Questions linger as state rests, defense begins in Charleston County ex-sheriff’s deputy trial

Several questions still linger three days into a former Charleston County sheriff deputy's triple reckless homicide trial.

More than a dozen witnesses have taken the stand so far. Some testimony has contradicted that of others. It’s still in dispute whether ex-deputy Emily Pelletier had activated her blue lights at the time she ran a stop sign and barreled into the victims on the “pitch black” U.S. Highway 17. The investigation into the collision also failed to determine whether the driver of the victims’ vehicle had turned on her headlights and did not get an accurate read of her potential levels of intoxication.

The state rested its case against Pelletier on April 17 — what would have been mother Stephanie Dantzler’s 56th birthday.

The impact from the collision caused Dantzler, then 53, and her two daughters — Shanice Dantzler-Williams, 28, and Miranda Dantzler-Williams, 22 — to die from total body blunt force trauma while they were driving home from a Mother’s Day celebration.

Testimony in Pelletier’s trial began April 15, and the prosecution and defense have frequently objected to the other side’s lines of questioning and often huddled around 9th Circuit Judge Dale Van Slambrook to spar over what information can be shared during the trial.

Defense attorney Nathan Williams even called for a mistrial April 17 after a Highway Patrol sergeant testified it was “unfortunate” that Pelletier was not interviewed about the collision.

The implication that Pelletier exercised her Constitutional right to remain silent was “inappropriate,” and could have prejudiced the jury against his client, Williams argued.

Van Slambrook ultimately decided the statement “at worst” was a vague comment on pre-arrest silence, and ordered the trial to continue.

The state’s witnesses testified about the rookie deputy’s actions prior to the collision, the conditions of each driver and vehicle and who had the right of way at the time of the wreck.

Prosecutors Jennifer Shealey and Elliott Barrow seek to prove that Pelletier recklessly disregarded a stop sign at nearly 30 miles over the speed limit while responding without lights or sirens to what she previously determined to be a non-emergent call.

Defense attorneys Frank Cornely and Nathan Williams seek through cross-examination to convince the jury that the investigation of the collision left something to be desired. The defense is expected to continue trying to poke holes in the state’s case as it calls more people to take the stand.

What happened May 8, 2022?

The defense opened its case April 17 by calling to the stand former deputy Clinton Sacks — the only other deputy on duty with Pelletier in the southern, “extremely rural” area of the county during the night shift of May 8, 2022.

After they responded to a call together on Edisto Island, they each ran their patrol vehicles over a deer that was dead in the road. They inspected their vehicles and took off again, with Pelletier a bit behind Sacks, he testified.

Pelletier was dispatched to respond to Patricia DiGeronimo, whose car had stalled out on Highway 17. That’s the same direction Sacks was headed, and he arrived there first and started assisting her after hearing on the radio that she had called several times, he testified.

Pelletier had followed directions on her car's dispatch system that also helps with navigation, which took her on another route. That system sometimes “lags” in terms of where it says you are versus where you actually are, Sacks said.

As Sacks talked to the motorist, he looked up and saw a “flash of blue lights,” from across the highway before seeing a shower of sparks. He immediately took off to help Pelletier, who he thought had hit a power pole.

She was dazed and the front of her vehicle was smashed and smoking, he testified. While Sacks testified Pelletier traveled at a reasonable speed, he admitted on cross by the prosecutor that running a stop sign is reckless, even when responding to a call.

As the South Carolina Highway Patrol investigated the collision, they determined Pelletier had sped through a stop sign at the intersection of New Road and Highway 17.

The stop sign was still upright, reflective and its view was not blocked by trees, witnesses testified.

It is unclear whether Pelletier saw the stop sign and chose to disregard it or if she didn’t notice it, according to South Carolina Highway Patrol MAIT Sgt. Jessea James.

Data from her patrol vehicle showed she was traveling 81 mph five seconds before the collision before lightly braking, hitting the gas pedal, and braking again as she T-boned the victims at 73 mph. 

The cause of the collision, which occurred between 10:57 and 10:58 p.m., was a “disregarded traffic sign” and speeding, James testified.

Were Pelletier’s blue lights on?

While several witnesses testified they saw at least a “flash” of blue light at the time of the collision, the Highway Patrol’s investigation determined Pelletier’s lights came on after the collision.

This determination was based on several pieces of evidence, including the control panel in her vehicle, James testified.

But the control panel also showed that her sirens were turned on — which they weren’t. And while turning on blue lights should activate her vehicle’s camera, no video was recovered from before or during the collision.

Defense attorney Williams pointed out the Highway Patrol still used that system to determine if Pelletier’s blue lights were on, even though they knew it was faulty and had “significant problems.”

Whether or not her lights were on would not matter in terms of determining who caused the collision, James said. 

“Even if she had her blue lights on, she would not be visible as a moving emergency vehicle until that last portion of the road,” and the victims would not have had enough time to react, James testified.

What was the state of the victims?

The close-knit group of Colleton County women were traveling away from Charleston along Highway 17 when they were struck.

Shanice drove the black Toyota Camry with her sister in the passenger seat and her mother in the back.

The Highway Patrol was also unable to determine if the victims’ vehicle had its headlights turned on at the time of the collision, James said.

The vehicle was so deformed they were unable to locate the headlight switch, and they did not perform additional tests on the lights because they did not think it was relevant to the cause of the collision, James said.

James did admit, while being cross-examined by Williams, that drivers who are under the influence sometimes forget to turn on their headlights. 

Pelletier's defense team is expected to call more witnesses on April 18.