Blue Grit Podcast: The Voice of Texas Law Enforcement
#042- "Friend or Foe?" w/ Bexar County D.A. Joe Gonzales
Don't miss out on the latest episode of the Blue Grit podcast featuring Bexar County District Attorney Joe Gonzales. He answers tough questions about his support for law enforcement despite facing calls for his resignation from department heads. This is a must-listen episode that sheds light on the challenges faced by those in law enforcement and the importance of standing behind them. Tune in now!
email us at- bluegrit@tmpa.org
Don't miss out on the latest episode of the Blue Grit podcast featuring Bexar County District Attorney Joe Gonzales. He answers tough questions about his support for law enforcement despite facing calls for his resignation from department heads. This is a must-listen episode that sheds light on the challenges faced by those in law enforcement and the importance of standing behind them. Tune in now!
email us at- bluegrit@tmpa.org
Recently you've come under scrutiny by law enforcement officials. To the San Antonio police officer or any deputy that's working for Barrick County out there that's listening to this podcast. What is your message to them about your support for law?
Speaker 2:enforcement. There are reasons why some high profile folks in law enforcement have called for your resignation. There are differences there. There are issues there.
Speaker 1:Welcome back. Blue grit listeners, voyeurs. I'm your host, tyler Owen, and I've got the big boss and a special guest today. Clint McNeer took the day off. I don't know how. How did we manage that? Well, he played golf yesterday. He needed to be a recruiter. He said he was feeling a little sickly, so I don't know what what doctor he went and saw, but anyway. So Clint are my co-host is going to be absent today, but I've got a feeling that Kevin can live up to Clint's expectations. Oh good, the pressure on you. I do not. I do not doubt that one bit, but we got a special guest on the day. First of all, thank you for coming down or coming up, I should say to here in the Travis County and and Austin and and coming on the blue grit stage. District Attorney Bear County. District Attorney Gonzalez.
Speaker 3:Thank you so much. Thank you for the invitation and happy to be here.
Speaker 1:Yeah, absolutely, Absolutely. One of the I guess how we got here is there's been some you know, some, some situations happen there in Bear County. Before we get into that, Tell us about you Where'd you grow up, Where'd you get into your profession and kind of give us a background of of where you came from.
Speaker 3:How much time ago that yeah, yeah, well, yeah, I've lived practically all my life in San Antonio and I grew up on the west side of San Antonio, was raised by a single parent. My mother raised four boys, one of which, by the way, was his career law enforcement. My brother spent retired from SAPD and now works for the sheriff's office down in Bear County. But I you asked what interested me in in being a lawyer. You know I'm probably going to date myself here. You know nowadays, you know kids watch law and order, you know the. But back when I was a kid and I'm 64, so I'm dating myself but back then it was Perry Mason and shows like that. So when I was a kid I thought, hey, you know, that's, that's. That's a great profession to be in, is to be able to advocate for the people, to, to be a trial lawyer. So I think that's that's where I probably first got an interest in becoming an attorney.
Speaker 1:Okay, and were you proud of it before you got into or dove off into the political side of becoming a district attorney?
Speaker 3:or you know what a lot of people don't don't know about me is that I was a career prosecutor before I became a defense lawyer. I have actually worked under four different elected DAs. I started my career and cut my teeth, as they say, in the early nineties and I actually worked as a prosecutor in Harris County during a time in the early nineties where there was a lot of violent crime in Harris County. So I've certainly still is. Yeah, yeah.
Speaker 1:Yeah.
Speaker 3:It was. It was pretty bad in the early nineties, but you're right, I mean we see violent crime all over in major cities and all over the country. But yes, I, I started my career as a young prosecutor and, and you know, I have fond memories of being being a prosecutor for this day.
Speaker 1:We had a district attorney on several episodes ago, what Kevin probably three months ago at a at a Harrison County which is up near my old neck of the woods before I transitioned down here to the wild side, and he was just talking about really the, the, the vacancies of how many district attorney's office is really just like law enforcement, see, and really with with ADAs and prosecutors, and do you know what the really the, the remedy is to solve that? Or do you have any recommendations as far as attorneys that are, that are maybe listeners or viewers and that want to, you know, get into the practice of becoming a prosecutor? What route would you recommend?
Speaker 3:Well, we obviously are seeing that in our office. We have, when we're fully staffed, we have an office of 500 people, half of whom are lawyers 250 lawyers and some are investigators. We have a believe it or not, we have a police department within our office. We have 65 investigators, who are primarily support staff or our prosecutors, but we're we're down usually well, not usually, but right now about 20 prosecutors. And I'll tell you the the biggest reason is economics.
Speaker 3:We cannot pay our prosecutors what they are worth. You know they will come to our office, spend three, four, five years getting trained, getting all the experience they can, and then the private sector, you know, lures them away. Personal injury firms, other other type firms will pay them double what we, when we can pay them, and I don't blame them for wanting to support their families. They got law school loans to pay and that and just the work-life balance. What happens is, let's say, you have three prosecutors in a court and one leaves. That leaves the other two to make up for that and they're working harder and not making any more money.
Speaker 1:So I certainly understand the frustration and oftentimes they will be Lord of the way to do something different and you probably see that way more, I would think, as far as attorneys are concerned, because the private practice, the private sector, pays a whole lot more than you know being a prosecutor, so it's probably more, it's probably a greater number with prosecutors as far as attorneys.
Speaker 3:Well it is, and it's a different type of stress. Right, there's a big difference between, you know, taking home a file where maybe we're talking about a probate manner, you know, or you know, a deforestation In our office. A lot of times we're making very serious decisions involving victims of crime and we don't always get the outcome that we're hoping for, and so there's a lot of stress involved with the work that we do day in and day out.
