Photo: Myrtle Beach Police Department image (top left)

Horry County Solicitor’s Office image (top right)

 

Photo: Myrtle Beach Police Department image (top left)

Horry County Solicitor’s Office image (top right)

114. Ultimately, however, on or about July 1, 2021, the OAG ended its investigation into the cover-up without filing criminal charges without explanation.

117. The OAG warrants were made publicly releasable in September of 2021. Immediately after reviewing them, DA Gardner met with Defendant Weber on or about September 28, 2021, at which point Defendant Weber claimed he was retiring from his employment with LC.

118. Despite all of this, and the information contained in the OAG search warrants, on or about October 1, 2021, Defendant WASD issued another press release in which the District stated that it “stands by its position that it and its administrators followed all proper procedures and protocols to appropriately respond to the incident in question.”

119. Defendants WASD and LC, directly and by and through their agents, employees, administrators, staff, and/or representatives were deliberately indifferent towards the sexual abuse and hostile educational environment Plaintiff suffered thereafter.

120. Furthermore, Defendants WASD and LC, directly and by and through their agents, employees, administrators, staff, and/or representatives exhibited a racial bias against Plaintiff in their disparate treatment of Plaintiff, who is black, and Male Victim #1, who is white. Plaintiff was treated less favorably than a similarly situated white victim of the same abuse and, shockingly, less favorably than the white perpetrator of crimes against him.

121. At all times relevant hereto, Defendants WASD and LC were acting by and through its employees, servants, and agents, in the operation of WAHS and LC DA’s Office, and the hiring, admitting, assigning, retaining, and supervising of administrators, teachers, coaches, staff, faculty members, and law enforcement officials therein. Accordingly, the Defendants are liable vicariously and derivatively for the negligent acts and omissions of these employees, servants, and agents while engaged in the operation of WAHS and LC DA’s Office and the hiring, admitting, assigning, retaining, and supervising of administrators, teachers, coaches, staff, faculty members, and law enforcement officials, including Dr. Brandon Pardoe, Roger Freed, Sean McCann, Ryan Miller, Fred Holland, and William Weber, under theories of respondeat superior, master-servant, agency, and/or right of control.

 

108. On or about May 8, 2020, recently elected LC District Attorney Ryan Gardner (“DA Gardner”) referred the investigation of Plaintiff’s assault and the subsequent response to it to the Pennsylvania Office of the Attorney General (“OAG”).

109. DA Gardner referred to the events in Myrtle Beach as “criminal sexual misconduct” and indicated that “the appearance of impartiality was severely compromised due to the previous joint investigation by [WASD] administration and this Office,” referring to LC DA’s Office.

110. The OAG assumed jurisdiction over the investigation of Plaintiff’s assault and Defendants’ cover-up of said assault on May 27, 2020.

111. In the course and scope of this investigation, OAG agents obtained several search warrants (4) to seize and search Defendant Pardoe’s’ phone, Defendant Weber’s phone and emails, an unredacted version of the letter George Lepley sent to Defendants Pardoe and McCann in May 2018, and any/all files and/or records pertaining to the 2018 WAHS baseball team Myrtle Beach Trip. Defendant Weber and WASD Superintendent Bowers were personally served with these warrants on or about September 3, 2020. These warrants were under seal until September 2021.

(4) See copies of these search warrants attached hereto as Exhibits “C”, “D”, and “E”.

112. Prior to the application of these warrants, OAG investigators were able to inspect the file from the LC DA’s Office, which was maintained by Defendant Weber. The file contained notes indicating that students were instructed to delete videos, that the school district was aware of the assaults while administrators were still in Myrtle Beach, that Defendant Pardoe himself told students to get rid of images, and that Coach Ryan Miller was also aware of the assault(s).

113. Moreover, the OAG conducted several interviews of key witnesses, including Plaintiff, Videographer #1 and his mother, and LC DA Jeff Yates, who confirmed that Defendant Weber told him he did not know about allegations in August 2018 after the “Millionaire Mayhem” article was published.

114. Ultimately, however, on or about July 1, 2021, the OAG ended its investigation into the cover-up without filing criminal charges without explanation.

115. DA Gardner subsequently issued a statement announcing the OAG’s conclusion was reached due to the failure of the LC District Attorney’s Office to create, implement, and enforce any policies governing the conduct of county detectives—specifically, the conduct of Defendant Weber. DA Gardner claimed that those “deficiencies” were identified in January 2020 and, subsequently, policies and procedures were implemented to correct said deficiencies.

116. Therefore, DA Gardner admitted that LC’s policies and procedures were deficient to adequately ensure that its county detectives were exhibiting proper conduct within the course and scope of their employment.

117. The OAG warrants were made publicly releasable in September of 2021. Immediately after reviewing them, DA Gardner met with Defendant Weber on or about September 28, 2021, at which point Defendant Weber claimed he was retiring from his employment with LC.

118. Despite all of this, and the information contained in the OAG search warrants, on or about October 1, 2021, Defendant WASD issued another press release in which the District stated that it “stands by its position that it and its administrators followed all proper procedures and protocols to appropriately respond to the incident in question.”

119. Defendants WASD and LC, directly and by and through their agents, employees, administrators, staff, and/or representatives were deliberately indifferent towards the sexual abuse and hostile educational environment Plaintiff suffered thereafter.

120. Furthermore, Defendants WASD and LC, directly and by and through their agents, employees, administrators, staff, and/or representatives exhibited a racial bias against Plaintiff in their disparate treatment of Plaintiff, who is black, and Male Victim #1, who is white. Plaintiff was treated less favorably than a similarly situated white victim of the same abuse and, shockingly, less favorably than the white perpetrator of crimes against him.

121. At all times relevant hereto, Defendants WASD and LC were acting by and through its employees, servants, and agents, in the operation of WAHS and LC DA’s Office, and the hiring, admitting, assigning, retaining, and supervising of administrators, teachers, coaches, staff, faculty members, and law enforcement officials therein. Accordingly, the Defendants are liable vicariously and derivatively for the negligent acts and omissions of these employees, servants, and agents while engaged in the operation of WAHS and LC DA’s Office and the hiring, admitting, assigning, retaining, and supervising of administrators, teachers, coaches, staff, faculty members, and law enforcement officials, including Dr. Brandon Pardoe, Roger Freed, Sean McCann, Ryan Miller, Fred Holland, and William Weber, under theories of respondeat superior, master-servant, agency, and/or right of control.

122. Defendants’ actions and inaction enabled the harassment of Plaintiff to continue for months, as he was called “dick lips” and other derogatory references to his assault for months after, until he was forced to leave WASD and go to another school district. As a result of the abovedescribed conduct, Plaintiff has suffered and continues to suffer great pain of mind and body, shock, emotional distress, physical manifestations of emotional distress, embarrassment, loss of self-esteem, disgrace, humiliation and loss of enjoyment of life; was prevented and will continue to be prevented from performing daily activities and obtaining the full enjoyment of life; has sustained and will continue to sustain loss of earnings and earning capacity; and/or has incurred and will continue to incur expenses for medical and psychological treatment, therapy and counseling.

