CHARLESTON, SC (WMBF) – A man who has been accused of being involved in the 2009 disappearance of Brittanee Drexel is due in court Wednesday for allegedly violating the conditions of his release for an unrelated 2011 robbery case.
Timothy Da'Shawn Taylor will be in federal court in Charleston at 1:30 p.m. Wednesday for a hearing regarding a violation of his pre-trial release, according to court records.
Documents show that on October 21, 2017, at 9:30 p.m., an officer received an alert that Taylor's location monitoring showed he was not at his home. His probation officer looked a Taylor's logged GPS points to determine that he had gone to the Dorchester Dragway on Saturday night. He did not have permission to be at that location, and Taylor later admitted that he was at the dragway working on one of his vehicles.
On October 27, a warrant was issued to arrest Taylor for failing to comply with the conditions of his home detention.
Taylor's detention is for a 2011 armed robbery of a fast food restaurant. Back in July of this year, Taylor pleaded guilty to federal charges related to the 2011 armed robbery. Taylor reportedly had confessed to being the getaway driver in the robbery of a Mount Pleasant McDonald's. He was awaiting sentencing on this case when he allegedly violated the conditions of his release.
Two other suspects have been sentenced in connection with the robbery.
During the court hearing in July, federal prosecutors said Taylor failed a lie detector test related to the disappearance of Brittanee Drexel with in the past 30 days. Federal prosecutors say they are still working on compiling evidence in the Drexel disappearance.
After the hearing Taylor's attorney said he and his client met with the FBI three times and told agents Taylor has no idea what happened to Drexel.
"Unfortunately we couldn't provide the FBI or the Drexel family with anything beneficial of her whereabouts and unfortunately we've been kind of punished," Peper said.
Taylor's attorneys say they have filed a motion on July 7 to dismiss the federal indictment against their client on the grounds that "his rights under the double jeopardy, due process, and cruel and unusual punishment clauses of the United States Constitution have been violated by the subsequent indictment and prosecution of him in federal court for the same offense and on the same underlying facts as his previous state court conviction."
In its response to the motion to dismiss, federal prosecutors said they learned of Taylor's involvement in the robbery and subsequent punishment while investigating a separate crime – "the abduction and murder of a teenage girl in the Myrtle Beach and McClellanville areas."
Last summer, an FBI agent testified in open court that Drexel was abducted, gang-raped at a "stash house" in the McClellanville area, shot after trying to escape, and then her body was fed to alligators.
A jailhouse informant accused Taylor and his father, Shaun Taylor, of being directly involved in Drexel's murder, according to the agent's testimony.
Taylor has denied killing Drexel. At present, no one has been charged in her disappearance.
"He was in third period class in Lincoln High School the day that jailhouse rat says he was in this trap house in the middle of McClellanville, they know that is not correct," Peper said.
While investigating the Drexel case, "further inquiries into the details of the robbery indicated that the defendant's penalty was far below what his co-defendants received, particularly given his level of involvement, which justified a subsequent federal prosecution," according to the response to the motion to dismiss based on double jeopardy grounds, which was filed on Tuesday. "Despite agreeing to plead guilty, the defendant has filed this motion seeking to have his indictment dismissed on double jeopardy grounds. The government anticipates that the change of plea will go forward once this issue is resolved."
Taylor's attorneys said allowing the federal prosecution to go forward is an "abuse of the dual sovereignty doctrine and the concept of double jeopardy."
The prosecution noted that the double jeopardy clause would ordinarily prevent a person from being prosecuted twice for the same crime. However, they argue in their response that the dual sovereignty doctrine does not bar prosecution if the charges are brought by "separate sovereigns."