Speaker 2:Well, not only that, but as a defense attorney I would imagine you get more leeway with the courts when you say, well, you're honored by caseloads too deep, I've got other cases I've got to be on, whereas if you represent the state of Texas and you have the full resources of the state of Texas or the perception that you've got those re, you don't get the same leeway when it comes to asking for continuances and delays and so on and so forth.
Speaker 3:You obviously have been hanging around the courtrooms. That's exactly what the judges say, yeah.
Speaker 2:Actually, when you and I when we met out here in the hallway, I thought this guy looks familiar and I couldn't think of why. From all through the nineties I was an investigator with the Seabrook police department. When Kim Og was assigned to our gang's task force and Joan Huffman was head of the family law, you were in the Harris County DA's office. We probably crossed paths a few times back in those days.
Speaker 3:I actually was elevated to what's called well. I was a court chief in the juvenile section and my job was to certify juveniles that committed crimes, various Harris offenses. So I spent a lot of time in the adult courts basically wrapping the cases with a bowl and hadn't saying here you go. And during again the early to mid nineties it was a lot of violent crime in Harris County. So yeah, you're right, you remember a lot, of, a lot of work involving Seabrook cases.
Speaker 1:How has the register real quick before we dive off in another topic, the is it Senate bill three or Senate bill 20 with the funding of the sheriff's offices and county employees?
Speaker 2:Man don't give me the line about the actual bill number.
Speaker 1:Yeah, I can't remember what it's called.
Speaker 2:Doesn't apply to very County though.
Speaker 1:That's right, it doesn't.
Speaker 2:It applies to other counties.
Speaker 1:That's right, that's right. Okay, so in my discussion with Reed McCain, the DA in Harrison County, his office is seeing a benefit from that Senate bill and so I was just going to ask if that was a something you could look forward to to maybe recruitment. But I guess that you guys won't qualify for it due to the population.
Speaker 3:Yeah, I think you're talking about the increase in pay for for rural DA's offices. It doesn't apply to us because we're an urban area. So yeah, unfortunately our prosecutor's gun benefit from that.
Speaker 2:The stated purpose was for rural counties, which applies to 243 out of the 254 counties.
Speaker 1:Yeah, yeah, those by design, I'm sure, I'm sure. Well, so what? So you're? You work for Harris County for many years and then transition back home. I guess what brought you back to San Antonio?
Speaker 3:Actually, I worked for three years in Harris County while my wife was in law school in Houston, but I worked in the DA's County DA's office in Bear County under under two different elected DA's, okay, and in the interim I worked for Johnny Holmes in Harris County, but back in Bear County, worked for Fred Rodriguez, worked for Stephen Hilbig and then and then it went to private practice and really the reason that happened, I mean, I, I intended to be a career prosecutor. I've got, I went to the career prosecutor's school in the whole bit, but I, you know, I decided I wanted to run for office. Well, it's a lot harder than than it may look, and and so I lost. But instead of going back to the DA's office, I decided to open up my own shingle. And then, 20 years later, you know the rest of history, as they say, and but I.
Speaker 3:I made a decision back in 2018 to to actually, in 2017, to to run for DA. I felt like I could do a better job of running the office in San Antonio, in Bear County, and so it's been a been a fantastic experience. I I enjoy what I do because the the people that work in our office are not doing it, as I've said, for money. They do it because they love what they do. They love representing, advocating for victims of crime, they love impacting public safety. So so, yes, it's an incredible time that I'm having the DA's office.
Speaker 1:Would you so? We have a lot of listeners that are explorers and explorers. I'm not sure if you're not really in the law enforcement realm as far as your career, but explore programs really target the youth, you know, the youth in our, in our, within our society, and so is there any type of those kinds of programs for anybody out there that maybe want to look at, you know, the prosecutor role. Is there an? Is there a program out there that a young kid can look at to maybe fall in the footsteps of of you and and other DA's out there?
Speaker 3:We would love to to have that kind of interest in the high school level. We have had, from time to time, volunteer interns come to our office, to our office. We regularly have summer intern programs internships, I should say and so we have people. We have several colleges in San Antonio, so we have internships that we offer from to those schools. We have law school interns that come and work for us. Those are the only type of interns we can pay. You have to be in law school but you can certainly put in some voluntary hours and and I've been known to to provide a nice resume or letter of recommendation. From time to time Somebody is interested in going to college or law school.
Speaker 2:That's that's as you. As you had it, it hasn't gotten down to the high school level.
Speaker 3:Well, we certainly can. I mean obviously, if, if we have parents permission to work with us, I mean I certainly would, would not discount that. But we haven't seen a lot of interest in high school kids coming because we're downtown you have to make the effort to come down downtown. But we certainly would be very, very open to to having an an explorer program like that. It'd be good.
Speaker 1:Sure, absolutely Uh recently, uh about last month or month and a half ago, uh, speaking of Barrie County and speaking on your brother. You know, uh, sometimes family members doesn't necessarily just mean that you're a law enforcement supporter but with we had three San Antonio police officers that were uh, that were injured and shot there in Barrie County, uh, and several of the we're not going to speak about the case, but we're going to talk about it's you've come under scrutiny and you've come under some uh by law enforcement officials. First, I want you to say or at least, at least to the San Antonio police officer or any deputy that's working for Barrie County out there that's listening to this podcast what is your message to them about your support for law enforcement coming from you? What would your message be to them about carrying out their duties as a, as a peace officer there and Barrie County?
