17 May Attorneys of Goose Creek High School Student Raise Additional Concerns Regarding School’s Cell Phone Policies

For Immediate Release
May 17, 2017
Media Contact: Tyler Jones – 252-675-7606 
tyler@speakstrategic.com
 
 

Attorneys of Goose Creek High School Student Raise Additional Concerns Regarding School’s Cell Phone Policies

Charleston, SC – Mark A. Peper and David Aylor, attorneys for a 16 year old Goose Creek High School student who was filmed in a bathroom stall on school property by a fellow student, sent a letter to the attorney for Berkeley County School District outlining the gross negligence demonstrated by faculty and administrators at GCHS in regards to the school’s cell phone recording policies.

The video footage of the incident was posted by a student to the popular social media application, Snapchat.

In the letter, attorney Mark A. Peper asserts that after speaking with various students, parents and faculty members, and despite school policy that expressly prohibits the use of electronic devices to record any student or staff member at school, the practice of unauthorized cell phone recording by students is the custom and culture at Goose Creek High School.

“In speaking with various students, parents and faculty members this week, it cannot be disputed that unauthorized cell phone use by students during the school day is the custom and culture at Goose Creek High School, which can only be attributed to the actual or tacit approval of the entire administration, and specifically, Principal Jimmy Huskey, since deviating from the policies, procedures, and rules requires prior permission from the principal himself.  In speaking with the School Resource Officer assigned to GCHS, I am confident that we can prove the school was on actual notice of students’ habitual use of cell phones to record daily events, and further, that the use of cell phones to record students, teachers and faculty has become so customary that it is considered condoned by the Principal himself.”

Additionally, attorney Peper points to the fact that Goose Creek High School’s own website still lists the cell phone policies of the previous academic school year which prohibit even the possession of cell phones during the school day as proof of the custom and culture regarding cell phone recordings at the school.

In the letter, attorneys Peper and Aylor state their intention to file a lawsuit against the Berkeley County School District if immediate steps are not taken on or before May 24, 2017 to amicably resolve this matter.

The letter from attorney Mark A. Peper to the Berkeley County School District is attached to this press release.

Interview requests for Mark A. Peper, Esq, should be sent to Tyler Jones at tyler@speakstrategic.com. 

17 May Goose Creek HS Student Press Release

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

Date: May 17, 2017

Media Contact: Tyler Jones – 252-675-7606
tyler@speakstrategic.com

Attorneys of Goose Creek High School Student Raise Additional Concerns Regarding School’s Cell Phone Policies

Charleston, SC – Mark A. Peper and David Aylor, attorneys for a 16-year-old Goose Creek High School student who was filmed in a bathroom stall on school property by a fellow student, sent a letter to the attorney for Berkeley County School District outlining the gross negligence demonstrated by faculty and administrators at GCHS in regards to the school’s cell phone recording policies.

The video footage of the incident was posted by a student to the popular social media application, Snapchat.

In the letter, attorney Mark A. Peper asserts that after speaking with various students, parents, and faculty members, and despite school policy that expressly prohibits the use of electronic devices to record any student or staff member at school, the practice of unauthorized cell phone recording by students is the custom and culture at Goose Creek High School.

“In speaking with various students, parents and faculty members this week, it cannot be disputed that unauthorized cell phone use by students during the school day is the custom and culture at Goose Creek High School, which can only be attributed to the actual or tacit approval of the entire administration, and specifically, Principal Jimmy Huskey, since deviating from the policies, procedures, and rules requires prior permission from the principal himself. In speaking with the School Resource Officer assigned to GCHS, I am confident that we can prove the school was on actual notice of students’ habitual use of cell phones to record daily events, and further, that the use of cell phones to record students, teachers and faculty has become so customary that it is considered condoned by the Principal himself.”

Additionally, attorney Peper points to the fact that Goose Creek High School’s own website still lists the cell phone policies of the previous academic school year, which prohibits even the possession of cell phones during the school day, as proof of the custom and culture regarding cell phone recordings at the school.

In the letter, attorneys Peper and Aylor state their intention to file a lawsuit against the Berkeley County School District if immediate steps are not taken on or before May 24, 2017 to amicably resolve this matter.

The letter from attorney Mark A. Peper to the Berkeley County School District is attached to this press release.