123. As a direct and proximate result of the sexual abuse by B.M.—enabled by the failures of the Defendants—and the Defendants’ subsequent acts and omissions, Plaintiff suffered physical and emotional injuries, as more fully set forth in this Complaint. As a result of the abuse, dissemination of said abuse, and cover-up of said abuse via the aforementioned conduct, Plaintiff was severely mentally, psychologically, and emotionally damaged.

124. Plaintiff has suffered and continues to suffer great pain of mind and body, shock, emotional distress, physical manifestations of emotional distress, embarrassment, loss of selfesteem, disgrace, humiliation, and loss of enjoyment of life. The significant emotional and psychological injuries sustained by Plaintiff dramatically transformed his personality. Throughout his life since the abuse, Plaintiff has struggled with symptoms of post-traumatic stress disorder.  As a result of these problems Plaintiff has suffered extreme difficulty in interpersonal relationships, among other problems.

125. All of the above physical, psychological, and emotional injuries were proximately caused by the negligence, carelessness, recklessness, and other tortious and outrageous acts or omissions of the Defendants as set forth in this Complaint. Plaintiff’s injuries were caused solely by the negligence of WASD, LC, and the individual Defendants as set forth more fully herein and were not caused or contributed thereto by any negligence on the part of Plaintiff.

“COUNT I, VIOLATION OF TITLE IX OF THE EDUCATION AMENDMENTS OF 1972, (20 U.S.C. § 1681(a)) Plaintiff v. WASD” in this series, is forthcoming.

Photo: Myrtle Beach Police Department image (top left)

Horry County Solicitor’s Office image (top right)

87. On September 28, 2018, Det. Glenn Porter of the MBPD wrote a report indicating he was notified via a request from Bartley regarding the assault of Plaintiff and others at the Atlantica Resort in March 2018. Det. Porter’s report indicates that the MBPD was never informed of the assault, its filming, or its distribution on social media until Bartley’s request came to them.

88. Det. Porter and Det. Kerry Aiesi of the MBPD then called Defendant Pardoe, who told the two law enforcement officers that Defendant Weber would be the person best suited to answer their questions. Pardoe never informed these law enforcement officials that he had conducted his own investigation, which included interviews of Plaintiff, B.M., and Videographer #1.

89. Defendant Pardoe therefore purposefully omitted relevant information to law enforcement officials seeking to investigate the sexual assault of a child. He did this despite MBPD 1 See Bartley, Todd, Millionaire Mayhem, TalkWilliamsport.com, August 24, 2018, describing what happened to Plaintiff as “criminal” and that they would adopt the case because it occurred in their jurisdiction.

https://talkwilliamsport.com/millionaire-baseball-mayhem-in-myrtle-beach/, a copy of which is attached hereto as Exhibit “A”.

90. Det. Tiffany Whitmire of the MBPD then emailed Defendant Weber requesting further information.

91. The same day, Sgt. Reeder of the Williamsport Police Department confirmed that their department did not take a report on Plaintiff’s assault. Therefore, no one from LC nor WASD even contacted the local police department regarding the assault of Plaintiff.

92. Moreover, multiple WAHS school resource officers confirmed to MBPD that they too had no knowledge of the incident. Therefore, WASD did not involve WAHS’s own school resource officers in an investigation of the criminal behavior of one of their students.

93. In September 2018, Lycoming County Assistant District Attorney Jeff Yates (“ADA Yates”)—who, at this time was the lead attorney responsible for prosecuting juvenile cases in Lycoming County—informed MBPD that he too had no knowledge of Plaintiff’s assault and only learned of the allegations after receiving an email from Bartley requesting a comment. ADA Yates relayed to MBPD that he spoke with Det. Weber after reading the “Millionaire Mayhem” article and, shockingly, was told by Weber that he too had no knowledge of the allegations—which is objectively false.

94. On or about October 3, 2018, MBPD Det. Porter spoke with Defendant Weber directly. Weber admitted that he was familiar with the allegations surrounding Plaintiff’s assault because it was reported via Child Line. Weber said he received the Child Line report in mid-May of 2018; however, he did not complete a report, but “facilitated the handling of this incident along with the school,” referring to WAHS. Additionally, Weber told MBPD that he did not see anything criminal with what happened in Myrtle Beach “based on Pennsylvania standards” and believed that the matter “appeared resolved”.

95. At best, Defendants Pardoe and Weber withheld vital information from law enforcement regarding what they knew about Plaintiff’s assault and their subsequent “investigation” of the allegations. However, Defendant Weber knowingly provided false information to ADA Yates.

96. Additionally, Defendant Weber’s assessment of the evidence in Plaintiff’s assault is indicative of his bias and discriminatory intent and/or his recklessness, gross negligence, and/or negligence with respect to his ability to objectively analyze and investigate reports of criminal sexual conduct as an agent of LC.

97. On or about October 11, 2018, Weber sent his report and video of the assault to MBPD by regular mail, which was received by MBPD on or about October 16, 2018.

98. As noted above, in this report, Defendant Weber asserts that: (1) in mid-May 2018 he told CYS that he would look into the matter due to his “familiarity” with the WAHS baseball program and his awareness of the annual Myrtle Beach and “what usually goes on” there; (2) he notified Defendant Pardoe of the allegations, but stated that he had no jurisdiction over the case and would only assist to make referrals “if need be”; (3) he met with Plaintiff and his mother, including the fabricated detail that Plaintiff was not harassed after video of the assault was published on social media; and (4) his ultimate assessment of the matter was that it was “clearly” a “hazing/bullying issue” that Defendant WASD “properly handled,” thus not requiring him to make any referrals whatsoever.

99. Defendant Weber’s October 2018 report further indicates that it was based on his “limited note taking and [his] memory from May 2018” as he “did not prepare a report at the time” he learned of the assault.

100. Defendant Weber’s report is completely devoid of any allegations regarding the other students assaulted in Myrtle Beach, including Male Victim #1, who was alleged to have been sodomized by B.M. at the Altantica Resort—an allegation that was received by CYS and was communicated to Defendant Weber in mid-May 2018.

101. As discussed above, Male Victim #1’s abuse was handled much differently, and more seriously, by Weber and WASD as his allegation was vetted and it was determined, through investigation, that he was indeed a victim of abuse—which resulted in Male Victim #1 being compensated by WASD agents, employees, and/or representatives.

102. Defendant WASD’s first official statement with respect to Plaintiff’s assault and any subsequent “investigation” was not released until January 9, 2020 and makes several material misrepresentations concerning the District’s response to Plaintiff’s assault.

