Skip to main content

10 charged in Cheltenham High School football hazing investigation; coaches accused of hiding assaults

By CNN

Click here for updates on this story

    CHELTENHAM, Pennsylvania (KYW) — Ten people are facing charges after a 15-year-old Cheltenham High School student was assaulted twice in the locker room last year, Montgomery County officials announced Wednesday.

Four coaches — Terence Tolbert, 55, of Elkins Park; associate head coach Darian “DJ” McFadden, 42, of Roslyn, Pennsylvania; assistant coach Benjamin Johnson III, 45, of Cheltenham; and volunteer coach Ralph Burnley, 60, of Elkins Park — are charged with endangering the welfare of a child and conspiracy to do so for trying to cover up the assault, Montgomery County District Attorney Kevin R. Steele said.

Two football players who were 18 years old at the time of the assaults are also charged. Isaiah Simpson, of Cheltenham, is charged with simple assault, conspiracy to commit aggravated assault, reckless endangerment and other counts, according to the DA. Josiah Peeler, of Cheltenham, is charged with false swearing for allegedly lying to law enforcement.

Four other players who were under 18 at the time of the incidents also face charges in the juvenile system, so they will not be named publicly.

On Thursday, an adult charged in the case turned themselves in. Their identity has not been publicly released at this time and we’re working to learn more.

The charges come after a lengthy investigation by the Montgomery County Investigating Grand Jury that included testimony from more than 25 witnesses.

“This was mishandled on a lot of different levels, and it took the Montgomery County Grand Jury a long period of time to get this to where we knew [what] the facts in this case are,” Steele said.

The grand jury found that multiple players were in the locker room at the time of both assaults, and the incidents came amid ongoing issues between the victim and other players.

Two of the players facing charges in juvenile court allegedly recorded the first assault on Aug. 15, 2025, and shared the video with others, then deleted it, the DA said. The videos showed multiple players restraining the 15-year-old victim while another of the juvenile suspects poked him with a broomstick.

The second incident happened on Sept. 3, 2025. On that day, Simpson and other players are accused of kicking and stomping the victim and again poking him with a broomstick. Investigators have not found video of this second assault.

No coaches were in the locker room during either incident, the DA said.

After the second attack, Steele said, the victim told Burnley, who was giving him a ride home, that he had been “jumped” in the locker room and had an injury to his genital area. Cellphone records show Burnley told the other coaches right away, and McFadden and Tolbert told the victim not to tell his mother about the incidents, the DA said during a press conference. The coaches also did not contact school administrators, he said.

Evidence shows the coaches discussed concerns that the assault would jeopardize the season and wanted to handle it internally.

“The assaults on this victim were not the typical goofing around by teammates or horseplay, as some of the coaches in this case called it. They were crimes,” Steele said.

The victim was taken to urgent care on Sept. 8, 2025, and was diagnosed with a contusion to his penis.

The victim’s mother learned of the second incident a few days after it happened from a family member who heard about it from other parents, and school administrators learned about it on Sept. 18 through an anonymous report on the Safe2Say app.

Cheltenham officials then contacted police and suspended the season on Oct. 17. They canceled the remainder of the 2025 season on Oct. 19, citing hazing allegations.

The school also canceled the 2026 football season because of the investigation. It will field a ninth-grade team this year, officials said.

In a letter to the community, Cheltenham Superintendent of Schools Brian W. Scriven said district officials appreciate that “those responsible are being held accountable through the criminal justice system.” The district has cut ties with every member of the football coaching staff in light of the investigation, Scriven said.

District officials will continue to review and strengthen safety procedures ahead of the new school year.

The grand jury also issued a report recommending state legislators change the law to make hazing an offense that mandated reporters must report. In the letter to families, Scriven said the district supports this recommendation and believes legislators could go even farther, as not all student-on-student assaults are considered hazing.

Officials have informed the 10 suspects that they are facing charges, and many of them are making arrangements to turn themselves in.

Parents have previously told CBS News Philadelphia they were frustrated by the investigation, saying their children were being viewed with suspicion by college recruiters despite not being involved in the assault.

In a message to parents in January, Scriven said about 19 students witnessed the Sept. 3, 2025, assault and made no attempts to stop it.

You can watch Steele’s full news conference about the investigation on CBS Philadelphia’s YouTube channel.

