West Virginia Principal Charged in Locker Room Recording Case
Eric James faces charges related to recording devices in female locker rooms at Brooke High School; the case is undecided.
3 reports on this incident · first at Sep 5, 2026, 10:21 p.m. ET
Earlier reports
Sep 5, 2026, 10:24 p.m. ET
West Virginia Principal Charged in Alleged Recording of Students in Locker Rooms
Eric James, 53, has been charged with intentionally intercepting or attempting to intercept wire, oral, or electronic communication and breaking and entering a non-residence, as reported by Daily Mail. The charges stem from allegations that James placed recording devices in female locker rooms and changing rooms at Brooke High School and was seen on video setting up a pen-like recording device.
These are only allegations at this stage. The matter is undecided, and James is presumed innocent until proven guilty in a court of law. Further proceedings will determine the outcome.
Sep 5, 2026, 10:21 p.m. ETFirst report
West Virginia Principal Charged with Recording Students in Locker Rooms
Eric James, 53, has been charged with intentionally intercepting or attempting to intercept wire, oral, or electronic communication, and with breaking and entering a non-residence, according to the Daily Mail. The charges stem from allegations that James placed recording devices in female locker rooms and changing rooms at Brooke High School. The government claims he was seen on video setting up a pen-like recording device.
The case is at the charging stage and has not been resolved. The matter is undecided, and James is presumed innocent unless proven guilty. The investigation is ongoing, and further details have not been released.
Was this report accurate and useful?
Sources
Revision history
- Version 16 Sept 2026, 02:24current
First published.
- Version 16 Sept 2026, 02:21current
First published.
- Version 16 Sept 2026, 02:25current
First published.
How we work
This site models an investigative reporter rather than a wire desk. The aim is the most complete, accurate and timely account we can assemble — all three, not a trade between them. Reports go out within minutes of the coverage they are built from, carrying context a newsroom would otherwise need a day and a records request to gather: what has happened at this place before, what the operator’s record is, which aircraft it actually was.
Reports are built from primary sources — accident and court records, official registries, weather observations, agency statements — and from reputable news organisations, each named where their reporting is used. Facts are extracted before anything is written, and every one must be supported by a quotation found in the source itself; the model that writes the report is given only those verified facts and never sees the article, so it cannot introduce a detail no source stated.
Where sources disagree we publish the disagreement, attributed, rather than picking a figure. Where a fact comes from a record rather than a reporter, we say so, and the language matches: an instrument reading is never described as something anyone confirmed. Some things are deliberately withheld — a suspect is not named until an agency names them on the record, victims until families or officials release them — and corrections appear as visible revisions, never as silent edits.
None of that makes a report true. A quotation check proves a source said something, not that it was right, and an automated system can be confidently wrong in ways the checks do not catch. If something here is wrong, the feedback above is how it gets found. The full methodology, including what we refuse to publish.