103. WASD’s statement (2) reads, in relevant part: Near the end of the 2017-2018 school year, local law enforcement brought to the district’s attention an alleged incident involving indecent and inappropriate behavior by a baseball player during the team’s spring trip to Myrtle Beach, South Carolina. The information had not been previously reported to any district administrator or employee. Once the district was contacted, a prompt investigation was completed and appropriate discipline was issued. In addition to the district’s own investigation, the matter was investigated by outside agencies, including the Lycoming County District Attorney’s office and law enforcement in Myrtle Beach. When contacted by Myrtle Beach authorities, the high school principal immediately referred them to the district attorney’s office and the district’s school resource officers, who serve with the Williamsport Bureau of Police.

(2) See A true and correct copy of Defendant WASD’s Statement on the “Myrtle Beach Incident,” attached hereto as Exhibit “B”.

Upon information and belief, Defendant Holland authored all or the majority of this statement.

It is important to note that the district first became aware of this incident after law enforcement had already been contacted and a ChildLine report made.

The report to ChildLine was not duplicated by the district, as it had already been reported.

The district’s investigation was conducted by the high school principal, district administrators and district legal counsel. Once it became clear which students were and were not involved in the incident, it was apparent that the high school principal had no personal conflict of interest or personal relationships with the students involved.

The principal was permitted by the district’s solicitor to participate in the investigation, and his actions were appropriate and thorough. As an added measure of diligence, a second administrator3 also participated in the investigation.

The district has communicated with the families of all students involved in the incident to the full extent to which we have been able . . . . [T]he district worked directly with the families of the students involved to provide the most comfortable and appropriate educational setting for the students following the incident, and has at all times aimed to act in the best interest of the students.

The Williamsport Area School District does not condone inappropriate and indecent behavior. The district has fully conducted an investigation of this incident and has transparently cooperated and participated with law enforcement officials.

104. Defendants Pardoe, McCann and Miller—all WASD employees—knew of the allegations in March 2018 shortly after they occurred. Defendant Pardoe’s own nephew was present for some or all of the criminal sexual behavior, thus making him a personally biased investigator—on top of the apparent racial bias he and others exhibited in the disparate treatment of Plaintiff and Male Victim #1. Moreover, WASD had no communication with Plaintiff or his mother since their meeting in late-May, 2018, and they were never informed of the breadth of information the District possessed, the ultimate outcome of the District’s investigation, nor the reasoning behind said outcome.

Upon information and belief, “second administrator” refers to Defendant Freed.

105. On or about February 4, 2020, the WASD School Board held a meeting wherein board member Adam Welteroth made a motion to have an unbiased third party investigate the 2018 Myrtle Beach assaults since the District remained silent for months while being subject to many Right to Know requests. His motion was not seconded by a single member of the WASD School Board.

106. Defendants WASD and LC therefore effectively considered the matter closed without having spoken to Plaintiff in over one and a half years, holding any formal disciplinary hearings for those involved, including B.M., or involving outside law enforcement agencies.

107. B.M. was, however, criminally charged in or around February 2021 in South Carolina for his actions in Myrtle Beach in 2018 as a result of an investigation conducted by the MBPD.

Photo: Myrtle Beach Police Department image (top left)

Horry County Solicitor’s Office image (top right)

Photo: Myrtle Beach Police Department image (top left)

Horry County Solicitor’s Office image (top right)

24. Plaintiff John Doe enrolled as a freshman student at WAHS in the Fall of 2017. Plaintiff was a member of the high school’s baseball team, the Millionaires.

25. In March 2018, the WAHS baseball team took a trip to Myrtle Beach, South Carolina, to participate in a tournament of schools from around the country. Plaintiff was able to “earn” his way on this trip by raising his grades in two weeks and receiving the approval of all of his teachers before he could attend.

26. The WAHS baseball team regularly attended this annual tournament in Myrtle Beach for years prior to 2018. Furthermore, upon information and belief, for years, if not decades, WASD and its coaches, teachers, administrators, and agents were aware of hazing incidents that occurred annually during the baseball team’s Myrtle Beach trip, including prior instances of sexual abuse of students in their care and custody on these outings. Despite actual knowledge regarding the hazing and abusive incidents occurring on the trip, WASD turned a blind eye to these abusive incidents, thus permitting such hazing and abuse to occur regularly under its supervision and failing to take any action to prevent future abuse.

27. The Millionaires baseball team was scheduled to be in Myrtle Beach from March 23, 2018, to March 30, 2018. Accompanying the team, comprised of approximately forty (40) students, were Head Coach Defendant Ryan Miller (“Miller”) and assistant coaches David Heller, Tariq Moore, Kyler Schneider, Nick Caringi, and Joel Worthington.

28. Miller was hired by WASD to be the WAHS varsity baseball coach in (YEAR). However, at the time of Miller’s hiring by WAHS he was ineligible to act as head baseball coach under 24 § P.S. §1-111(f.1) because he was convicted of a second DUI within three years of his date of hiring.

29. Several WAHS administrators, including WAHS Principal Defendant Brandon Pardoe (“Pardoe”) and Athletic Director Defendant Sean McCann (“McCann”), both of whom had sons on the baseball team at the time, also made the WAHS trip to Myrtle Beach in 2018. Defendant Pardoe also had a nephew on the Millionaires baseball team. Outside of the WAHS Baseball coaching staff and administrators, there were no other adult chaperones on the trip.

30. George E. Lepley, Jr. (“Lepley”), a criminal defense attorney local to Williamsport, was also present in Myrtle Beach at the same time to watch his grandson play baseball in the tournament.

31. The Millionaires baseball team, under Miller’s name, reserved ten (10) bedrooms at the Atlantica Resort in Myrtle Beach: nine (9) two-bedroom suites and one (1) single bedroom suite. There were no more than two (2) rooms per floor assigned to Miller and the team—rooms were therefore scattered all over the sprawling Atlantica Resort tower.

32. Students were assigned to bedrooms, despite Defendants WASD, Pardoe, McCann, and Miller denying record of such assignments existing for years subsequent to the events described herein.

33. Upon information and belief, however, Defendants Pardoe and McCann did not stay with the team at the Atlantica Resort but instead at beach houses.

34. In fact, some of the WASD administrators there to chaperone the baseball team attended a party at beach house in Garden City, South Carolina, with a portion of the team. Present at the party were Pardoe and McCann and at least ten students. This event was approximately 11 miles from the Atlantica Resort. Upon information and belief, Head Coach Ryan Miller and assistant coaches David Heller, Tariq Moore, Nick Caringi, Kyle Schneider, and Joel Worthington were out in Myrtle Beach at the same time as the party, leaving the rest of the team alone at the hotel, despite knowing the foreseeable harm likely to occur to students, including Plaintiff, in their care and custody when left completely unsupervised.

