In part 2, Sean Teare, a candidate for Harris County District Attorney, evaluated the impact of the county's justice system on community welfare and public safety. Teare confidently outlined actionable strategies to enhance the intake system, underscoring the pivotal role of trust in fostering effective law enforcement practices.
During the conversation, contentious issues surrounding bond hearings were discussed, with Teare confidently emphasizing the necessity of accountability and exploring the potential efficacy of community courts. The discussion also confidently delved into the perceived influence of 'anti-police' sentiments, with notable donors such as George Soros for their alleged sway in district attorney campaigns.
Throughout the dialogue, the emphasis remained on confidently fostering progress through collaborative efforts, comprehensive understanding, and a profound reverence for law enforcement. You want to make sure to catch this episode!
email us at- bluegrit@tmpa.org
In part 2, Sean Teare, a candidate for Harris County District Attorney, evaluated the impact of the county's justice system on community welfare and public safety. Teare confidently outlined actionable strategies to enhance the intake system, underscoring the pivotal role of trust in fostering effective law enforcement practices.
During the conversation, contentious issues surrounding bond hearings were discussed, with Teare confidently emphasizing the necessity of accountability and exploring the potential efficacy of community courts. The discussion also confidently delved into the perceived influence of 'anti-police' sentiments, with notable donors such as George Soros for their alleged sway in district attorney campaigns.
Throughout the dialogue, the emphasis remained on confidently fostering progress through collaborative efforts, comprehensive understanding, and a profound reverence for law enforcement. You want to make sure to catch this episode!
email us at- bluegrit@tmpa.org
I've never met Mr Soros. I seriously doubt that I will ever meet Mr Soros, but meeting with him has just reinforced. He has become a boogeyman for the right. That is really undeserved in a lot of ways.
Speaker 2:On the last episode of part one of the Blue Grit podcast.
Speaker 1:on the last episode of part one of the Blue Grit Podcast, In seeing victims sitting down with victims the next day and their families really understanding what the whole component, every component of the picture looks like. You've got to have an open line of communication and that's really all I'm going to promise. We're going to talk, we're going to be wide open and you're going to know where I'm coming from and, more importantly, why I'm coming from that position every time and regardless of whether we agree or not, we're still going to be able to go have a beer afterwards and talk about it.
Speaker 3:I've got to give you some kudos because you up my ass to something. It's there.
Speaker 1:It's pretty man.
Speaker 3:You know I started in police work a long time ago and so I'm told I'm old school and all of that. And through the years, as diversion and things like that came around, the term among cops is the hug of thug and you know we'll send them somewhere in a beautiful facility for a couple of months and I've always kind of had an opinion of that. But listening to one of your recent talks talking about one of your ideas for diversion is is making them go find a trade. Um, micro. We we were talking offline. Micro is big on. Not everyone's child in America can be a CEO. Somebody is going to have to be a plumber, an electrician, hvac. I like the idea of we're not going to send you to a beautiful campus facility for two months and then you're free and clear, you didn't do anything wrong. Whole campus facility, exactly you know, for two months and then you're free and clear, you didn't do anything wrong. I like go out and figure out how to sustain your family, because the funny thing is nobody wants to do those jobs anymore.
Speaker 1:My neighbor's son's like 24 or 25 years old in the hvac business and is making a butt ton of money and when you about it and it's opened my eyes in the last year, really kind of thinking through this process, the benefits all the way down the line, right, when I put some money on a diversion program that you know, it's just all make us pat ourselves on the back and feel like we're doing good stuff. And you know, do 30 hours community service and we'll see you in a year and you're healed, Exactly, Go forth and sin no more, Like it doesn't happen, Right. But if I say here are your two opportunities, right, You're either going to be a plumber or an electrician or a seafarer or something else right or a prisoner.
Speaker 1:And you go, then during that year I don't have to pay for supervision. They've got the infrastructure already built up right and this isn't a also go find a job while you're on bond. For whatever the case is, you're going to earn money while you're an apprentice in this program and then if in a year that journeyman comes back and is like this guy's on the road to recover, what do I get out?
Speaker 3:Impossibly set his family up to succeed and sustain and make a better constituent.
Speaker 4:On that note, sean, how are you going to address it with the actual? How are you going to finance that? That's a huge issue, obviously with the county, because I mean, kim Ogg's excuse forever has been I can't get any money from the commissioner's court, I can't hire any DAs. It's always been someone else's excuse or someone else's problem. And before you answer that, but clarify me, how many district attorneys, how many attorneys are we missing compared to what we were previously? Because I mean, how could it work before and then all of a sudden it not work? So, just any idea. Do you have any number on that?
