Two Men Sentenced for Helping Dispose of Jamilla Smith's Body
Clyde Hendley II and Bryan Alexander Hampton Jr. received sentences for their roles in the aftermath of Jamilla Smith's murder.
4 reports on this incident · first at Aug 25, 2026, 5:46 p.m. ET
Earlier reports
Aug 27, 2026, 1:52 p.m. ET
Two Men Sentenced in Jamilla Smith Case
Two men have been sentenced in connection with the Jamilla Smith kidnapping and murder case, according to wrdw.com. On August 25 and 27, 2026, reports detailed the sentencing of Clyde Hendley II, of Bath, and Bryan Alexander Hampton Jr., of Augusta.
Hampton received a 15-year sentence, suspended to five years of probation, while Hendley was sentenced to 10 years in prison, wrdw.com reported. Both men were accused of helping dispose of Smith's body and evidence, including burning clothing, carpet, and shoes behind a residence, according to conflicting accounts reported by wrdw.com. The cause of Smith's death has not been determined.
Aug 25, 2026, 5:52 p.m. ET
Clyde Hendley II Sentenced to 10 Years in Jamilla Smith Case
Clyde Hendley II was sentenced to 10 years in prison on August 25, 2026, for accessory after the fact to murder in the kidnapping and murder case of Jamilla Smith, according to WRDW.
Hendley was accused of helping dispose of Smith's remains and evidence, including burning clothing, carpet, and shoes behind a residence, WRDW reported.
Aug 25, 2026, 5:46 p.m. ETFirst report
Second Man Sentenced in Jamilla Smith Kidnapping and Murder Case
Clyde Hendley II was sentenced to 10 years in prison on August 25, 2026, in connection with the kidnapping and murder case of Jamilla Smith, according to WRDW. Hendley pleaded guilty to accessory after the fact to murder, the outlet reported.
Hendley was accused of helping dispose of Smith's remains and evidence, including burning clothing, carpet, and shoes behind a residence, WRDW reported. The sentencing follows the earlier conviction of another individual in the case.
Was this report accurate and useful?
Sources
Revision history
- Version 127 Aug 2026, 17:52current
First published.
- Version 125 Aug 2026, 21:46current
First published.
- Version 127 Aug 2026, 17:55current
First published.
- Version 125 Aug 2026, 21:52current
First published.
How we work
This site models an investigative reporter rather than a wire desk. The aim is the most complete, accurate and timely account we can assemble — all three, not a trade between them. Reports go out within minutes of the coverage they are built from, carrying context a newsroom would otherwise need a day and a records request to gather: what has happened at this place before, what the operator’s record is, which aircraft it actually was.
Reports are built from primary sources — accident and court records, official registries, weather observations, agency statements — and from reputable news organisations, each named where their reporting is used. Facts are extracted before anything is written, and every one must be supported by a quotation found in the source itself; the model that writes the report is given only those verified facts and never sees the article, so it cannot introduce a detail no source stated.
Where sources disagree we publish the disagreement, attributed, rather than picking a figure. Where a fact comes from a record rather than a reporter, we say so, and the language matches: an instrument reading is never described as something anyone confirmed. Some things are deliberately withheld — a suspect is not named until an agency names them on the record, victims until families or officials release them — and corrections appear as visible revisions, never as silent edits.
None of that makes a report true. A quotation check proves a source said something, not that it was right, and an automated system can be confidently wrong in ways the checks do not catch. If something here is wrong, the feedback above is how it gets found. The full methodology, including what we refuse to publish.