Speaker 3:Well, listen, I want everybody in law enforcement to know that I recognize how hard their jobs are. I recognize how dangerous it is to start a shift Not knowing whether or not you're going to come back home to your family, not knowing whether or not you're going to be able to put your head on your own pillow. I know that because I saw my brother go through it and still goes through that. I've heard all the stories about about having to chase down a crook or someone that commits a crime and that that individual fighting back. So I know, I know how dangerous it is. I also we were aware of the just a proliferation of guns. People are pulling guns on each other.
Speaker 3:I know that how dangerous it is when an officer encounters somebody that there's a chance that someone may pull a gun on them. So I want the men and women in law enforcement to know that I appreciate the hard work that they do and that we recognize the dangers. I recognize the danger and that I'm never going to do anything intentionally to compromise their rights. Is your track record. Go with what you're saying to the, to the listener out there right now.
Speaker 1:I think it does, because if you're talking about assault, on, on, on on peace officers.
Speaker 3:We we have prosecuted individuals that have assaulted officers and have gotten results and have gotten convictions, and we have we've been doing that. So I'm going to say that we have prosecuted individuals that have gotten results and have gotten convictions, and we have we've vigorously gone prosecuted individuals that that harm members of law enforcement. I'll tell you, because one of the things that that I'm constantly hearing out there is is oh yeah, you've got that that liberal D A Down in San Antonio and he doesn't support law enforcement. Let me tell you something If I was that guy, I would not have sought and obtained the death penalty on a cop killer.
Speaker 3:How many, how many liberal thinking D A, you think, are out there that are willing to do that? But but I said that when I ran in 2018, if I believe that the right thing to do is to seek the death penalty or someone who kills a cop, I'm going to do it and we've done that. So, and you know, may not have taken a victory lap, but I felt like that that was right thing to do and I reserve the right to do that again in the future of it happens again.
Speaker 2:But there there are reasons why some high profile folks in law enforcement have called for your resignation. There are differences there, there are issues there and I don't I don't want to put you on the spot on any particular case. I know there's cases you cannot discuss, but the rift that is there, what are you doing to bridge that?
Speaker 3:Well, I urge that. Let me let me address the cause for resignation, because I think that they're ill placed the the. If the reason they're calling for my resignation is because that they believe that I'm the reason that that violent offenders or people with criminal histories are out on the streets, I'm here to tell you that's not what we do in the DA's office. We don't we don't set bonds, we recommend bonds. It's ultimately up to the magistrate judge to set a bond, and I will tell you that, since the year that I've come in on 2019, we have consistently increased the recommendations that we that we make to those magistrate judges. For example, on a regular basis, when somebody is arrested for murder, we will recommend a bond of one hundred and fifty thousand dollars. Now, most often, magistrate judges will follow our recommendations, but not always. Sometimes, magistrate judges don't even ask us what our recommendation is, but we do recommend what I believe are appropriate, robust bonds for violent crimes.
Speaker 2:So the cases that are being cited in these calls for your resignation are those cases where the magistrate judges have in fact not gone with your recommendation.
Speaker 3:Those are cases where we may have recommended a bond and the judge may have gone down a little bit, like I remember one where an individual we recommended a bond of, let's say, fifteen thousand and the judge knocked it down to ten thousand, for example. But but here's what. Here's what I want to get clear, because I think the narrative out there was in every one of these situations, and I think there were actually five shootings in a period of about a week and a half, which, by the way, is an anomaly. I've been doing this for thirty five, thirty five years. I've never seen a situation where you have four or five shootings of officers in a week and a half span.
Speaker 2:But I hate to say this, but you might want to get used to it, because we're seeing we're seeing an acceleration of those types of cases not only statewide, but nationwide. Fortunately, and I told you, I know, I told you not to do this, I'm going to you know a lot of officers are surviving those for different reasons, but more cops are being shot and shot at today than any point in history that we can remember.
Speaker 2:Yes, sir, and so there's a proliferation of those. In Harris County. You've got a committee of judges that have gotten together and basically have predetermined that they're going to release people on PR bonds, on one hundred dollar bonds across the board. Do y'all have that same thing in Bear County or is it every case judged on its own merit?
Speaker 3:Every case is judged on its own merit and I'm happy to say that that doesn't happen in Bear County. I believe that our magistrate judges do a good job. They have a tough job. Let me tell you why I say that Again. You've heard me say I've been doing this for thirty five years. For seven years when I was out on private practice I was a magistrate judge and for I'd like to say that's that's why I ended up with this gray hair sooner than later, because I was up all night long for seven years on the weekends making those tough calls.
Speaker 3:But the reality is prosecutors and magistrate judges don't have crystal balls and all we have is what we can review in terms of criminal history and in terms of the top of offense that sits in front of us. And if somebody comes in with a case but doesn't have any criminal history, then we have to judge that bond amount based on what we have in front of us. And again, going back to the calls for resignation, only two of those six individuals that shot at the officers had any kind of criminal history to speak of, and one of those individuals we tried repeatedly to prosecute but we were unable to do that because we had witness problems. The victims were interested in helping us prosecute that individual. The other one had to do with domestic violence history and even in that case, the woman that was involved, the woman that was the victim of the violation of protective order again, we had some problems with her cooperation. And all that to say that it wasn't a situation where every one of those cases involved someone that was out on bond on a violent criminal history. And so, again, that's what I'm trying to do here is to clear the narrative so that people understand that we didn't just willy-nilly decide, yeah, somebody's got a violent history and we're going to give them a low bond anyway.
Speaker 3:By the way, something else that was said that's incorrect. The narrative that I heard was the reason these people out was because of the policy of low bonds. I've never had a policy of recommending low bonds on violent offenses. What my directive has been to my prosecutors that work on the bank at the back courts is use your best judgment in terms of recommending what you believe is an appropriate bond. So in fact, I think the term was lax bond. The DA down there has lax bond policies. That's not accurate.
