Photo: Myrtle Beach Police Department image (top left)
Horry County Solicitor’s Office image (top right)
Atlantica Resort room image (bottom)
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 –
“COUNT I
VIOLATION OF TITLE IX OF THE EDUCATION AMENDMENTS OF 1972, (20 U.S.C. § 1681(a))
Plaintiff v. WASD”
By Todd Bartley, Talk Williamsport
News@talkwilliamsport.com
The following article is the sixth in a series 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 Complaint;
From the First Amended Complaint filed on Thursday, May 11, 2023.
126. Plaintiff incorporates by reference the preceding paragraphs of this Complaint as if fully set forth herein.
127. Title IX of the Education Amendments of 1972, 20 U.S.C.S. § 1681 et seq., provides, in relevant part, that no person in the United States, shall, on the basis of sex, be excluded from participation in, be denied the benefits of, or be subjected to discrimination under any education program or activity receiving federal financial assistance.
128. If a funding recipient does not engage in harassment directly, it may not be liable for damages unless its deliberate indifference subjects its students to harassment.
129. A federal funding recipient may be held liable for the harassment of a victim when the recipient exercises substantial control over the harasser and the context in which the harassment occurs. For example, if the continued harassment occurs on school grounds, within the context of a school-related function, or otherwise while in the course and scope of an environment controlled by the federal funding recipient.
130. While a recipient school cannot be held vicariously liable for the specific acts of sexual harassment or violence, they can instead be held liable under Title IX for their own conduct.
131. Sexual harassment is a form of discrimination for purposes of Title IX of the Education Amendments of 1972, 20 U.S.C.S. § 1681 et seq., and Title IX proscribes harassment with sufficient clarity to serve as a basis for a damages action. Moreover, an implied private right of action exists under Title IX of the Education Amendments of 1972, 20 U.S.C.S. § 1681 et seq., and money damages are available in such suits.
132. Upon information and belief, Defendant WASD is a recipient of federal education funding.
133. As stated above, Plaintiff was in the care and custody of Defendant WASD when he was abused by a fellow student, also in the care and custody of WASD, in an environment controlled by WASD—an out-of-state athletic team trip sponsored and supervised by WASD.
134. Plaintiff was subject to sexual abuse in the form of an indecent assault wherein a fellow student sat on his head and placed his penis on Plaintiff’s face, making skin-to-skin contact with Plaintiff.
135. WASD employees permitted this abuse to occur at a school function due to their deliberate indifference towards the supervision of Plaintiff, the perpetrator B.M., and the other children in the care and custody of WASD. The acts and omissions of Defendant WASD created an environment where this type of sexual abuse was a foreseeable consequence of their actions.
136. WASD also knew or should have known of the regular instances of hazing, bullying, assaultive behavior and/or sexual assaultive behavior that occurred on the annual WAHS baseball trip to Myrtle Beach. Such abuse occurred for years, if not decades, and WASD exhibited a deliberate indifference to such conduct occurring to children in its care and custody, including Plaintiff, on these annual school-sponsored trips.
137. Upon information and belief, Defendant WASD was made aware of Plaintiff’s sexual abuse at or near the time of the abuse actually occurring in March 2018. In any event, WASD was, at the very least, notified of the sexual abuse of Plaintiff by way of a Child Line report on May 18, 2018.
138. When informed of the specifics of the abuse and that there was proof of the abuse, documented on at least one student’s phone, WASD administrators and coaches instructed students to destroy that evidence and keep quiet about what had occurred but did nothing to actually ensure said videos were prevented from being disseminated, did not discipline any students involved, and failed to control the situation immediately after it occurred.
139. Due to these failures, Plaintiff’s abuse was publicized within the WAHS community, he was subject to ridicule, name-calling, bullying, torment, and harassment from other students. This harassment was communicated to WASD. In response, WASD did nothing—which allowed the harassment to continue and worsen in severity.
140. Thereafter, and in conjunction with agents and/or employees of LC, Defendant WASD failed to conduct any meaningful investigation into the sexual abuse and harassment of Plaintiff. What is more, WASD actively conspired to cover-up the abuse and harassment of Plaintiff with its inadequate investigation.
141. Due to the sexual abuse and subsequent harassment Plaintiff endured, he was forced to transfer out of the school district.
142. Defendant WASD’s failure to protect Plaintiff from abuse and harassment and its failure to investigate rises to the level of deliberate indifference by attempting to destroy and/or suppress evidence, attempting to silence witnesses, failing to meaningfully discipline B.M., failing to keep Plaintiff and his mother apprised of any actions taken within the investigation and after the conclusion of said investigation, and other acts and omissions described throughout this Complaint.
143. The deliberate indifference, omissions, actions, and failures to act described above caused Plaintiff to suffer sexual abuse and harassment.
144. Defendant WASD, by and through the acts of its employees, agents, servants, staff members, teachers, and coaches had a duty to protect the life, liberty, and property of Plaintiff John Doe, and because of its failure to take any precautionary measures to supervise children in their care and custody, Plaintiff suffered sexual abuse.
145. Defendant WASD, by and through the acts of its employees, agents, servants, administrators, staff members, teachers, and coaches had a duty to protect the life, liberty, and property of Plaintiff, and because of its failure to take remedial measures with regard to the known instances of misconduct by B.M. and other students involved in the assault of Plaintiff, Plaintiff suffered additional harassment in school.
146. Defendant WASD, by and through the acts of its employees, agents, servants, administrators, staff members, teachers, and coaches failed to comply with Title IX by failing to take any meaningful action with regard to prior reports and observations of inappropriate conduct and/or sexual abuse by students on the Myrtle Beach trip, including B.M., and continued to allow B.M. to stay enrolled at WAHS as a member of the Millionaires baseball team where he, and others to whom he disseminated the video of Plaintiff’s abuse, had the opportunity to harass, ridicule, bully, shame, and torment Plaintiff.
147. As a direct and proximate cause of the affirmative acts and omissions of Defendant WASD and its employees, agents, servants, staff members, teachers, and coaches that rise to such a level of deliberate indifference, Plaintiff 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.
148. Plaintiff’s injuries are severe, pervasive, and objectively offensive, and as a direct result of Defendant WASD’s acts and omissions, Plaintiff experienced a complete loss of educational benefits and opportunities afforded to him.
WHEREFORE, Plaintiff demands judgment against Defendant WASD in a sum in excess of Seventy-Five Thousand ($75,000.00) Dollars, and in excess of the prevailing arbitration limits, in compensatory damages and punitive damages, exclusive of pre-judgment interest, post judgment interests and costs.
“COUNT II, VIOLATION OF 42 U.S.C. § 1983, Plaintiff v. Defendants Pardoe, Freed, McCann, Miller, Holland, Weber, and John Does 1-20 Civil Rights Conspiracy” in this series, is forthcoming.
This is an exclusive and developing story on TalkWilliamsport.com.
