Highway Patrol Employee Fired, Charged With Child Porn

A civilian Highway Patrol employee was fired and then arrested by Apex police on child porn charges.

James Taylor is facing 20 counts of second degree exploitation of a minor.

The 45-year-old Apex man was assigned to the patrol's technical services unit. A Highway Patrol news release says Taylor was fired because of an on-going criminal investigation relating to him having child pornography on his personal computer.

Because of the initial investigation, the SBI was brought in to conduct a criminal probe for unauthorized use and misappropriation of a state-issued computer.

Taylor's in the Wake County jail on a $800,000 bond.


You must be logged in to post comments.

Username:
Password (case sensitive):
Remember Me:

Read Comments

Comments are posted from viewers like you and do not always reflect the views of this station.
  • by Anonymous on May 8, 2011 at 06:14 AM
    Happy Mother's Day Mom! Think she is proud of him?
  • by to Grammar teacher on May 6, 2011 at 07:41 PM
    "Or you could so they are children." Seems like to me you need to proofread. You mean Or you could have said they are children. But this is a blog and sometimes people makes mistakes right?
  • by creepy on May 6, 2011 at 01:55 PM
    man this freaked me out, thinking of all the power a SHP officer has...and am mildly relieved to see he is simply a civilian..this is still terrible. shame on you WITN for that slightly misleading title
  • by Why WITN????? on May 6, 2011 at 01:01 PM
    Why do you have to link this guy to Highway Patrol? He didnt have any more to do with Troopers than any other state employees. They are just who he assisted with his CIVILIAN state job. Guess it just makes readers listen more when you try to link him to Highway Patrol. Good thing he wasn't a janitor at the White House. I could see it now; Obama aid arrested in a child porn scandel!!
  • by NOT IN HIGHWAY PATROL on May 6, 2011 at 10:21 AM
    why must "witn" say "highway patrol employee fired". this guy had nothing to do with being a state trooper. are you just trying to make them look bad so you can grab a few more listers attention? i think our law enforcement has had enough negative without witn bringing on more, especially when they didnt have anyting to do with it. this was this guys personal choice.
    • reply
      by 250 on May 6, 2011 at 01:11 PM in reply to NOT IN HIGHWAY PATROL
      I do concur. I do not see why Highway Patrol was mentioned but mayebe the fact it was Gov't comps that were involved. This was a Flash Grab to make people aim for that story. Good Day hey?
    • reply
      by state on May 6, 2011 at 06:50 PM in reply to NOT IN HIGHWAY PATROL
      no one said he was a state trooper..however he was an civilian employee of the North Carolina Highway Patrol.. so he was an employee of the highway patrol. you need to get your facts straight...but that does not matter he was wrong in what he done and needs the full arm of the law on him
    • reply
      by guy on May 6, 2011 at 09:17 PM in reply to NOT IN HIGHWAY PATROL
      WITN clearly said it was a civilian employee in their headline. It was not misleading at all.
  • by Mom Location: NC on May 6, 2011 at 09:59 AM
    Scary. You don't know who these people are. I would have NO PROBLEM pulling the trigger, switch or plug on any of them.
  • by wow on May 6, 2011 at 09:26 AM
    I don't know of a punishment harsh enough for someone who commit crimes against children. You have to be the sickest of sick to even entertain the thought of having sexual relations with a child.
    • reply
      by Tish on May 6, 2011 at 05:33 PM in reply to wow
      Amen I say the same thing when i hear of a child being harm in any kind of way,what kind of a twisted mind want to take advantage of little people that look up to grown people too protect them, I have always thank God that nobody mess with my babies when they was little cause it aint no tellin what i would have did,it's some sick people in this world to do stuff too someone that can't help theirself....
  • by here Location: here on May 6, 2011 at 07:24 AM
    What is wrong with these people?? Their CHILDREN!!!!
    • reply
      by Grammar teacher on May 6, 2011 at 09:42 AM in reply to here
      It is they're children - Not their children. Or you could so they are children - Not their children.
      • reply
        by Who cares on May 6, 2011 at 10:53 AM in reply to Grammar teacher
        Get over yourself! Not everyone is going to use correct grammar and you should know that being a grammar teacher.
      • reply
        by Anonymous on May 6, 2011 at 12:27 PM in reply to Grammar teacher
        Please STOP that's VERY annoying.
      • reply
        by Anonymous on May 6, 2011 at 12:29 PM in reply to Grammar teacher
        Who cares we get it.
        • reply
          by Anonymous on May 7, 2011 at 05:13 AM in reply to
          You will care when your employer gives you an assignement that requires a written response and you don't know the difference between 'their' and 'they're.' It changes the entire meaning of what is being said.
      • reply
        by guy on May 6, 2011 at 09:21 PM in reply to Grammar teacher
        Grammer Teacher? Okay!
        • reply
          by Teacher on May 7, 2011 at 06:28 AM in reply to guy
          That would be grammAR not ER:) Smile:)
      • reply
        by Anonymous on May 7, 2011 at 12:35 PM in reply to Grammar teacher
        Do you need a job?
WITN

275 E. Arlington Blvd. Greenville, NC 27858 252-439-7777
Copyright © 2002-2016 - Designed by Gray Digital Media - Powered by Clickability 121384119 - witn.com/a?a=121384119
Gray Television, Inc.