35. One evening during the trip at the Atlantica Resort, Plaintiff was assaulted by at least one teammate while he slept. This student, B.M., sat on Plaintiff and placed his penis on Plaintiff’s face, making skin-to-skin contact with him, while Plaintiff slept. B.M. also placed his bare buttocks on Plaintiff’s face. Plaintiff did not consent to this criminal sexual conduct, which constitutes violations of Pennsylvania criminal statutes prohibiting Indecent Assault (18 Pa. C.S.A. § 3126), Indecent Exposure (18 Pa. C.S.A. § 3127), and Institutional Sexual Assault (18 Pa. C.S.A. § 3124.2(a.2)(1).

36. As an older team member and without any other supervision, B.M. was placed in a position of authority, care, supervision, guidance and/or control over Plaintiff at the time of the assault. Moreover, B.M.’s assault of Plaintiff was done to haze, harm, and/or hurt Plaintiff and/or for the purpose of arousing or gratifying B.M.’s sexual desire, including a sexual desire to
overpower and humiliate Plaintiff.

37. Prior to the assault, B.M., and other students on the team repeatedly used racial slurs to refer to Plaintiff, who is black. After the assault, B.M. and/or other students on the team threatened to lynch Plaintiff if he told anyone about what occurred.

38. Shockingly, this was not the only sexual assault to take place at the Atlantica Resort involving members of the Millionaires baseball team. Another student, Male Victim #1, who is white, was held down by multiple teammates while B.M. sodomized him with a television remote.

39. The sexual assaults, including the assault of Plaintiff by B.M., was captured on a mobile device by another member of the team, Videographer #1.

40. Upon information and belief, multiple videos were filmed of Plaintiff being assaulted. The first video shows B.M. in a state of undress, with his pants and underwear around his ankles, and Plaintiff in a room at the Atlantica Resort. Other individuals are heard in the video as being present in the room with B.M. and Videographer #1, including at least two additional WAHS teammates, one of whom is the nephew of Defendant Pardoe. These students are heard laughing. A second video depicts the assault of Plaintiff: B.M. is seen sitting on Plaintiff’s face, placing his penis on the face of the victim. A third video depicts the assault of Male Victim #1, who was held down by multiple teammates and can be heard screaming while B.M. attempts to or does in fact sodomize Male Victim #1 with a television remote. Multiple WAHS players are seen and heard as being present for the assaults in these videos.

41. Upon information and belief, WASD agents, employees, administrators and/or coaches including but not limited to Pardoe, Miller, and McCann learned of the videos recorded of assault of Plaintiff and the other victims while the WAHS baseball team was still in Myrtle Beach, South Carolina. In fact, Miller repeatedly called WAHS baseball assistant coach, Randy Zangara (“Zangara”), who did not attend the trip, the night of the assault—indicating that WAHS employees were aware of Plaintiff’s assault almost immediately.

42. WASD agents, employees, administrators and/or coaches, including Pardoe—the Head Principal of the high school—at some point after they were aware of the assaults— then unlawfully instructed students on the baseball team to delete any videos they may have taken of the assault. That is, instead of reporting the criminal assault on Plaintiff or taking control of the situation in any way, WASD attempted a very feeble cover up. WASD’s agents, employees, administrators and/or coaches knew or should have known that their instructions were not sufficient to prevent further harm to Plaintiff from potential dissemination of said videos.

43. Aside from removing Plaintiff from the baseball team, WASD’s agents, employees, administrators and/or coaches did nothing else to address Plaintiff’s assault for months, allowing the dissemination of the videos and enabling the continued harassment of Plaintiff.

44. Shortly after the team returned from Myrtle Beach, Plaintiff was removed from the baseball team by WAHS.

45. Moreover, in the aftermath of the Myrtle Beach trip, videos of Plaintiff’s assault were shared to the phone of B.M. and also shared on social media with multiple parties on the team and in the WASD community at large. In fact, B.M. even shared videos of the assault on his phone with other students in the WAHS cafeteria once the team returned to Williamsport. B.M. bragged about what had occurred.

46. Thus, in the days and weeks after returning to Williamsport, Plaintiff was called derogatory names, including “dick lips,” by students at WAHS who had seen videos(s) of his assault. Plaintiff was repeatedly harassed, bullied, and tormented by students who had viewed his assault because WASD had done nothing prevent this behavior from occurring. Rather, WASD was deliberately indifferent to the hostile educational environment it created in its reaction to Plaintiff’s sexual abuse.

47. If WASD had promptly investigated, properly disciplined offending students, and taken appropriate action to stop any dissemination of videos of Plaintiff’s sexual abuse, WASD would have had control over the situation, would have prevented students from viewing the videos on social media, and, therefore, would have prevented students from harassing Plaintiff after
having watched his abuse.

48. On or around May 18, 2018, a report was made to Lycoming County Children and Youth Services (“CYS”) employees about an alleged sexual assault on some member(s) of the baseball team by other members of the team. These allegations pertained to the assaults of Plaintiff and Male Victim #1.

49. These CYS employees are mandated reporters pursuant to 63 Pa.C.S. § 6311, et seq. They subsequently made a report to Child Line of the allegations and then contacted Defendant William Weber, then Chief County Detective for Defendant Lycoming County, who worked out of the Lycoming County District Attorney’s Office. Weber, in turn, contacted WAHS Principal, Defendant Brandon Pardoe, regarding the CYS report.

50. Pardoe, Weber, Zangara, and WASD school board member Barbara Reeves live, respectively, at 43, 53, 56, and 57 Keyser Circle in Williamsport—literally within feet of each other on the same street.

51. Moreover, for years before he became a detective at the DA’s Office, Weber was a member of the Williamsport City Police Department and the Lycoming County Child Abuse Investigation Team and was therefore intimately familiar with WAHS and personal friends with several of its employees.

52. Plaintiff believes, and therefore avers, that Pardoe approached his neighbor Weber shortly after the assaults occurred in Myrtle Beach. Plaintiff believes, and therefore avers, that Pardoe, as an agent of WASD, asked Weber, as an agent of LC, to intervene in any potential investigation of the Myrtle Beach assaults—should they ever become public—in an effort to shut said investigation down, thus protecting Pardoe, WASD, and the other administrators, teachers, and coaches who were responsible for Plaintiff’s assault and subsequent harassment.

53. In a report that Defendant Weber would author almost five months later in October 2018—the first and only time he drafted an investigative report related to the assault of Plaintiff—Weber recalls informing CYS in mid-May 2018 that he would look into the matter due to his “familiarity” with the WAHS baseball program since his son was previously a member of the Millionaires and Weber himself attended the Myrtle Beach tournament for three years.

