Lowcountry mother files suit against Corrections Dept. in son's killingBy Noah Haglund (Contact)
The Post and Courier
Saturday, July 19, 2008
State prison officials failed to protect a Berkeley County man from an extortion scheme when he was slain behind bars two years ago, a recent lawsuit claims. Daniel Preston Walker, 20, was less than two years into a 20-year sentence for his role in a fatal shooting in Moncks Corner when he was killed at Lee Correctional Institution on June 24, 2006. Reports show he was beaten and smothered. Authorities have not publicly identified any suspects in the case. Walker's mother, Alice A. Walker, is the plaintiff in the lawsuit against the State Department of Corrections, warden Anthony Padula and other still-unidentified employees at the Lee County prison. A complaint was filed in the Third Circuit County Court of Common Pleas on June 20. "Danny went to prison to serve his sentence, not to die," said T.O. Sanders, the Charleston attorney who filed the suit. The complaint accuses the Corrections Department of causing wrongful death, negligence, negligent hiring and retention of employees, and depriving Walker of his Constitutional rights. Specific allegations include: not supervising inmates to prevent assaults; properly staffing the prison unit where Walker was slain; having inadequate video surveillance and other forms of monitoring; not reacting to threat complaints; failing to separate Walker from other inmates after he received threats; and not giving Walker proper medical care after the attack. The Corrections Department was still preparing a response to the lawsuit, public information officer Josh Gelinas wrote in an e-mail on Friday. Gelinas said prison officials investigate extortion allegations whenever they are aware of them. The suit seeks unspecified damages in an amount to be determined by a jury. Read more in tomorrow's editions of The Post and Courier. |
Article toolsSponsored Links |
|
Notice about comments: Charleston.net is pleased to offer readers the ability to comment on stories. We expect our readers to engage in lively, yet civil discourse. Charleston.net does not edit user submitted statements and we cannot promise that readers will not occasionally find offensive or inaccurate comments posted in the comments area. Responsibility for the statements posted lies with the person submitting the comment, not charleston.net. If you find a comment that is objectionable, please click "suggest removal" and we will review it for possible removal. Please be reminded, however, that in accordance with our Terms of Use and federal law, we are under no obligation to remove any third party comments posted on our website. Full terms and conditions can be read here. |
Comments
This article has 8 comment(s)
Posted by summerville_guy on July 19, 2008 at 6:19 p.m. (Suggest removal)
You kill somebody, you get killed. Seems pretty even to me.
Posted by NakedYoga on July 19, 2008 at 8:38 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Right... eye for an eye... guess we haven't progressed much since the Code of Hammurabi.
He received a determinable sentence from the State, not the death penalty.
Posted by NakedYoga on July 19, 2008 at 8:43 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Also, the article is careful not to say that he killed the other person. He was sentenced for his "role" in the killing. In South Carolina, the minimum punishment for murder is 30 years imprisonment. He was serving 20, so he wasn't convicted of murdering the person. Nor was he likely convicted as an accessory to murder, as being an accessory typically carries the same penalty as the principal crime committed.
Posted by goosecreek_guy on July 19, 2008 at 8:48 p.m. (Suggest removal)
I'm certain that the warden of the prison would love to have a bigger staff. If the threats were not investigated that would be a legitimate complaint. Otherwise, the department of corrections, contrary to popular belief, is not a babysitting service. It is understandable that the mother would be upset about losing her child to these circumstances. I am not making any accusations, but I seriously wonder how concerned a parent she was before this incident?!?
Posted by The_Mouth_of_the_South on July 19, 2008 at 9:33 p.m. (Suggest removal)
So, his mommy is upset that the murderer was himself killed in prison. Seems like poetic justice to me. . .
She should be thankful. They did her a great service by taking a murderer out of circulation permanently.
Besides, if she had been a good mother, then her son wouldn't have ended up in prison in the first place. She is ultimately responsible for the outcome in the end.
Posted by ThinkAboutThis on July 19, 2008 at 10:58 p.m. (Suggest removal)
She is entitled to sue and should so -- there is no reason or excuse a correctional facility should be so out of control to have it's prisoners treated as such!
Posted by dianed43 on July 19, 2008 at 11:06 p.m. (Suggest removal)
he was sentenced to 20 years not death. shame on those who past judgement. for those of you who think that your children would never do anything wrong....they just don't get caught. this is still someone's child. your cruel words are harsh. my prayers to his family. the sad part is that no one was caught in his murder. those involved need to realize they will meet their maker....even the employees.
Posted by abitskeptical on July 20, 2008 at 12:12 a.m. (Suggest removal)
MOS, in holding a mother responsible for the actions of her 20 yr old child, you seem to discount something called free will.
Even though my husband & I have worked hard & sacrificed much to teach our children, mostly by example, the right way to live, I do not feel that I have a right to take credit for the good choices & accomplishments of my children (especially as they get older) & I certainly will not be to blame if they decide to do something contrary to everything they were taught & saw lived out as we raised them.
I am happy & grateful--it gives me a great sense of peace-that they, so far, have adopted good values (good work ethic,honesty, compassion, loyalty, discipline, respect for others & authority etc.) & applied them to how they conduct their lives. But I cannot "take credit" for their good decisions & choices. Ultimately, they were the ones to make those decisions & choices.
Although their free will was somewhat restrained as needed when they were younger, they are individuals in their own right & do have minds & consciences of their own.