Pokémon Craze Pushes Dad Past the Law

Police officers in riot gear stand on a city sidewalk at night
Photo: Lester Graham / Shutterstock

Police say a South Carolina father left his 6-year-old asleep outside a Target after 1 a.m. to hold a spot for Pokémon cards, then returned as officers arrived.

Story Snapshot

  • Charleston police arrested a 35-year-old father after finding his child alone outside a West Ashley Target overnight.
  • Witnesses called police after about an hour; the child was unharmed and placed in emergency protective custody.
  • Police say the father admitted he left her to keep his place in line for Pokémon cards.
  • The charge, unlawful conduct toward a child, focuses on exposing a child to unreasonable risk under South Carolina law.

What Police Say Happened Outside the West Ashley Target

Charleston Police Department officers responded around 2:30 a.m. to reports of a child sleeping outside a Target in West Ashley. Reports state the girl, age six, had a pillow and blanket and was alone in a line for Pokémon cards. Witnesses had waited about an hour before calling police. Officers say the girl’s father returned to the store while they were there and was identified by people in line. He was taken into custody at the scene.

Police identified the father as a 35-year-old from Johns Island and said he was charged with unlawful conduct toward a child. A department account quoted an interview admission that he left his daughter to hold his spot so he would not miss the chance to buy Pokémon cards. The child was not physically hurt, according to police, but was placed into emergency protective custody with the state’s social services agency for safety.

Why the Charge Does Not Require Proof of Injury

South Carolina’s unlawful conduct toward a child statute makes it a crime to place a child at unreasonable risk of harm to life, health, or safety. The law addresses avoidable danger, not only actual injury. Prosecutors can charge when a caregiver’s choice creates a serious risk a reasonable person would avoid. That is why cases can move forward even if a child is found unharmed, as police reported here. The statute is codified at Section 63-5-70.

Courts in South Carolina have allowed prosecutions that turn on risk, supervision, and access to care rather than completed harm. Appellate opinions discuss proof standards and trial rulings in neglect and unlawful conduct cases, even when they carry no precedential weight. These cases show how fact patterns about supervision choices are tested in court. They also explain why investigators document timeframes, location, and caregiver intent closely in reports and interviews.

How Witnesses and Timing Shaped the Response

People in line told police they noticed the sleeping child and waited about an hour before calling. That delay suggests bystanders hoped a guardian would return quickly, then chose to seek help as the night went on. Officers arrived in the early morning hours, which raised concerns about lighting, security, and access to help if something went wrong. Witnesses later identified the father to police when he came back to the store, helping establish the sequence of events.

The timeline matters because it informs risk. Late night hours limit foot traffic and staff presence. A six-year-old alone outside any store at that time could face hazards from weather to strangers to medical needs. Police statements say the father left to keep a shopping opportunity. That alleged motive, if accepted in court, can support the state’s claim that the risk was avoidable and unreasonable under the statute, even without proof of physical harm.

What This Case Says About Everyday Risk and Priorities

This case taps a broader worry many Americans share: kids often pay the price when adults chase scarce goods or trending drops. Scarcity lines for games, sneakers, or electronics can spur poor choices. Law enforcement responses then step in where common sense should. Parents across the political spectrum want safe communities and clear rules. This charge signals that, at least in South Carolina, leaving a young child to hold a spot overnight crosses the legal line.

Sources:

charlotteobserver.com, abcnews.com, people.com, abcnews4.com