Speaker 1:So if it's not you, if some of this is not to blame against you, and if it's against the magistrates and the judges, are we willing to come out? You specifically, are you willing to come out and identify these judges and say hey, you're going to call bullshit when bullshit needs to be called and you're going to stand with law enforcement on that aspect? Or is it because they're party affiliation?
Speaker 3:Okay. Well, let me tell you that I don't even think that it's that easy to say that it's a magistrate judge. Yes, there are times when the judges will set bonds lower than we recommend. But I will tell you quite honestly, there have even been also cases where, for whatever reason, our prosecutors will recognize that a bond should be at a certain amount and the magistrate judges said a higher bond. So here's the problem and I'm talking about a case that happened about a week ago where one of my prosecutors set a bond at a certain amount and, even though it was higher than normal, the magistrate judge Uh, I think tripled it. But here's the problem that person still was able to get out of jail. Here's why Because in Texas we have a bond system that's based on a cash uh uh bail system where you, as long as you have enough money, you can get out.
Speaker 3:It's not based on a risk assessment. So someone who is is committed, has, is accused of committing a murder, and the bond is set at a hundred thousand dollars. If that man has $10,000 in his bank, he's getting out. If you can hire a bondsman that's willing to write the bond, he's getting out. So that's the problem. It's systemic. It's not. The DA is not even the master judge. It's the system that we have in.
Speaker 1:Texas. It's not a statewide recommendation because where I came from in East Texas it seems like a murder, even just a simple and I say simple, it's just a murder charge, not a capital murder, but just a simple murder case. A judge in East Texas, from Bowie down to Pinella County, I know, over to Smith County, a hundred thousand dollars to me would seem very small. Is there and I'm asking this just for personal reference, because I think our listeners probably would ask the same question Is there a statewide bond setting formality or is it just kind of depending on the population of the jails and depending on the politics within the DA's office or magistrates or or so forth? But is there a statewide formality with bonds? Okay?
Speaker 3:Here's, I think what you're asking about is is there a statewide bond schedule that all the judges are, all the judges can file or follow? Rather, the reality is that that's been found to be unconstitutional. There is a federal case out of Harris County called old Donald where the judges were following a bond schedule and the federal judge says uh-uh, you cannot do that. You cannot systemically just follow a schedule. It has to be done on a base, case by case basis. So, uh, while the bachelor judges a judge in East Texas they said a different bond from one in South Texas or one in West Texas they cannot follow a bond schedule.
Speaker 2:Okay, well, that answers that when I was working in Seabrook I got to see this kind of firsthand because you know, seabrook is right there as a corner of Harris County. Right across the Clear Creek Channel is Galveston County, much more rural, especially back in the nineties, and they're right across Galveston Bay is Chambers County, which to this moment is still rural unless you get way over there by Montpelview. So I got to work in all three of those counties and they are completely different system. Yeah, you know, Harris County is its own, its own breed, right? Uh, so we would get somebody that would actually charge them out of Montgomery County, sorry, out of Chambers County. They'd get a $1 million bond on the same exact charge that Harris County would do a $5,000 bond on.
Speaker 2:It's crazy, it is, it is crazy, but there, like you said, there's also constitutional issues there. I'm curious about your intake system. Do officers, when they arrest somebody, do they have to call the DA's office and get charges accepted by the DA before they book that person into the county jail? Or do they simply fill out a complaint and affidavit and submit it and y'all review it later? They will typically when they make that arrest.
Speaker 3:If we have two different kinds of cases we handle in Bear County the arrest cases where the officers respond to the scene for example, let's say, the perpetrator is still there makes a decision to arrest that individual which we were calling on view, an on view arrest Right, which is the vast majority of the lot.
Speaker 2:Yes, sir.
Speaker 3:And so then he brings them to the magistrate's office. He filled out a complaint, may have an initial offense report, brings it to us, we review it, make sure everything's where it needs to be, and so that's basically how that happened. So, yes, they have to prepare a written report Again. When I spent my years in Harris County, you could call in the DA's office and say, hey, this is what I have over here, will you accept it or not? We've not gone to that method. I think there's some argument that it's something we should look into, but historically, bear County has never had that kind of a system.
Speaker 3:Okay, you don't have 24 hour intake. We do have 24 hour. We have a 24 hour registration system. Yes, sir, absolutely. We have prosecutors that are there. We also now have bond hearings where a defendant is appearing in front of a magistrate judge. We represent the state, the accused is represented by a public defender and we'll each make a recommendation about where we think the bond should lie. But yes, we do have 24, 7 magistration at Bear County. He mentioned Harris County by the way.
Speaker 2:in the 90s when he was there, when I was working for Seabroot, the charges were filed online by computer. There was a thing called the gym system that was used to file all that. Years before that, when I was working in Baytown in the late 70s, early 80s, we didn't have computers, we didn't even have fax machines. We had a thing called a telecopier. That's how we sent the charges to the DA's.
Speaker 1:I guess, because I've never worked in that environment where you would need a 24-hour representative of a DA's office. So how typically it would work, even somewhere in the metropolitan areas not all some, but the peace officer makes the arrest. The only view of arrest possession of marijuana or let's just say a simple assault, assault, family violence. You take the subject to the jail. The officer would fill out a probable cause after David, complete the book in and then really at that point it's up to the DA's office to accept it later on. But it's almost like we've gotten into this and correct me if I'm wrong. We've got the process where we have to get approval in order to make that arrest and that's not Well.
Speaker 2:I think what the DA is telling you is that in Bear County that's not really the case. They make the arrest, they start preparing the report and then they go submit it to the process.
