mark sanford's personal affairs were neverf an issue for me. However his lack of character and integrity, deceit, dereliction of duty, and ethics violations were. His re-election to the Congress (after repeatedly vowing to serve no more than three terms) shows that the majority of the South Carolina electorate would vote for a pile of dog excrement so long as it said it was a republican.
SAHMOM May 09, 2013 at 07:00 PM
Well that is because the dog excrement is a whole lot less then the Dino crap the democrats keep dropping!
ann May 10, 2013 at 03:16 PM
Mortals check out the democrats in washington. abortions up to 6months. day after pill to 15 year olds no parent consent . killing of our people on -9-11-2012 Oh wait what did white house say oh that happened long time ago ( MMM 8 months ago) \slaver happen a long time ago and and the freedom. ( but everyday the democrats and libs and hollywood and the main street media and people in washington ) keep using racist)that happened century ago. Ripping us off is giving millions to the brotherhood who hate america. Killers of our NAVY SEAL who got bin what ever his name was name. REALLY if your so upset democrats pass a bill where if you cheat while you are married rather husband or wife and you cheat with a married man or women . The husband or wife will give more then half of everything to the person you cheated on. and pay their medical bill due to the fact that they will have to get check for aids that you might of brought to them. The person who was the other women or man will be writing a check each month for causing heart ach to that person. If kids are involved you will be paying a check to them till they turned 18. No jail time hit where hurts the most THE POCKETS
ann May 10, 2013 at 03:18 PM
I have several friends who are DEM AHHHH yeah they do wear their (family values) on their sleeves. Didnt Jessie Jackson sr. father a child while he was married. Or after it came puplic that his wife was okay with it


More »
Got a question? Something on your mind? Talk to your community, directly.
Note Article
Just a short thought to get the word out quickly about anything in your neighborhood.
Share something with your neighbors.What's on your mind?What's on your mind?Make an announcement, speak your mind, or sell somethingPost something