54. Defendant Weber also wrote that he informed Defendant Pardoe that Weber had no jurisdiction over what happened in Myrtle Beach, “but would assist and make referrals if need be.” Weber also told Pardoe that he was “aware of the trip and what usually goes on during the annual trip.” Plaintiff believes, and therefore avers, that Weber was aware of the hazing and assaultive behavior which regularly took place on the WAHS annual trip to Myrtle Beach.

55. Both Defendant Pardoe and Defendant Weber are also mandated reporters pursuant to 63 Pa. C.S. § 6311, et seq. Neither ever made a report to Child Line concerning what they learned from CYS.

56. Upon information and belief, it was also at this time in May 2018 that Defendant Weber gained possession of at least one of the videos depicting the assaults. However, Weber did not take any further action despite also being a mandated reporter and law enforcement official. Weber did not contact the Williamsport City Police Department nor the Pennsylvania State Police regarding the video he obtained, which constituted child pornography under Pennsylvania and United States law. Weber did not so much as even communicate the allegations of criminal sexual conduct to a single prosecutor in the LC DA’s Office at or around the time he received the report.

57. Moreover, Weber did not forward the video in his possession to the Myrtle Beach Police Department (“MBPD”) nor contact them about the allegations, despite the MBPD being the proper law enforcement entity to have jurisdiction over the criminal behavior of B.M. in South Carolina.

“Part II: The Response of WASD and LC to the Sexual Assault of Plaintiff” in this series, is forthcoming.

This is an exclusive and developing story on TalkWilliamsport.com.

Photo: Myrtle Beach Police Department image (top left)

Horry County Solicitor’s Office image (top right)

A previous, multi-part series of articles was published on this website with results of a more than 18-month long investigation by Talk Williamsport.com.

This story is graphic and contains details related to multiple indecent sexual assaults.

The author and editor of this story have made the editorial decision to not publish the names of the individuals under the age of 18 at the time of the incident who have been clearly identified as committing these acts in this case; even though they have been formally charged with a crime in South Carolina.

 

A Baseball Story In The Birthplace Of Little League Baseball

IF NOTHING HAPPENED IN MYRTLE BEACH

WHY WON’T THE WASD TELL US THE STORY?

THE 2018 WAHS BASEBALL MYRTLE BEACH STORY – “FACTUAL HISTORY”

By Todd Bartley, Talk Williamsport

News@talkwilliamsport.com

The following series is based upon the recent First Amended Complaint filed in Federal Court by the attorneys for John Doe #1; who was indecently sexually assaulted during the Williamsport Area High School Baseball Team trip in Myrtle Beach, South Carolina in the spring of 2018.

From the First Amended Complaint filed on Thursday, May 11, 2023.

“19. This lawsuit is about an educational institution that had special responsibilities and obligations to protect the most innocent among us—children and students—from sexual abuse and the complete and abject failures of that same educational institution to fulfill those responsibilities and obligations. Williamsport Area High School (“WAHS”), operated and administered by Defendant WASD, failed in its most basic legal duties to guard against the sexual abuse of a minor.

For years, if not decades,

WASD was aware of hazing incidents that would occur

on school sponsored athletic trips,

including instances of sexual abuse of students

in their care and custody on these outings.

 

Yet, WASD turned a blind eye to the knowable and reasonably knowable,

allowing child sexual abuse to occur under its supervision.

 

However, this matter is also about the cover-up of abuse

perpetrated by Defendant WASD and its

staff/representatives/agents, including but not limited to

Defendants Dr. Brandon Pardoe, Roger Freed,

Sean McCann, Ryan Miller, and Fred Holland

in choosing to protect their own reputation

and the reputation of WASD

at the expense of the safety

and well-being of children in their care, custody, and/or control, including Plaintiff.”

 

From the First Amended Complaint filed on Thursday, May 11, 2023:

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA

JOHN DOE
c/o Laffey, Bucci & Kent
1100 Ludlow Street, Suite 300
Philadelphia, PA 19107
Plaintiffs,

v.

WILLIAMSPORT AREA SCHOOL
DISTRICT, LYCOMING COUNTY, DR.
BRANDON PARDOE, ROGER FREED,
SEAN McCANN, RYAN MILLER, FRED
A. HOLLAND, ESQ., WILLIAM WEBER,
in his individual and official capacity, and
JOHN and JANE DOEs #1-#20 (ficticious
names), whose true identities are currently
unknown to Plaintiffs, Defendants.

CIVIL ACTION NO.
4:22-CV-01387-MWB
JURY TRIAL DEMANDED

FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT

Plaintiff, John Doe, by and through his undersigned counsel Laffey, Bucci & Kent LLP and Stapp Law, LLC, hereby brings the following First Amended Complaint before this Honorable Court and avers the following in support thereof:

JURISDICTIONAL STATEMENT

1. This Court has subject matter jurisdiction over this case pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §1331, which vests this Honorable Court with original jurisdiction over all civil actions arising under the Constitution, laws, and treaties of the United States. This Court also has subject matter jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1343, which grants district courts original jurisdiction over any civil action to recover damages or to secure equitable or other relief under any Act of Congress providing for the protection of civil rights.

2. This Honorable Court has supplemental subject matter jurisdiction over all related State-law based claims herein pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1367, which vests the federal district courts jurisdiction over all other claims related to claims in the action by which the Court has original jurisdiction that are arising out of the same case or controversy under Article III of the United States Constitution.

3. Plaintiff brings this action to redress a hostile educational environment where Plaintiff was subject to sexual assault and sexual harassment due to the actions and inaction of Defendants. Plaintiff has Standing to bring forth his claim pursuant to Title IX of the Education Amendments of 1972, 20 U.S.C. § 1681 et seq., as set forth more fully herein.

4. Plaintiff also seeks redress under the Pennsylvania common law theories of negligence and negligence per se against the Defendants.

5. Venue is proper in this district pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1391(b), because the Defendants reside within the Middle District of Pennsylvania and the events giving rise to the claims occurred in this district.

PARTIES

6. Plaintiff, John Doe (fictitious, anonymous name), is an adult male whose name and address are not contained in this First Amended Complaint so as to protect his privacy and identity as he incurred injuries and damages of a sensitive nature as a minor child as a result of the negligent acts and failures of Defendants outlined below. Information which would or could identify John Doe is not contained herein. Plaintiff may be contacted through his counsel as outlined herein.

7. Defendant Williamsport Area School District (hereinafter “WASD”) is a school district organized pursuant to the Public School Code of 1949, Act of March 10, 1949, P.L. 30, as amended, 24 P.S. § 1-101, et seq., and maintains an office at 2780 W. 4th Street, Williamsport, PA 17701. WASD operates Williamsport Area High School (“WAHS”), which Plaintiff John Doe attended.