Speaker 1:But you guys are basically making sure all the elements are there to make that arrest right, correct but in Harris County.
Speaker 2:You're making that phone call from the scene. You're calling the DA's office to talk to an ADA to let them tell you whether or not to make the arrest. It's a whole different system and Harris County is the only one in the state that does it that way, one of the few in the country that does it that way, which could be problematic.
Speaker 3:Well, in metropolitan areas like San Antonio, houston, austin, dallas, you've got a larger number of cases that they're reviewing and that they're handling, and the law says that an accused is to be magistrated without delay. So what does that mean? Does that mean 10 hours, 24 hours or 3 days? I know from my years in private practice the most frustrating thing is when a client of mine would get arrested at 8 o'clock on Friday, didn't get to see a magistrate until Monday morning. They were going to spend the weekend in jail. But that didn't happen in the major metropolitan areas and I don't know whether or not this was something that was implemented by local rule. All because it's the law. But we do have a magistration system that requires that we be there 24-7, that we be able to review those cases and make those recommendations for bond. And I think part of the reason is because the judges are there. And if the magistrate judges are there, then the prosecutors need to be there as well.
Speaker 2:And I think the courts have. Historically the courts have said you have the resources, therefore you should If you're in Bowie County or Panola County. They just don't simply don't have the same resources. So reasonable amount of time means different things and different jurisdictions 100%.
Speaker 1:There seems to be somewhat of an opposite disconnect, something between you and or your office and some of the law enforcement she's there in Bear County. This is a kind of a two-part question. I got in this career field in 2003. I'm not going to mention when y'all got into it because we're going to show everybody's age.
Speaker 1:But it seems like to me, even growing up as a kid, that for the most part and back to what you, whatever you referenced at the beginning of this you grew up watching, you know law and order type shows and those are. It's fascinating to think back on that because, respectfully, we're all on the same team. The officers make the arrest, we punt it to you guys to finish it right. And so at what point do you think that and I'm going to reference this later on that these major metropolitan cities San Antonio, austin, dallas, houston at what point did we not get on that same sheet of music? At what point did we separate that? And it seems like that the DA's office can't be on the same team with law enforcement, or at least publicly. And is that a disconnect? Or is that just the wrong perception that I've got on my own?
Speaker 3:No, I think that is the perception out there, and that's part of why I'm here today. Somehow, somewhere, we've forgotten that we're on the same team. I will tell you that when we pick juries and we bring panels downtown to select a jury, they don't see any difference between law enforcement and the DA's office. We're all the same to them, and so I think that we do need to continue to remember that we are on the same team. There's probably a number of reasons where I think the culture today is different than when I started 35 years ago, and I will say this I think that at some point, when I was in college and going through law school being a prosecutor, we were one of the good guys. We were on the side of justice and on the side of right, just like law enforcement.
Speaker 3:But somewhere there has been a disconnect over the years. I don't know if I can point to any one event, but I will tell you that certainly there's been a reduction in respect for law enforcement. There's been a reduction in respect for the system. There's been a reduction in respect for what we do as prosecutors For government in general. I think that's true, and I don't know if it's generational, but we do see it every day and there's a climate of distrust of both of us and that's not good. That's not good for us because, again, I think we're both good guys, law enforcement and prosecutors. We can't do our job, guys, without you doing your job, and we have to work together. So there shouldn't be this disconnect.
Speaker 3:Part of the if you ask my honest opinion, part of the disconnect is where politics interjects, where it intersects with what I do. I'm never gonna get law enforcement to totally agree with my philosophy, but the reasons that I've made, the decisions that I have done while I've been in the office, have been primarily for efficiency sake, not because I'm this flaming liberal that I think nobody belongs in jail. No, the reform and people are afraid of the word reform and reform just means change. Sometimes. Change is good If it's going to benefit the way that you run an office, for example.
Speaker 1:Well, I think if it benefits everybody it doesn't just benefit just these people over here then I think that change will be bad. But if the benefit is for the overall better of society and I mean law enforcement included then I would agree to change. And I'll be the first one to tell you right now and I think you probably agree to this is that law enforcement, 99.99999% of us, we are good, we're good people and we have a great job to do and we carry out great jobs every day. Sometimes we have to fight with that court of public opinion, and I think that's where the intimidation factor comes in. With some peace officers. I will tell you that I've got friends that work in Bear County and there are days, if not every day, that they go to work every day and they're hesitant about doing their jobs because they don't know how things are gonna be perceived in your eyes or people in your office's eyes.
Speaker 1:And I think that court of public opinion and that distrust is we all need to get back on the same sheet of music. And I think, however, wherever we got disconnected, we need to get back on there. And I will ask you this when's the last time that you or a representative of your office sat down with all law enforcement agencies in the same room. Is it a monthly or when is the last time that happened? So I think that, kevin, you can probably pick up on this Communication seems to be the lack within law enforcement, within law enforcement sometimes associations, and I think that communication is the key to getting back on track and I think if we open that line of communication, that's where at least the baby steps are gonna start.
Speaker 2:Well, I will chime in here. By the way, thank you for being here.
Speaker 1:The fact that you accepted this invitation.
Speaker 2:I think is a big step. We actually were part of a county-wide meeting last week. We've now had a couple of meetings with the Harris County DA, and I say Kim Og and I worked together when I was a cop in Siebrück years ago, but all the different law enforcement agencies and their unions were all invited to be there and I think we broke some eggs. Obviously, there's still a lot of work to be done, but some things got done. And I think that's the question he's asking is if you're willing to do this, are you willing to have that kind of meeting with your local law enforcement agencies and the officers and the groups that represent the officers to discuss some of this that you're talking about with us today?