Please note: This story was provided to CNN Wire by an affiliate and does not contain original CNN reporting. This content carries a strict local market embargo. If you share the same market as the contributor of this article, you may not use it on any platform.

Judge in Don Lemon indictment asks to see grand jury records, adding to growing scrutiny of Justice Department cases

By CNN
(CNN) — A federal judge in Minnesota will probe this week whether grounds exist to toss the Justice Department’s case against journalist Don Lemon. It’s the latest example of judges’ growing skepticism of whether the department is behaving ethically behind closed doors in grand jury proceedings.Judges across the country have signaled they are willing to give far less deference to federal prosecutors than in previous administrations and have raised concerns about DOJ’s apparent abandonment of regular practices.Federal judges in Wyoming, Illinois and Virginia have either thrown out charges or seriously admonished federal prosecutors for missteps in front of the grand jury. The botched grand jury presentments have prompted a historical review of cases in Chicago and, in some courts, new rules requiring defendants to be notified when a grand jury declines to indict.On August 18, Minnesota federal Judge Laura Provinzino issued a short but extraordinary order demanding the Justice Department provide her a wide swath of grand jury materials related to Lemon and his co-defendants, including presentations made by prosecutors and case agents, and the totality of communications prosecutors had with grand jurors resulting in their indictments.Provinzino set a Tuesday deadline to provide her with the presentation by federal prosecutors and case agents related to grand juries empaneled in January and February. Further, Provinzino told DOJ to provide any introduction, legal instructions, witness testimony, closing arguments, and answers to questions from grand jurors.Lemon’s team has aggressively pursued obtaining grand jury materials and had asked for either grand jury records to be provided to the defense or, at a minimum, reviewed by the judge privately, citing “irregularities” in the grand jury that resulted in his indictment.“There is substantial evidence of grand-jury irregularities in this case,” Lemon’s team wrote in a recent filing.“Multiple judges, including at the Eighth Circuit, found there was no probable cause to charge Lemon” and his co-defendant Georgia Fort, the filing said.Mark Wolf, a former Massachusetts District Court judge and federal prosecutor, said it is rare for defense attorneys to ask for grand jury transcripts in federal court. It is even more rare that judges grant the motions, he said.“There is a high bar to getting grand jury materials,” Wolf said. “You have to have some direct or circumstantial evidence that there has been some defect in the grand jury proceeding.”In her two-page order, Provinzino wrote that she weighed the necessity of maintaining grand jury secrecy against whether grounds may exist to dismiss the case due to a “matter that occurred before the grand jury.”She did not say she had already found evidence of any misconduct.The Justice Department’s initial attempt to charge Lemon in January for appearing alongside protestors who disrupted a church service in St. Paul, Minnesota, was rejected by a federal magistrate judge, which “enraged” then Attorney General Pam Bondi, according to a source who spoke to CNN at the time.Lemon, a former CNN anchor, was later indicted by a grand jury along with several other defendants, including independent journalist Georgia Fort. Lemon has been charged with conspiring to violate someone’s constitutional rights and violating the FACE Act, which prohibits the use of force or threats to intentionally interfere with someone expressing their First Amendment right to practice religion.Lemon has pleaded not guilty to both charges. His team has aggressively pursued obtaining grand jury materials throughout the case, and earlier this month filed a motion to dismiss the case altogether.Justice Department losing credibilityWolf told CNN he does not believe the Justice Department’s credibility remains intact.“For good reasons, the Department of Justice’s reputation with judges generally has been injured,” Wolf said.In Chicago, defense attorneys urged Judge April Perry to release grand jury transcripts in the highly publicized case against protestors at an ICE detention facility outside the city.After reviewing those transcripts, Perry found federal prosecutors engaged in inappropriate actions, such as interacting with grand jurors outside the proceeding, ordering some jurors to leave in another hearing, and “vouching” to the grand jurors.Vouching is a practice where prosecutors present their own reputation while delivering their case to a grand jury. It is forbidden in grand jury proceedings because the practice effectively asks jurors to trust the prosecutor personally rather than only on the merits of evidence.“I have never seen the types of prosecutorial behavior before a grand jury that I saw in those transcripts,” Judge Perry said during a May 21 hearing.US Attorney Andrew Boutros then dropped the case against the protestors. Later, after reviewing the prosecutor’s conduct, Boutros opted to drop at least two more criminal cases, ordered a historical review of more than 100 grand jury transcripts, and launched reforms such as more training on grand jury presentations.