8. At all relevant times, Defendant WASD was the recipient of Federal Financial Assistance.

9. Defendant Lycoming County (hereinafter “LC”), is a local government unit and is a county of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania with business offices located at 330 Pine Street, Williamsport, PA 17701. LC oversees and/or controls the Lycoming County Office of the District Attorney (hereinafter “DA’s Office”), located at 48 West Third Street, Williamsport, PA 17701, and its county detectives. LC is a “person” as the term is used in 42 U.S.C. § 1983.

10. Defendant Dr. Brandon Pardoe is an adult individual, employed by the WASD, and was at all relevant times, the Head Principal of WAHS. Pardoe was responsible for ensuring that WAHS provides for the safety and care of children while in the custody of WASD. Pardoe is sued in his official and individual capacities for his actions and/or inactions made under color of state law and in violation of Plaintiff’s Constitutional rights as described more fully herein.

11. Defendant Roger Freed is an adult individual, employed by the WASD, and was at all relevant times, an Assistant Principal of WAHS. Freed was responsible for ensuring that WAHS provides for the safety and care of children while in the custody of WASD. Freed is sued in his official and individual capacities for his actions and/or inactions made under color of state law and in violation of Plaintiff’s Constitutional rights as described more fully herein.

12. Defendant Sean McCann is an adult individual, employed by the WASD, and was at all relevant times, the Athletic Director of WAHS. McCann was responsible for ensuring that WAHS provides for the safety and care of children while in the custody of WASD. McCann is sued in his official and individual capacities for his actions and/or inactions made under color of state law and in violation of Plaintiff’s Constitutional rights as described more fully herein.

13. Defendant Ryan Miller is an adult individual who was employed as the Head Baseball Coach for WAHS from approximately 2016 until April 2018. Miller was responsible for ensuring that WAHS provides for the safety and care of children while in the custody of WASD. Miller is sued in his official and individual capacities for his actions and/or inactions made under color of state law and in violation of Plaintiff’s Constitutional rights as described more fully herein.

14. Defendant Fred A. Holland, Esq., is an adult individual, employed by the WASD, and was at all relevant times, the Solicitor for Defendant WASD. Holland was responsible for ensuring that WAHS provides for the safety and care of children while in the custody of WASD. Holland is sued in his official and individual capacities for his actions and/or inactions made under color of state law and in violation of Plaintiff’s Constitutional rights as described more fully herein.

15. Defendant William Weber is an adult individual who was employed by LC as a LC County Detective, assigned to the DA’s Office at all relevant times. Weber is sued in his official and individual capacities for his actions and/or inactions made under color of state law and in violation of Plaintiff’s Constitutional rights as described more fully herein.

16. Defendants Jane and John Does #1 through #20 are currently unknown by actual name after a reasonable search with due diligence. Defendants Does #1-#20 are believed and averred to have exposed Plaintiff to undue risk and actual harm by putting him in a situation where he could—and ultimately—would be sexually assaulted by another student, who failed to adequately investigate and respond to Plaintiff’s sexual assault, and who conspired to cover up both the assault and their failures to properly investigate and respond to said assault, thus causing Plaintiff to be harassed and bullied at school. Said harassment, which caused Plaintiff to leave WAHS, would not have occurred but for the Defendants’ failure to immediately report, discipline, and exercise the appropriate control over the conduct of the students in their care and custody. Defendants Does #1-#20 include, but are not limited to, administrators, school board members, teachers, counselors, coaches, former employees and/or charged agents/employees of Defendants WASD, LC, and other individuals who conspired with the aforementioned defendants and/or are responsible for Plaintiff’s abuse, harassment, and the cover-up of said abuse and harassment.

17. At all relevant times hereto, Defendants WASD and LC were acting by and through their duly authorized actual and/or apparent agents, servants and employees, in particular, their principals, vice principals, school board, school board presidents, teachers, staff, supervisors, and/or team coaches and/or activity coordinators, acting within the course and scope of their actual and/or apparent agency and/or employment.

18. Defendants herein are directly and vicariously liable to Plaintiff for injuries sustained as a result of negligence, gross negligence, outrageous conduct, and reckless misconduct as described further herein, as well as for violations of Plaintiff’s constitutional rights as described further herein, by persons or entities whose conduct was under their control, or right to control
which conduct directly and proximately caused all of Plaintiff’s injuries.

FACTUAL HISTORY

19. This lawsuit is about an educational institution that had special responsibilities and obligations to protect the most innocent among us—children and students—from sexual abuse and the complete and abject failures of that same educational institution to fulfill those responsibilities and obligations. Williamsport Area High School (“WAHS”), operated and administered by Defendant WASD, failed in its most basic legal duties to guard against the sexual abuse of a minor. For years, if not decades, WASD was aware of hazing incidents that would occur on school sponsored athletic trips, including instances of sexual abuse of students in their care and custody on these outings. Yet, WASD turned a blind eye to the knowable and reasonably knowable, allowing child sexual abuse to occur under its supervision. However, this matter is also about the cover-up of abuse perpetrated by Defendant WASD and its staff/representatives/agents, including but not limited to Defendants Dr. Brandon Pardoe, Roger Freed, Sean McCann, Ryan Miller, and Fred Holland in choosing to protect their own reputation and the reputation of WASD at the expense of the safety and well-being of children in their care, custody, and/or control, including Plaintiff.

20. WASD was able to cover-up abuse perpetrated on Plaintiff John Doe by another student enrolled at WAHS with the assistance of Defendant William Weber, a Lycoming County detective employed by Defendant LC and assigned to the DA’s Office. Together they conspired with WASD and the above-named administrators and employees of WASD to conduct a fraudulent investigation which included the destruction and/or attempted destruction of evidence, the suppression and/or attempted suppression of witnesses, failure to cooperate with law enforcement, falsifying records and/or fabricating information in official investigatory documents, and other acts and omissions further outlined throughout this First Amended Complaint which ensured that the perpetrator of Plaintiff’s abuse was able to escape repercussion, thus depriving Plaintiff the opportunity for justice, discriminating against him, and violating his constitutional rights.

21. The Defendants’ failure to immediately report, discipline, and exercise the appropriate control over the conduct of the students in their care and custody, caused Plaintiff to be harassed and bullied at school in the wake of his assault. WASD and its agents, employees, and representatives were aware of the ongoing and continued harassment of Plaintiff at WAHS and did absolutely nothing to stop it. WASD was deliberately indifferent to such conduct, thereby encouraging and enabling the harassment and bullying to continue unabated until Plaintiff John Doe was forced to leave WAHS due to the hostile environment enabled by Defendants.