Speaker 3:Absolutely, and I will tell you, we regularly engage in conversations the chief of police and I and the sheriff and we just this past Saturday I participated in a 5K run where Chief McMannison, I, chatted for a bit. Obviously, there was a period during all these shootings where we were both frustrated, but we have had since the time I came into office. We have regular meetings. We meet once a month with not only the chief of police but the city manager and the assistant city manager to talk about the issues that are common with each other. I regularly talk to the sheriff down there. We have lunch at least once a month, if not more often. We have quarterly meetings with the Elemol Area Council of Government chief of police where we make presentations on, for example, how to offer different types of evidence or how we can assist them in their obligation of investigating cases and filing cases with us. So we do regularly meet with them and engage in dialogues.
Speaker 2:If you're following Harris County's lead, I'm gonna tell you that's not working.
Speaker 2:And here's why Yep, dao, was having the same meetings with department heads countywide. It's not getting funneled down to the troops, it's just the words not getting down to them. So I think that's where you have to agree to allow some of the boots on the ground, or their representatives, their association, their lodge, their union, whatever it's called in that particular jurisdiction. Allow them to be there to ask questions like, say, to break some of those eggs. We've had this conversation many, many times.
Speaker 2:You know, when the calls for police reform started, a lot of people were working off the assumption that their problems in law enforcement are because of bad police officers. And I would argue what Tyler said cops by and large are just decent, honest, hardworking people trying to do the right thing. When bad policing happens, it's not usually because of bad police officers. There are bad cops. We acknowledge that and nobody works harder to weed them out than we do. But bad policing more often than not is a result of bad policies, bad training, bad leadership, lack of resources, lack of staffing. There's a lot of other things that cause bad police work to happen and we're not addressing those. We're trying to pin it all on the cops and blame it on them. I know you're signaling me like we're running out of time no no.
Speaker 2:Because I still want to get around to Brady. But I think you have to include the boots on the ground in those discussions. At least give them an avenue by which they can have they can get a better understanding of what you're doing and what you need from them.
Speaker 3:Absolutely, and I'm glad you said that, because that was going to be the continuation of the point that I was making is that, even though there may be periods of time where the chief and I are the sheriff and I are not communicating, there are layers, and I'm using the phrase that the chief used himself a couple of weeks ago. There are layers under us where the communication is constant. Just today, my first assistant met with the chief's assistant or his right hand man, and that happens all the time. Our division chiefs meet with the command staff of the law enforcement and the boots on the ground meet with our rank and file. So yes, there is a constant communication, even if the people aren't on top or not communicating.
Speaker 1:You want to dive off into what you wanted to.
Speaker 2:Well, yeah, the two other things that I had on my agenda is and one of the things we're seeing, by the way, have you ever recruited lawyers out of New York to come down here and prosecute cops?
Speaker 3:Have I ever.
Speaker 2:No I don't believe so. Can you tell me right now, sitting here just off the top of your head, how many current active police officers are under indictment at Bear County today?
Speaker 3:I think, one that I can recall, and I'll tell you and that's something where did this disconnect come from?
Speaker 3:One of the things that I did was to create a civil rights division when I came into the office, because I discovered that we're one of the last major metropolitan cities in the country that didn't have a civil rights division. Not because I'm going after anybody in particular or any profession, but because we have to respect the Constitution and we have to be able to identify whenever somebody's civil rights are being violated, and so that was a little bit of the distance from the police associations about why I felt the need to do that, but it was important for me to make sure that we were doing the right thing and making the right calls. And I'll tell you, for example, the concern is the officer involved shootings and how many cops are being charged with that. I ran the numbers yesterday and today, in the time that we initiated the civil rights division in 21,. We have reviewed 31 cases involving officers that were involved in shootings. We died at three. One was then ultimately dismissed, so two out of 31. So that's less than 10%, okay.
Speaker 2:And, let's face it, the vast majority of times when cops are involved in use of force situations, it's because they had no other choice. The vast majority of the times, the cops are getting it right. Again, we understand. We have to be held to a higher standard, we have to be subject to review, we have to make sure that we are being as transparent as possible.
Speaker 2:I draw this comparison, by the way, because the DA of Travis County by the way, you have an open invitation, mr Garza anytime you want to come in there and have the same conversation. We'd love to have you here. He actually was recruiting lawyers from New York with a line hey, want to prosecute cops, come to Austin, and we have a problem with that Big time. That's not a teammate in our, in our. The other question I have for you, and you know this, is this is the case Cops have a problem with politicians that are supported by George Soros. Yeah, and that is the case with the Harris County DA, it is the case with the Dallas County DA, it is the case with the Travis County DA, and I'm pretty sure you have also received money from George Soros, am I correct?
Speaker 3:Yeah, you're absolutely correct, does that?
Speaker 2:impact your decision making at all.
Speaker 3:Absolutely not. I will tell you that I've never met the man I don't know who. I've never talked to George Soros. I jokingly say to me, George Soros is like Howard Hughes. I don't even know if the man is alive, but but I'll tell you that when I ran, obviously there was some publicity surrounding my decision to run and I don't, frankly recall whether or not his group reached out to me or vice versa. But the point is he did support me when I ran the first time and there was some support for my reelection. But I told you, I will tell you quite honestly and truthfully, the only way that I take support, financial contributions from anybody is there cannot be any strings attached. You're not going to tell me how to run my office, You're not going to tell me what policies to implement. If you want to support me, that's fine, but but you're not going to ever call me and say look, I want you to do XYZ.