“If I was a federal public defender or a private defense attorney, every case I get that’s indicted, I’m going to file a motion that is asking the judge to review the transcripts,” said Mike Fox, a current Cato Institute fellow and former Colorado public defender.“In my view, at this point, it doesn’t matter in which court it is, doesn’t matter if I have binding case law,” Fox said. “Every single case, the defense attorney should be filing, and the judge should be inquiring.”In May, a panel of three federal judges in Wyoming dismissed felony drug and gun indictments against nine defendants after the judges found the acting Wyoming US Attorney referred to defendants as “bad guys,” and “murderers,” and handed out business cards to jurors outside of the proceeding.Prosecutors opted not to appeal the judges’ order. Later, Wyoming federal prosecutors empaneled a new grand jury which issued a new indictment. The case remains ongoing.Fox believes the remedy is a more engaged judiciary where judges routinely witness grand jury proceedings.The current law doesn’t require judges to listen to proceedings, but some courts are issuing new local rules to ensure greater oversight. This spring, the Northern District of Illinois, where Boutros is US Attorney, enacted a rule requiring grand juries to alert a magistrate judge when a grand jury fails to issue an indictment.A spokesperson for the Justice Department told CNN in an email the executive office of the US Attorney provides training for prosecutors which includes grand jury practice.“On rare occasions where there is an issue, as noted in our Chicago US Attorney’s office, we took immediate corrective action and provided renewed, in-depth instruction on ethics and grand jury practice,” the spokesperson wrote.“Our US Attorneys will always follow the law and prosecute cases without fear or favor. Nobody is above the law, regardless of political affiliation. Beyond that, we don’t comment on pending litigation.”Grand jury presentments in the spotlight last yearLast fall, in the most high-profile and politically charged example of a problematic grand jury presentment, then-interim US Attorney for the Eastern District of Virginia, Lindsey Halligan, took a proposed indictment against former FBI Director James Comey through a grand jury on her own. A magistrate judge in Alexandria, Virginia, reviewed the transcript and found Halligan may have incorrectly presented the law to the grand jury. The judge called the debacle “profound investigative missteps … to potentially undermine the integrity of the grand jury proceeding.”Halligan later admitted to a judge the grand jury hadn’t supported the initial version of the proposed indictment of Comey, and the full grand jury hadn’t signed off on the final charging document. That Comey case was dismissed for a separate reason, when a federal district judge determined Halligan wasn’t serving as a legitimate prosecutor. The Justice Department is appealing.But the grand jury handling in the Comey case and other cases continues to hover over prosecutors.Comey’s defense team, for instance, is attempting to pry into grand jury records in the separate, newer case against him, out of Eastern North Carolina. He is charged there with threatening the president by posting on social media a photo of the numbers “8647” written in seashells on a beach.The phrase 86 is sometimes used to say nix or get rid of something. Trump is the 47th president. Comey has denied wrongdoing in the case.“The highly irregular procedures that led to the indictment create a significant risk that the government misrepresented key issues of fact and law to the grand jury,” Comey’s lawyers wrote in a recent court filing, citing federal searches of Comey that they question.If Comey’s defense cannot gain access to the grand jury transcript, they at least want a judge to look at it to check the Justice Department’s work.Wolf said he is deeply troubled by the Justice Department’s recent actions and told CNN he believes it shows the American people that the department will use the law for partisan purposes.“It sends a message that a Department of Justice that should institutionalize our ideal of equal justice under law is not doing that,” Wolf said. “And that means anybody is vulnerable.”The-CNN-Wire™ & © 2026 Cable News Network, Inc., a Warner Bros. Discovery Company. All rights reserved.
Read Next Story

Related Stories

Latest News
A medida que se acercan las elecciones, Netanyahu presenta a Turquía como el nuevo enemigo de Israel
1 hour ago

A medida que se acercan las elecciones, Netanyahu presenta a Turquía como el nuevo enemigo de Israel

¿Por qué el francés se ha convertido en un punto conflictivo en la disputa comercial entre Canadá y EE.UU.?

A Black man once sentenced to death for murder fights for freedom after discovering his attorney defended the Ku Klux Klan

Michael Jordan’s ‘Last Dance’ 1998 Finals jersey could sell for over $10 million

EE.UU. afirma que tomará medidas enérgicas contra los países que hacen negocios con Irán. ¿Quién compra petróleo iraní?