22. Moreover, Plaintiff John Doe, who is black, was treated less favorably by the Defendants than a similarly situated white student who was also sexually abused on the same WAHS athletic trip. The Defendants violated Plaintiff’s due process and equal protection rights by, among other things outlined herein, by conducting a biased or rigged investigation into the assault on Plaintiff, all while conducting an unbiased investigation into the abuse of the white male victim. At the conclusion of the investigation into the assault committed against the similarly situated white victim, Defendants made a payment of $10,000 to the white victim, while failing to even investigate the abuse against Plaintiff. Plaintiff was removed from the baseball team, but the other similarly situated victim was not. Plaintiff was not afforded the same treatment as the similarly situated white victim and was therefore discriminated against on the basis of his race.

23. Defendants WASD and LC failed in a myriad of ways including, but not limited to: (a) not properly vetting their staff, including Pardoe, Freed, McCann, Miller, Holland and Weber; (b) not properly training and/or supervising their staff; negligently retaining staff they knew or should have known were unqualified to supervise and protect students in their care and custody and/or who were actively working to cover-up the sexual assault of a child; (c) failing to investigate reports of concerning and/or criminal behavior; (d) and failing to have in place any legitimate measures to protect against, investigate, and respond to a student-on-student sexual assault, the very thing that happened to Plaintiff in this suit. Defendants did not simply stick their heads in the sand, they actively obstructed the administration of justice, discriminated against an innocent child victim to protect the perpetrator of a criminal sexual offense, purposefully treated a white victim of the same abuse more favorably, made material misrepresentations to law enforcement and the public, and acted out of self-interest in order to protect the reputation of the school and the baseball team, thereby exposing thousands of vulnerable students to a dangerous environment and, in the process, violating Plaintiff’s Constitutional rights.

Part: I. The Sexual Assault of Plaintiff in this series, is forthcoming.

This is an exclusive and developing story on TalkWilliamsport.com.

By Todd Bartley, TalkWilliamsport.com

News@TalkWilliamsport.com

TalkWilliamsport.com will live video stream the Lycoming County Democratic Committee, Democratic Candidate Forum.

The event will feature the Democratic candidates running for Lycoming County Commissioner.

The live stream available by clicking the image below will begin around 6:30 p.m. this evening from Park Place in Williamsport.

 

IMAGES: Josh Shapiro, PA Governor and former PA Attorney General (left),

Willie Weber, Former Lycoming County Chief Detective,

current MASD School Police Officer, 

current Little League World Series Team Host (Uncle) (top middle),

Williamsport Bureau of Police logo (bottom middle)

Brandon Pardoe WASD Director of Student Services, Deputy Title IX Coordinator

and former WAHS head principal (right).

By Todd Bartley, TalkWilliamsport.com

News@TalkWilliamsport.com

In his 35-page MEMORANDUM OPINION issued on Thursday, Matthew W. Brann, Chief United States District Judge takes to task former WAHS head principal Brandon Pardoe, former Lycoming County Chief Detective Willie Weber as well as WASD Solicitor Fred Holland who allowed both men to participate in running investigations into the criminal sexual assault of JOHN DOE #1 during the 2018 Williamsport Area High School baseball team trip in Myrtle Beach, South Carolina.

Brann, as previously reported by TalkWiliamsport.com takes significant issue with former Pennsylvania Attorney General and current Governor Josh Shapiro and calls into question the decision made not to file criminal charges in the case.

(Editor’s Note: The numbers at the end of the sentences are footnote references from the MEMORANDUM OPINION.)

 

From Pages 7 & 8 of the MEMORANDUM OPINION:

3. The “Millionaire Mayhem” Story

After facing months of humiliation and ridicule from his peers stemming from the Myrtle Beach assault, Doe finished his freshman year and left WAHS. 37

Following Doe’s departure, in August 2018, a local journalist published an article detailing the Myrtle Beach incident under the headline: “Millionaire Baseball Mayhem in Myrtle Beach.” 38

The journalist contacted Weber, who confirmed his possession of one of the videos of the assault, which he stated would not be sent to the Myrtle Beach Police Department (“MBPD”). 39

The journalist had also contacted the MBPD and learned that MBPD personnel were never informed of the assault. 40

In response, the MBPD contacted Pardoe,

who referred it to Weber without providing any additional information. 41

 

From, Brandon Pardoe, WAHS head principal: “Can I ask who you tried to speak with?” (talkwilliamsport.com)

Audio of the call between Detective Aiesi, Myrtle Beach Police Department and then WAHS head principal Brandon Pardoe; which was obtained through a Freedom of Information Act request to the Myrtle Beach Police Department.

 

 

From Pages 7 & 8 of the MEMORANDUM OPINION:

A Williamsport police officer told the MBPD

that the Williamsport police had never taken a report of the incident. 42

 

Several school resource officers stationed at WAHS and Lycoming County Assistant District Attorney Jeffrey Yates, who was responsible for the prosecution of juvenile crimes, also learned of the incident for the first time when contacted by MBPD or through reading the Millionaire Mayhem article. 43

 

From Page 26 of the MEMORANDUM OPINION:

“Doe alleges that Defendants violated several criminal statutes: 18 Pa. C.S. §§4904 (unsworn falsification), 4910 (tampering with evidence), 4952 (intimidation of a witness), 5101 (obstructing administration of law), and 5301 (official oppression). 118

He also alleges that Defendants’ failure to report B.M.’s sexual assault violated 23 Pa. C.S. § 6311 and the Educator Discipline Act, 24 P.S. § 2070.1 et seq. 119

Based on the allegations in the Complaint,

the only potential statutory violation that Holland could have taken a part in

is the failure to report B.M.’s assault to the authorities,

in violation of 23 Pa. C.S. § 6311 and 24 P.S. § 2070.9a(a)(3.1). 120

Footnote references:

118 Compl., Doc. 1 ¶ 194.

119 Id. ¶ 199. Doe does not identify which particular section of the Educator Discipline Act Defendants violated. Section 2070.9a requires educators to report instances of sexual abuse in a manner similar to that provided in 23 Pa. C.S. § 6311.

120 See 23 Pa. C.S. § 6311(a)(14) (including “attorney[s] affiliated with an agency, institution, organization or other entity, including a school” as mandatory reporters).”

 

From Page 27 of the MEMORANDUM OPINION:

“The other identified violations could only stem from Weber’s and Pardoe’s actions. 121

 

Both § 6311 and § 2070.9a(a)(3.1) require school officials to report

sexual misconduct in certain circumstances that appear present here.”

 

Footnote references:

“121 Doe alleges that Weber’s recollection of his meeting with Doe published in Weber’s report was an intentional falsification, which would appear to violate 18 Pa. C.S. § 4904 and/or §4910. See Compl., Doc. 1 ¶ 51. Doe also alleges that Pardoe met with the student who filmed B.M. assaulting Doe and told her to refrain from speaking about the incident. See id. ¶ 56.

Assuming Pardoe’s actions constituted “intimidation”

—which is far from clear—

his contact with the student who took the video of the assault and his mother

could potentially serve as a violation of 18 Pa. C.S. § 4952.