Speaker 1:But don't we see a connection between Dallas, austin here, or Harris County or Houston and now San Antonio with the violence? And then it all kind of stems back with the philosophies and the and the ideologies behind George Soros funded the A's and it and it. And I'm just telling you, street cops look at that and like this is kind of odd, everyone took money from this guy and everyone on have the common interest in the kind of, the common practices of, of, of, what, of what I say y'all, y'all have, and that's where. So the listener out there that's watching the cop, what would you say to that? Would you say that y'all don't think a lot, because it certainly looks that way from the cop's perspective on the boots on the ground.
Speaker 3:Well, look look at it this way from our perspective. It's what you said a minute ago, that, and thank you for acknowledging that. In every, just by everybody, every profession, you have bad apples. You know. You have bad cops, you have bad teachers, you have bad lawyers, you have bad judges, you have bad business people. Does that mean? Oh?
Speaker 2:yeah judges.
Speaker 3:I'm sure I'm sure you'll in this group you'll have people agree with that. But. But the point is you do have bad apples. But to paint a white picture and say all cops are bad or all lawyers are bad or all progressive prosecutors are bad is unfair. I will tell you that I know personally, because I consider them colleagues, the elected DA's in Dallas County, and I know Kim on. In fact, kim and I have this joke where we both worked intake together and she used to send me to go get lunch because I was a young, the young guy working you were the newbie?
Speaker 3:Yeah, I was the newbie, but but yeah, I worked with Kim on. I know the DA.
Speaker 2:You and Kim and I are all exactly the same age.
Speaker 3:Really, how about that?
Speaker 2:I'm sorry she will be as of. I think her birthday party is this weekend, okay.
Speaker 3:But? But the point is that I think it's unfair to paint any one of us as being you know what we're not you know. I think the thing to do is to ask each one of us what is your philosophy? What do you think? I don't think any of us intentionally is ever going to do anything that's going to compromise the safety of our jurisdictions. I can't speak for for the policies of other DA's, but I will tell you that I've instructed my prosecutors to never, to never, do anything to intentionally compromise the public safety of Bear County.
Speaker 2:How long is your Brady list? You have any idea.
Speaker 3:Yeah, I mean we, we have a running list, we have a we don't call it a bright Brady list, we have a non-disclosure list. But you know we regularly remove officers when, when those cases are resolved in their favor. You know, if you, if I had known that you wanted a specific number, I can, I can get back to you and give you the exact number?
Speaker 2:You don't have to.
Speaker 3:I was just curious. But.
Speaker 2:I mean and here's here's the reason I asked that question we hear horror stories about Brady from and it's not just the Metropolitan County. There's a lot of DA's that they will put a police officer on a list where they just simply will not sponsor them as a witness in any case throughout eternity, because of one isolated incident where the officer lied about being sick and, you know, called off sick instead of working an extra job. But the same prosecutors will use dope dealers and gang members as witnesses at trial. They will simply try to rehabilitate them on the stand. Why won't we do the same for our police officers? Why won't we treat them like human beings instead of just simply saying, okay, we're going to run you out of the business because of a mistake or because you got accused of making a mistake, but I don't hear the same horror stories out of Bear County and I'm I'm curious to know if you have a different take than some of these other prosecutors do.
Speaker 3:Well, I mean, I will tell you that there are, that we we do have a list of officers, and not just officers in that list are also other professions where where, because of their prior involvement in the court system, there are issues of of credibility and and we just believe that that we're not going to sponsor them as a witness. But but I mean, if it comes down to whether or not an officer is on that list, on a do not sponsor list, and we have to rely on that officer to prove a case beyond the reasonable doubt, then we have to really look close and hard about whether or not we want to go forward with that case.
Speaker 2:So you might still go forward with the case and we're able to take the officer.
Speaker 3:Well, I mean it means certainly possible, but we'd have to make that decision in our office.
Speaker 2:I'm guessing it's different for San Antonio because they've got collective bargaining and they've got civil service and they've got all kinds of internal due process and everything, whereas opposed to I don't know Leon Valley or Converse or one of the other smaller cities in Bexar County where they are truly at-will employees, they don't have any internal due process. If they've been accused of something internally, how do you go about vetting and determining whether or not you should still sponsor that officer? Well, I think the way an officer got fired from Leon Valley because he was accused of lying about calling in sick or whatever and then takes another job and pick one Converse, how do you vet that to make sure you're okay with sponsoring that or not sponsoring that officer?
Speaker 3:We'll have internal discussions in the office. We'll talk about that officer's prior history and whether or not we believe that because of that, there's an issue about that officer's credibility, even though we make the decision about but you do recognize the minute that an officer is placed on what we call Brady List, whatever you all call it disclosure.
Speaker 1:Is that what you all call it Disclosure list, non-disclosure list, non-disclosure list? Okay, so you do realize that the moment he's put on there, 99.9% of departments out there he's done, he's not going to be able to work in law enforcement. For the most part it's pretty much ending that officer's career. I mean, do you realize that, I guess, is what I'm asking.
Speaker 3:Well, I mean, it depends on the reason for why that officer's on that list.
Speaker 1:Let me sum it up to you. I have called in to sick and not been sick before, but not to TNPA. When I was in law enforcement Happened to me my kid's birthday. Why would you ever call?
Speaker 2:in sick at TNPA. Oh yeah, exactly.
Speaker 1:Happened to me on my daughter's birthday Called in sick I'll say it right now because I don't work there anymore, but I was a great cop. My colleagues at TNPA was a good cop. They shouldn't end my career because I called in sick and utilized sick time. And that's what we as an organization are seeing in some parts of the state.
