CHELTENHAM YOUTH DETENTION CENTER SEXUAL ABUSE LAWYERS

Introduction

Most of the controversies and allegations surrounding the Cheltenham Youth Detention Center in Prince George’s County, Maryland revolve around abuse and mistreatment of young male and female youth. It houses youth offenders from surrounding areas, including the DC suburbs and southern Maryland counties. Originally established in 1870, Cheltenham has undergone several transformations.
The state took a somewhat progressive approach to this new facility, realizing that many of the youth were victims of the circumstances into which they were born. The center’s mission is to prepare all youths for a realistic and successful return to the community. Increasing educational opportunities and improving personal development form the foundation of the Cheltenham Youth Detention Center.
However, incidents of sexual abuse, including those between detainees, went unaddressed by staff, who neglected their responsibility to report and prevent such occurrences. This created a dangerous environment where abuse could continue unchecked. With the enactment of the Mary Child Victims Act of 2023, former residents have sought compensation for the trauma caused to them.

The details of abuse reported herein were from the report filed into DOJ unless otherwise indicated.

2012–2024

• Survivors have since stepped forward, filing lawsuits to hold Cheltenham accountable for the harm they endured. These legal actions emphasize the urgent need for accountability and comprehensive reform, including improved staff training, enhanced oversight, and the enforcement of protective protocols.
• The Maryland Child Victims Act of 2023 (CVA), which eliminates any time limit as to the institution of civil suits arising out of childhood sexual abuse, allowed former inmates of Cheltenham to seek justice in court. Within a month of the passing of the CVA, over 60 victims lodged an action against the Maryland Department of Juvenile Services (MDJS). The plaintiffs assert that they were sexually abused as children by staff and inmates, and it was a known fact that MDJS did not even bother to screen and supervise their workers. The abuse of power by staff members that prevented staff abuse and silenced victims of abuse by threatening them with reprisals is outlined in the lawsuit, claiming that MDJS did not have measures in place to protect or sanction staff abusers. One plaintiff shared his experience of being sexually assaulted seven times in the mid-1990s by guards who exploited his vulnerability and used physical intimidation to keep him quiet.

2000–2011

• In the year 2010, the Department of Justice looked into allegations of abuse, noting serious issues within the facility and more recently, renewed concerns about the welfare of youths at the center were highlighted when the Maryland Attorney General’s Office launched a new investigation into the conditions at Cheltenham.
• In April 2004, the civil rights division of the US Department of Justice conducted an inquiry that showed inadequacies in Cheltenham’s harm prevention measures, focusing on physical abuse perpetrated by staff, violent altercations among residents, and the excessive use of disciplinary isolation. Further, there were recorded cases of minor sexual abuse and staff’s inappropriate relations with youths which hinted at a culture of sustained and underreported abuse. It was noted that the facility had in the past experienced a number of abusive incidents involving staff and inmates but still had no effective protocols in place to protect its youth from continued abuse.
• In January 2004, Maryland State Police filed criminal charges against four Cheltenham staff members who reportedly restrained a youth and severely beat him. After the youth resisted going to bed, staff, including a unit supervisor, restrained him in a “chicken wing hold” while others punched him in the face and kicked him in the ribs. By the end of the incident, the youth’s pants and underwear were torn and pulled down, and he was left with documented injuries to his face and ribs, ultimately requiring hospitalization.
• By February 2001, more than a dozen advocacy groups had launched a campaign to permanently close Cheltenham Youth Detention Center. The publicity was fueled by the abuse, rape and violence in the center. In the late spring of 1995, a national campaign had already identified and tagged Cheltenham as among the worst juvenile detention centers. These combined efforts only define the urgency and desperation for the much needed change. Despite the negative publicity, Cheltenham still went about its business as usual.
• In April 2002, Carolyn Diane Cooley, a guard at Cheltenham, was suspended and later charged with multiple sex crimes. Authorities uncovered that Cooley had engaged in a weeks-long sexual relationship with a teenager detained at the facility. This revelation sparked renewed scrutiny of the oversight and screening of staff members, casting light on a deeper issue of unchecked abuse by those in positions of authority at Cheltenham.

1980s–1990s 

• During these years, reports surfaced about detainees experiencing excessive force, including physical restraint and isolation. Staff frequently used isolation as punishment, disregarding the mental and emotional toll it took on youth. Such practices persisted largely unchallenged, establishing a culture of neglect.
• In October 1991, nurse Jean Castle was indicted on charges of sexually abusing 16 boys during his brief employment at Cheltenham. Castle however worked at the facility for less than two months and was originally accused of sexually assaulting three boys, until further investigations revealed a total of 16 victims. This case however brought focus on the ease with which abusers were able to access the youth within the institution.
• In February 1991, counselor Terry Kevin Ward was arrested for child sexual abuse after he molested a boy while he was at Cheltenham which was then known as Boys Village of Maryland. In 1993, Ward was later on charged with other sexual crimes after he was alleged to have molested a teenager while volunteering for the Columbia Youth Baseball Association. His convictions highlighted long-standing concerns regarding Cheltenham’s hiring and monitoring practices for staff members working directly with youth.
• In December 1999, Maryland juvenile justice officials acknowledged the severity of conditions at Cheltenham by firing seven employees implicated in the physical abuse of youth inmates over the prior year. The state’s findings also revealed over 200 incidents related to suicide attempts and numerous reported cases of sexual assaults by guards. The state’s response included creating a task force to monitor and improve conditions within the facility, but the persistence of these problems illustrated the depth of Cheltenham’s issues.
• In July 1999, Cheltenham Superintendent Carlton Richardson was demoted and reassigned after it was discovered that a counselor under his supervision had impregnated a teenage resident at the facility. This incident added to Cheltenham’s tainted history, spotlighting inadequate staff supervision and the serious consequences of lax oversight in a facility responsible for the welfare of vulnerable young individuals.

Contact Us

The legal journey in sexual abuse cases requires more than just expertise—it requires empathy, sensitivity, and an unwavering commitment to justice. At GGH, we understand the profound impact that sexual abuse has on survivors and their families. We stand firm in our belief that survivors of sexual abuse have the right to seek justice, hold perpetrators accountable, and begin the process of healing.

The GGH team is dedicated to ensuring that survivors' voices are heard and their stories respected. We are here to help you navigate the legal process with care and confidence, advocating for the justice and closure you deserve.

Contact GGH Today for a free consultation at (312) 728-7444 or contact us online.