M. Fauntleroy

ELKINS — The cases against a Montrose couple accused of abducting their biological child from  the Department of Health and Human Resources and fleeing to South Carolina will go before the grand jury, after their preliminary hearings this week.

Darries Lamar Fauntleroy, 42, appeared in Randolph County Magistrate Court Monday with attorney Paul Gwaltney. Darries Fauntleroy is charged with removal of a minor child from a custodian and conspiracy, both felonies.

After a preliminary hearing lasting two hours and 90 minutes, probable cause was found in the case, moving it forward to be considered by a Randolph County Grand Jury.

Assistant Randolph County Prosecutor Leckta Poling said that, during the hearing, Darries Fauntleroy’s bond was modified from a $25,000 cash-only bond to a personal recognizance bond. He was released from Tygart Valley Regional Jail under this new bond.

On Monday afternoon, Megan Rae Fauntleroy, 40, also appeared in Randolph County Magistrate Court, with attorney Gregory Tingler, for her preliminary hearing. She is also charged with removal of a minor child from a custodian and conspiracy.

Megan Fauntleroy waived her right to a preliminary hearing, moving her case forward to be considered by the grand jury. During the hearing, Tingler asked Magistrate Benjamin Shepler, who presided over both preliminary hearings, to modify Megan Fauntleroy’s bond.

Tingler argued that there was a “massive disparity” between Megan Fauntleroy’s bond and Darries Fauntleroy’s bond.

“Mr. Fauntleroy’s was originally set at $25,000 cash-only,” Tingler told the court. “My client’s was set to $100,000 cash-only. Can’t reconcile that because it’s the same set of circumstances, same allegations.”

Tingler stated that, as Darries Fauntleroy had received a PR bond that same day, his client should also have the same bond, or at least have her bond be reduced to a $25,000 property/surety or a 10% bond.

Poling reminded the court that, before the alleged abduction, there was a “specific condition due to safety concerns” regarding Megan Fauntleroy being around the child. Poling stated that she understood Tingler’s request for bond modification and asked the court that, if bond was modified, a condition be added that Megan Fauntleroy have no contact with any foster parents the child could be placed with.

Shepler modified Megan Fauntleroy’s bond from a $100,000 cash-only bond to a 90% personal recognizance, 10% cash bond. Shepler also stated that Megan Fauntleroy would be placed on electronic monitoring before her release, and that she is not allowed contact with any juveniles, as well as any future foster parent of the allegedly abducted child.

According to the criminal complaint, filed by Senior Trooper A.P. Petrella of the West Virginia State Police, on Jan. 9, Petrella received a direct complaint from a state Department of Health and Human Resources employee saying that the Fauntleroys had left the state of West Virginia with a 7-year-old child.

Officials learned that the Fauntleroys had traveled to South Carolina, and that their Montrose residence was now “empty,” the complaint states.

The DHHR employee later told police that the DHHR were the current custodians of the 7-year-old, according to the complaint. The employee said she had contacted Darries Fauntleroy on Jan. 10 and he said he and the child were in New Jersey. He allegedly provided a New Jersey address which police later determined did not exist.

Using police technology, the State Police Elkins Communications office “searched the License Plate Reader database and located” Darries Fauntleroy’s vehicle “traveling on 1-77 South in Kanawha County” on Dec. 27, according to the complaint. In the License Plate Reader photograph, the truck was “loaded with appliances.”

The State Police Elkins Communications office then “pinged Megan Fauntleroy’s cellular phone and returned a location of Kingstree, South Carolina,” the complaint states.

According to the DHHR employee, a previous court order had stated that Megan Fauntleroy was to have no contact with the child, including phone calls, the complaint reads.