Speaker 3:I don't know and again this may be something that may get into an area that may be confidential but I will tell you that I don't know of a situation where we don't sponsor a witness because he had an issue with calling in sick, unless it was something where we believe it was habitual and it was an issue of honesty that if he was filling out forms when he said he was going to work and he wasn't going to work but for an officer, because he shows up a couple hours late or calls in sick and maybe he wasn't as sick as he claimed I mean, I'm not aware of any situation like that where we just said we're not going to sponsor that guy because he did something like that.
Speaker 2:And I guess I understand the argument. When you've got a situation where you just don't feel like there's any way that you can justify using public funds to prosecute a case, knowing full well that you're going to have an officer and I hate to even mention any specific cases but you've got an officer that's just going to get embarrassed on a witness stand and credibility is going to go out the window. You don't want to waste time and resources on that. And I'm talking about these other cases where why not? I mean Brady and Michael Morton is actually the act, the legislation that started this whole process? Yes, but why not just simply disclose that information to the defense?
Speaker 3:You know, and I think I called it non-disclosure. You're right, it's called a disclosure list. The other list of somebody is a do not call list. Those are the ones, the officers, where we believe that there are credibility issues, there are issues of dishonesty that would impact our case. But again, it's not in my mind, it's not anything that you know is because of some administrative issue. It's because, for example and again let's talk in hypotheticals let's say we knew of an officer that planted evidence and we had proof that he planted evidence. That's a bad cop. You would agree with me, right, If an officer did something like that.
Speaker 1:If it was proven, yes, well, I think 99.9% of cops out there that are listening would have 100 and 10. Cops I'll say this publicly and I mean from TNPA cops hate bad cops worse than the citizens. Because you know why it gives us a bad name and because they know better and because we have to fight through all the rhetoric and all the anti-law enforcement stuff. Anyway, we maintain a high level of respect anyway, and for a cop to do that to us, I just want to leave you that Cops hate bad cops worse than citizens.
Speaker 2:But if they planted evidence, they shouldn't be making arrest anymore because they ought to be in jail. That's right. That's what the Austin Peace Officers license, right yeah.
Speaker 3:But what if we don't discover that the evidence when it was planted, until months or even years later we have actually exonerated people because we have learned later that the officers did just that. But again, that's an example. But you have two lists.
Speaker 2:So you've got one that is actually the disclosure list, where you know we're going to give this to the defense, right, and if necessary, we'll let the judge make a decision on the credibility of this witness or the jury, no matter and the other one is the will not sponsor. Do not call this person as a witness, right? So you've got two different lists, right? Do you think most DAs do that?
Speaker 3:I mean I can't speak for other DAs. I know that we do that, so I mean I've never taken a survey of what other of the DAs do.
Speaker 2:Just the first one has told me that you have two separate lists. They've all told me they have just one list.
Speaker 3:Okay, well, I mean, it's not a secret.
Speaker 2:Interesting. Yeah, that's good.
Speaker 1:I think we've surpassed the time. Well, Kevin, you got a thing else.
Speaker 2:I just thank you very much for being here, yeah.
Speaker 1:Really do think you know these are difficult questions and I think you and I and Kevin have the discussion about getting back on the same sheet of music and getting back on the same page. I think you coming here is just a testament that you're willing to do that. So again, thank you. I greatly, greatly appreciate it. Anything else you want to leave the listeners and the watchers? Being the DA of Bexar County to speak to the officers at work, your county?
Speaker 3:Well, I'd like to leave you with this. First of all, thank you for inviting me and I certainly am willing to come back if you ever want to invite me again in the future. But I'm certainly willing to sit down and talk to any of the officers in my jurisdiction, in my county, so that we can clear the air and work together, because we're all about the same thing, which is public safety.
Speaker 1:Yeah, well, tnpa can facilitate that. Let's make a deal.
Speaker 2:But we'll do this again sometime, but we'll do it remotely from a good time, charlie's.
Speaker 3:I like that 100% Chicken fried steak hey these two guys right here are super busy.
Speaker 1:I'm not. I just got a comment popped in for the day from Wembley, texas. By the way, wembley shot out to the Texans. Go, texans. I don't make the playoffs, but we like to end each episode with three rapid fire questions. So you're ready? Yes, all right. First is what is your favorite cop movie or line from a cop movie?
Speaker 3:Clint.
Speaker 1:Eastwood. Do you feel lucky? Oh, yeah, yeah. That's probably the most common answer. The second question is what's your favorite patrol car that you've ever seen or been a part of? I know that you haven't really rode out in one, but it's. What's your favorite law enforcement vehicle?
Speaker 3:You know, when I was a kid I used to love the Mayberry, the Andy Griffin car with the little, the cherry on top.
Speaker 2:Yeah, that was 63 Ford Galaxy. There you go.
Speaker 3:It's a Ford. And the close second was Dragonate Joe Friday's car. That was another, oh good.
Speaker 2:Lord, I know I deal with that.
Speaker 1:Well, the third question is what's your favorite drink of choice when you are relaxing and enjoying some time off, because we all deserve it.
Speaker 3:So, um, okay, I guess I can um favorite drink of choice. I mean I'm uh, but okay, I was going to ask Modelo Especial. I'm a Mexican beer in a bottle. There you go.
Speaker 1:That's great Good stuff. That's good stuff. You got anything else, boss? That's all right Good. You guys stay safe out there, please, please, please, be safe. Uh, check out the TNPA clay shoot coming up November 3rd. Uh, god bless you and, as always, if you haven't downloaded the app, make sure you do. Yeah, exactly, I got. Uh, the hand thrown up is November 2nd, so I apologize about the date. You guys stay safe. God bless you and, as always, god bless Texas. Yeah, thank you.
Speaker 2:You.