Former South Carolina Jailer Spared Prison After Testimony Fails to Convict Former Sheriff
A former South Carolina jailer who cut a plea deal and testified against his former boss is now the only one of the two to be convicted. But David Andrew Cook, 30, will not spend any time behind bars for viciously and repeatedly attacking a detainee with a Taser at the Marlboro County Jail, under orders of then-Sheriff Charles Lemon. As PLN reported, Lemon was acquitted at trial in August 2024. [See: PLN, Oct. 2024, p.57.] On December 5, 2024, Cook was sentenced to two years of probation by the federal court for the District of South Carolina.
Cook worked at the jail in May 2020, when Lemon instructed him to Taser detainee Jarrell Johnson. Both were charged with assault in state court, where the case languished until federal prosecutors filed charges in January 2024, accusing them of violating Johnson’s civil rights. Cook quickly cut a deal, agreeing to plead guilty and testify against Lemon. But when the case went to trial in August 2024, jurors acquitted the former Sheriff, crediting his argument that Johnson was violent, and the force used was necessary to subdue him.
That left Cook facing prison time for the same crime his former boss was cleared of. So prosecutors requested a downward departure from sentencing guidelines, resulting in Cook’s probated sentence, plus a $100 special assessment. See: United States v. Lemon, USDC (D.S.C.), Case No. 4:24-cr-00068.
Cook will never work in law enforcement again. After his acquittal, Lemon, 60, was reinstated by Gov. Henry McMaster (R), but he served only the last 131 days of his term, since he was too late to qualify for the November 2024 election. That was then won by Larry McNeil, the former interim Sheriff appointed to serve while Lemon was suspended.
Additional source: Queen City News
As a digital subscriber to Prison Legal News, you can access full text and downloads for this and other premium content.
Already a subscriber? Login
Related legal case
United States v. Lemon
| Year | 2024 |
|---|---|
| Cite | USDC (D.S.C.), Case No. 4:24-cr-00068 |
| Level | District Court |
| Conclusion | Bench Verdict |