The Complaint alleges Holland participated in the investigation of Doe’s assault, but it does not connect him to the allegations that could serve as the basis for the criminal violations Doe identifies in Count X. But it is not at all clear that any of the criminal statutes Doe cites to—aside from 23 Pa. C.S. § 6311—are intended to protect him.

They appear to protect the general public’s interest in the integrity of the judicial and prosecutorial functions, not the individual interests of victims of an underlying offense.”

From Page 33, footnote reference 139 of the MEMORANDUM OPINION:

“Although the Court has already dismissed Doe’s negligence per se claim (Count X) on different grounds, Doe’s claim presents a more complex problem in the context of the PPSTCA. The PPSTCA’s exceptions only apply to “negligent acts.” The Court infers from the word “acts” that the statute focuses on the underlying conduct rather than the legal nature of the claim.

One could bring a negligence action based on intentional conduct.

 

Indeed, some of the statutory violations underlying Count X

are criminal statutes that clearly contemplate intentional acts.

See 18 Pa. C.S. § 4904 (criminalizing certain actions when done

“with intent to mislead a public servant in performing his official function”).

 

But one could violate 23 Pa. C.S. § 6311 negligently or intentionally.

In any event, the Court need not reach this issue at this time, having dismissed Count X against all Defendants on different grounds.

Additionally, municipal employees are not entitled to immunity

if their actions constituted “crime[s], actual fraud, actual malice or willful misconduct.

18 Pa. C.S. § 8550.

Doe’s IIED Claim (Count VII) and negligence per se claims (Count X) may overcome the individual Defendants’ immunity defenses under section 8550 but, as discussed above, Doe fails to adequately allege an intentional act or willful misconduct.”

Based on the findings of the 35-page MEMORANDUM OPINION issued on Thursday by Matthew W. Brann, Chief United States District Judge; TalkWilliasmport.com contacted the most senior elected officials in Pennsylvania for their insights into a black student athlete being criminally sexually assaulted by a white teammate and the subsequent investigations conducted.

 

Kate Foley, Communications Specialist in the Office of Pennsylvania Attorney General, Michelle A. Henry offered the following Friday afternoon when contacted for this story, “We have no comment here. Kate”

A message seeking comment from current Pennsylvania Governor and former Attorney General, Josh Shapiro has not been responded to at this writing.

A message seeking comment from current Pennsylvania Lieutenant Governor Austin Davis has not been responded to at this writing.

A message seeking comment from current Speaker of the House and Majority Leader Joanna McClinton has not been responded to at this writing.

On background: Currently, Austin Davis serves as chair of the Allegheny County House Democratic Delegation and vice chair of the House Democratic Policy Committee, as well as serving on the House Appropriations Committee, House Consumer Affairs Committee, House Insurance Committee, and House Transportation Committee. Austin is also a member of the Pennsylvania Legislative Black Caucus, Climate Caucus, and PA SAFE Caucus.

In November 2022, Austin made history and was elected as the first Black Lieutenant Governor of Pennsylvania, and as the youngest Lieutenant Governor elected in the country.

From the WASD school board meeting minutes from April 5, 2022:

G. Brandon S. Pardoe, was promoted from full-time Head Principal at the Williamsport Area High School to full-time Director of Student Services (245 day) at District Service Center effective July 1, 2022, at a salary of $134,509 and benefits as provided in the ACT 93 Compensation Plan (replacing Richard Poole, transferred).

At this writing, Brandon Pardoe is employed as the Williamsport Area School District Director of Student Services and Deputy Title IX Coordinator.

The same Title IX, John Doe #1 is pursuing a federal civil rights violation case under and the Count, Matthew W. Brann, Chief United States District Judge allowed the case to proceed on against the same Williamsport Area School District which employs Dr. Brandon Pardoe.

At this writing, former Lycoming County Chief Detective Willie Weber remains employed as a part-time school police officer by the Montgomery Area School District. He was hired to the position at the July 19, 2022 MASD school board meeting.

At this writing, Fred Holland who permitted Pardoe and Weber to conduct investigations remains the WASD Solicitor.

A majority of current Williamsport Area School District School Board members voted to promote Dr. Pardoe to his current positions as well as the renewal of Fred Holland as WASD Solicitor.

The promotion of Pardoe was unanimously approved by: PRESENT: Lori A. Baer, Cody L. Derr, Patrick A. Dixon, Jennifer Lake, Barbara D. Reeves, Jamie L. Sanders, Adam C. Welteroth, Scott R. Williams. ABSENT: Michelle L. Deavor.

The entire MEMORANDUM OPINION and ORDER are accessible by clicking the underlying links.

This is an exclusive and developing story on TalkWilliamsport.com.

Photo: Former Pennsylvania Attorney General and current Governor Josh Shapiro

By Todd Bartley, TalkWilliamsport.com

News@TalkWilliamsport.com

It appears from the MEMORANDUM OPINION issued on Thursday by Matthew W. Brann, Chief United States District Judge; former Pennsylvania Attorney General and current Governor Josh Shapiro has a multitude of questions to answer regarding the decision his office made not to file criminal charges in case based on the criminal sexual assault of JOHN DOE #1 during the 2018 Williamsport Area High School baseball team trip in Myrtle Beach.

From the MEMORANDUM OPINION:

IV. CONCLUSION

Despite the unsettling nature of Doe’s allegations, he fails to demonstrate a legal basis for the remedies he seeks on his constitutional and state-law claims.

Some of the misconduct Doe alleges involves violations of the law that are not his to pursue.

As to some of those violations, the appropriate authorities have exercised their discretion not to act.

As to others, the Pennsylvania General Assembly has decided

that private civil actions are not the appropriate remedy.

That said, the Court will grant Doe leave to amend his pleading in accordance with the Court’s analysis. But for the foregoing reasons, the Court grants Defendants’ motions in part.

An appropriate Order follows.

BY THE COURT:
s/ Matthew W. Brann
Matthew W. Brann
Chief United States District Judge

In the 35-page MEMORANDUM OPINION issued on Thursday, Judge Brann meticulously refers to each and every alleged instance of potential criminal liability by the Defendants in the case and provides a road map for most if not all of the dismissed counts to be refiled in an Amended Complaint.

Brann goes even further by chiding those “appropriate authorities have exercised their discretion not to act”; in doing so, on reason and belief it is a calling out of their combined failures and potentially a challenge to reopen the case, which in the most plausible eventuality leads to criminal charges against those who failed to act in the case.

Messages have been sent seeking comment on this story, to the Office of Pennsylvania Attorney General as well as Governor Josh Shapiro.

The entire MEMORANDUM OPINION and ORDER are accessible by clicking the underlying links.

This is an exclusive and developing story on TalkWilliamsport.com.