31 Mar Salvation Army Press Release

March 31, 2017

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

Media Contact: Ellis Roberts – 843-277-6655
ellis@mcleod-lawgroup.com

Press Release Issued by McLeod Law Group on Behalf of Mother and Father Doe

CHARLESTON, SC – On March 20, 2017, McLeod Law Group filed a civil lawsuit in the matter of Jane Doe, a minor under the age of eleven years old, by her parents, Mother and Father Doe, vs. The Salvation Army; The Salvation Army Southern Territory, A Georgia Corporation; Thomas Louden; Mabel Shuler; Thomas Richmond; and Christopher Thornhill.

Following the filing, the Salvation Army, its officers, and employees issued a public statement which in part read as follows: “From the moment The Salvation Army heard the allegation, our first priority has been the care and well-being of those affected and their families,” and “Upon hearing the report, the Salvation Army corps officer immediately contacted law enforcement and encouraged the family to seek medical attention at the local hospital.”

While neither the McLeod Law Group nor the Peper Law Firm are in a position to comment on what could be disputed facts in the lawsuit, the family does have the right to issue this release through their attorneys and are doing so in an attempt to correct what Mother and Father Doe believe to be incorrect public statements.

Per Mother and Father Doe, these public statements by the Salvation Army were a slap in their face because they were incorrect, self-serving, misleading, and did a disservice to an innocent child. Mother and Father Doe were in hopes the Salvation Army would voluntarily retract these public comments. Because it has been over one week and the Salvation Army has not voluntarily retracted these public comments, Mother and Father Doe request the following:

Mother Doe:
“I am shocked and upset that The Salvation Army has failed to retract their news release of last week, especially since it contained so many incorrect statements. For one, contrary to their statement, I personally made the call to 911 to report what my daughter had told me on October 18, 2015. Further, it is not true that they immediately banned the employees that did this to my daughter. They only did so several days later, after my daughter expressed concern about other children being assaulted. Finally, they claim that, ‘our first priority has been the care and well-being of those affected and their families,’ but that couldn’t be farther from the truth. Instead of helping us, they turned their back on us. They simply don’t care what happened to my daughter and refuse to be held accountable, which is why I filed a lawsuit on her behalf. Only when they are forced to be held accountable for their actions will justice be served. The Salvation Army should be ashamed of themselves, and immediately retract their statement.”

Father Doe:
“Once we reported that our daughter had been sexually assaulted for the last 5 years at The Salvation Army, I ran into Major Tom Richmond and told him he needed to call my wife. To this day, he has not reached out to her. Their statement says they encouraged us to do something, when in fact, they have never spoken to us. They should immediately retract their statement.”

31 Aug Da’Shaun Taylor Press Release

THE PEPER LAW FIRM, PA
1637 Savannah Hwy, Ste. 202, Charleston, SC 29407 – 843-225-2520
24 Broad Street, Charleston, SC 29401 – 843-310-4900
mark@peperlawfirm.com |
david@davidaylor.com

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

SUSPECT IN DREXEL INVESTIGATION TIMOTHY DA’SHAUN TAYLOR SPEAKS OUT

The Squeeze is On

Charleston, SC – August 31, 2016 – On September 3, 2011, our client was charged, arrested, and prosecuted in state court for his involvement in a robbery of a local McDonald’s. He cooperated with local authorities, admitted his involvement, and pled guilty to Strong Armed Robbery on July 29, 2013. He successfully completed his probationary sentence.

On June 21, 2016, the Federal government filed an Indictment charging our client with Conspiracy to Commit Armed Robbery for this same exact robbery. We hope this statement is sufficient enough to allow him to move through this subsequent prosecution in a private manner.

I had no involvement with anything to do with Brittanee Drexel. I don’t know Taquan Brown and I don’t know why he would call my name. I am being prosecuted again for a crime I already helped them solve and already did my time for, all because some guy in prison is trying to cut a deal. It’s not fair to be charged for the same crime twice and that’s not how our system is supposed to work.

The United States Congress has expressly provided that a state judgment of conviction, including one resulting from a plea agreement, shall be a bar to any subsequent federal prosecution for the same act or acts. Any attempt to do so must be approved by the appropriate Assistant Attorney General of the United States, and further, approval can only be granted upon the satisfaction of three substantive prerequisites, none of which are applicable to the instant case. This subsequent prosecution is nothing more than an attempt to squeeze Mr. Taylor for information of which he has no knowledge.

For more information on this matter, please contact:
Mark A. Peper – 843-225-2520 – mark@peperlawfirm.com
David Aylor – 843-310-4900 – david@davidaylor.com