Nancy Mace ex-fiance charged: Patrick Bryant, the former fiancé of U.S. Rep. Nancy Mace, was charged with voyeurism on Wednesday as South Carolina investigators brought sex-crime charges against Bryant and two of his business associates over a 2018 episode the congresswoman described in detail on the House floor last year.
The Men Nancy Mace Named on the House Floor Are Now Charged
COLUMBIA, South Carolina — The former fiancé of U.S. Rep. Nancy Mace and two of his business associates were charged Wednesday with sex crimes and voyeurism over an October 2018 episode at a home on Sullivan's Island that the South Carolina congresswoman detailed in a nearly hour-long speech on the House floor in February 2025, the Associated Press reported. The charges, brought by the South Carolina Law Enforcement Division (SLED) after an investigation lasting more than a year, are the first criminal counts to emerge from allegations Mace made under the protection of Congress's Speech or Debate Clause — and they convert one of the most extraordinary speeches in recent House history into a criminal case that will now be tested in court.
What SLED charged on Wednesday
John Douglas Osborne, 46, faces the most serious counts: first-degree assault and battery and two counts of third-degree criminal sexual conduct. Patrick Bryant, 53, Mace's former fiancé, and Eric Bernard Bowman, 46, are each charged with voyeurism. Bowman faces additional charges of obstruction of justice — agents say he performed a factory reset on a cellphone he knew investigators were seeking under a search warrant — and of publishing the name of a victim of criminal sexual conduct after posting her name and a video of her on X, according to the AP's account of the sworn statements.
The charges cover three of the four men Mace accused by name in her 2025 speech. SLED did not say whether its investigation into any of the men is continuing, and it has not announced charges against the fourth man. Bryant did not return a message seeking comment on Wednesday, the AP reported, and attorneys who have represented Bowman and Osborne in other cases did not immediately respond. All three men are presumed innocent unless proven guilty, and none has entered a plea in the case.
The 2018 night on Sullivan's Island, as investigators describe it
The allegations, as set out in sworn statements by SLED agents and reported by the AP, concern a night in October 2018 — the Charleston County jail records cited by the New York Post date the incident to October 26, 2018 — at a home on Sullivan's Island, the affluent barrier-island community at the mouth of Charleston Harbor. Agents say a 23-year-old woman who was incapacitated and intoxicated, having fallen into a pool, was lying passed out on a couch covering herself with a pillow when Osborne committed sex acts on her while Bryant and Bowman watched. According to the statements, the men had discussed beforehand who would assault the woman, and the episode was photographed and recorded, including on a home security system feed.
A second woman who happened to be watching that security feed saw what was happening, took pictures and wrote about it in a journal, agents said — an account that, if prosecutors can put it before a jury, could become central evidence, because it was written at the time rather than reconstructed years later. Mace and Bryant were not yet engaged when the episode is alleged to have occurred; they became engaged in 2022 and called off the engagement in 2023.
The speech that forced the case into the open
Wednesday's charges cannot be separated from how the allegations became public. In February 2025, Mace took to the House floor for nearly an hour and named the men, describing what she said she had found when she looked at Bryant's cellphone while they were still together: photos and videos she characterised as evidence of rape and of the non-consensual filming of women. Her broader charge was institutional — that crimes against women are not investigated thoroughly, and that her case proved it. Delivering the speech on the floor mattered legally as well as politically: statements made in Congress are shielded by the Speech or Debate Clause, and when Bryant later sued her for defamation, Mace claimed exactly that protection.
That sequence — accusation under immunity, denial, civil suit, and now criminal charges — is why this case reaches beyond one alleged crime on one island. Bryant denied the allegations completely at the time of the speech, telling the AP then that he took the matter seriously and would cooperate with any legal process to clear his name. The defamation suit was his attempt to answer in civil court, where Mace's constitutional shield complicated his path. Criminal charges change the forum entirely: the question is no longer what a congresswoman may say, but what state investigators can prove, beyond a reasonable doubt, about a night eight years ago.
Why this matters
Start with the timeline, because the timeline is the scandal inside the scandal. The alleged assault took place in 2018. The accusations were made publicly, by a sitting member of Congress, in February 2025. The charges arrived in October 2026 — eight years after the episode and twenty months after the speech. Whatever a jury eventually decides about the three defendants, that chronology is itself a data point in the argument Mace was making on the floor: that a case with an alleged contemporaneous witness journal, photographs, recordings and a security feed still took this long to reach a courtroom, and reached one only after the accuser used the most protected microphone in American politics.
The case also lands at a hinge point in Mace's own career. She is leaving the House at the end of this term after losing her bid for the Republican nomination for governor of South Carolina, finishing fifth in the primary. After Wednesday's arrests she released a statement pointing to 25 bills she says she has backed to protect victims of sexual assault, harassment and discrimination — including against retaliatory defamation and libel suits brought over allegations victims bring to light — and to a proposal she introduced this week that would require anyone who brings such a case and loses to pay the defendant's attorney fees. "Protecting women and holding predators accountable isn't a slogan," she said in the statement. The legislation and the prosecution will now run in parallel: one is her argument about the system, the other is the system's answer.
Both sides, and the burden that now applies
The case for the prosecution, as far as the public record shows, rests on the kinds of evidence defence lawyers usually have to work hardest to shake: an alleged eyewitness watching in real time on a security feed, her contemporaneous journal, photographs and recordings, and — in Bowman's obstruction count — an allegation that evidence was deliberately destroyed after investigators came looking for it. If the recordings and the journal are what agents describe, the passage of eight years matters less than it usually does in cases built on memory alone.
The defence starts from a different place, and it deserves to be stated plainly. Charges are allegations. The sworn statements are the investigators' account, not findings of fact; the defendants have not been tried, and Bryant has denied wrongdoing from the first day, in the middle of a bitter public rupture with a former partner who is also a politician with a talent for commanding attention. His lawyers will be able to test the provenance of the phone material Mace described, the chain of custody of the recordings, and the witness's account. The same constitutional drama that made the speech famous cuts both ways in court: a jury will decide the 2018 facts, not the 2025 speech, and South Carolina prosecutors will have to win on evidence that survives cross-examination, not on the force of an accusation made where it could not be answered.
What happens next
The immediate steps are procedural: bond and first appearances in Charleston County, the appointment or confirmation of counsel, and the first fight over evidence — above all over the phone that agents say Bowman reset and the recordings and photographs the state says exist. Expect the defamation litigation to be reshaped by the criminal case; civil suits commonly stall while criminal charges are pending, and the outcome in criminal court would heavily influence any civil claim built on the same facts. Watch, too, for whether SLED's silence about a continuing investigation turns into charges involving the fourth man Mace named, or further counts involving other alleged victims her speech referred to.
Politically, the case will follow Mace out of Congress. She built the final chapter of her House career around the claim that the system protects predators and punishes the women who name them; prosecutors in her own state have now charged the men she named, which her supporters will read as vindication and her critics will scrutinise for any sign of political pressure on investigators. Both readings are premature in the same way: the charges are the beginning of the test she demanded, not its result. The verdict — on the men, and on the eight years it took to get here — now belongs to a Charleston County courtroom.
Related coverage: New Jersey Lt. Governor Caldwell Resigns After Sexual Harassment Report · Federal Agents Search Rep. Ilhan Omar's Home in Criminal Probe · Trump, Annie Andrews and the South Carolina Senate Fight
Sources: Associated Press (October 14); AP via Scripps News Group (October 14); New York Post (October 14); AP on the SLED announcement (October 14). This article is original reporting and analysis based on those accounts; the charges are allegations, and all three defendants are presumed innocent unless proven guilty.