Speaker 1:Yeah, I mean it's a moving target. Okay, the dirty secret that, as you said, it's never the current DA's fault. There are more DA's now than there have ever been Wow and the biggest backlog we've ever had.
Speaker 4:Correct, no joke.
Speaker 1:Well, I'm glad you brought that to light it is running the office the right way. You know. Look, our commissioner's court gets a bad rap and a lot of it is unearned. They have increased her budget and the number of prosecutor spots every single year since 2017. Every year, they gave 22 spots. Two years ago, on a dime, when we got three new courts, they fully staffed those three new courts with three prosecutors each last year. They're going to do it again next year. So we've got more prosecutors than we've ever had.
Speaker 1:What you're seeing is a complete breakdown in the intake system, a complete breakdown in the ability, because of the continuity of one prosecutor to the next in handling cases, and it's all based around paralysis and fear of doing your job. So you get on the radar Can't happen. That's why I keep saying you've got to empower the prosecutors, you've got to give them their discretion and let them go, because that's the only way you get through the backlog and you see things start to work. But you had another great question that I forgot because I got onto that.
Speaker 3:How would you fund the diversion programs this?
Speaker 1:is the beautiful part about it, especially when you're talking about the trades. You know how much it costs us to supervise somebody for a year on a pretrial diversion Thousands of dollars. You know how much it would cost us to require somebody to go to a trade for a year on a pretrial diversion Thousands of dollars. You know how much it would cost us to require somebody to go to a trade for a year and then come back and check in what's the consequences.
Speaker 1:If they don't man, the case is picked right back up and we prosecute them. That's any diversion. Right, they sign the tolling agreement. It's not dismissed. How is it? Is it state funded? I guess no, right, they sign the tolling agreement.
Speaker 2:It's not dismissed. How is it? Is it state funded? I guess no. No, they fund it.
Speaker 1:They want. The trade unions need apprentices. They want these apprentices. They pay out of the money that they make while they're working to become a member of the union. It's fully self-funded.
Speaker 4:Sean on that. So, going back to the diversion program, because we do have a lot of people that are in the diversion program, that broke the diversion program and were not prosecuted. So you're telling me right here right here on this podcast that you're not going to do that.
Speaker 1:So it depends on what.
Speaker 4:The program is Okay and it depends on what the violation is, if Um, and it depends on what's the violation.
Speaker 1:So the DWI pretrial intervention programs, that's the, that's the biggest one. Um, you know, I I think that you all know my history through the office and and the fact that I think that is the most selfish, dangerous crime that most people will ever commit. Right, get mine a wheel after you've had something to drink.
Speaker 3:Especially with Uber, lyft, everything there is, it's so selfish and stupid, but regardless.
Speaker 1:So those are going to be monitored and that's something we've got to pay for. I mean, that is something that's not going to go into a union, although it could. It's just typically those are pretty, pretty well tailored toward that. We are not revoking those ptis in the manner that I think we should right. I mean, we're you pick up another dwi, you? You violate a couple of couple of uh, you know, lapses in drinking.
Speaker 4:You're not a candidate in my mind what about the on a diversion program and committing another theft at that point? Or excuse me, another crime, excuse me if any to say theft or something to that effect. I mean, say they went from this for simple possession, they're on the diversion program. Then while they're out on the diversion program they're caught doing this. What's the recourse for that?
Speaker 1:So for me, I think again, you look at different things. So for me, I think again you look at different things. If we're talking about addiction, right, for just simple possession, and you pick up a new PCS, that's something that maybe we do have some grace, right. Maybe you continue on. Really, really am of the opinion that when you start violating someone else, when you start affecting someone else's well-being, I really stop having a lot of grace for you. Simple possession on top of simple possession, all right, maybe we can still salvage that person. But when you start violating someone else, that's when I think my job comes into play, right, be it BMV, be it bird building, be it bird hub, certainly ag rob, you know any sex crimes. Now I get that you probably are a broken person and wounded, but now I've got to come in, and so I think that's kind of where I land on what a diversion and potentially a continued successful diversion looks like, as opposed to somebody who's on a low-level diversion but now commits a crime against someone else. Well, now I'm going to—.
Speaker 4:You know you hit a little bit on that because I know back in August when we met, you stated and so forth that if you're a threat to the community, a flight risk, you will stay in custody.
Speaker 1:That's it and that's.
Speaker 4:And now we're moving into bond, which you know we should just tee up another hour, yeah, so we can go on and on for this, but you got to understand what we're dealing with and the questions that need to be answered in Harris County are endless because we have been beat down for so long. Guys want answers.
Speaker 3:That's it. It feels like it's a headline every week So-and-so out of jail commits murder, so-and-so out of jail commits murder. So-and-so out of jail robs family.
Speaker 1:And what you've seen is just like we've talked about. The current DA does not accept responsibility for anything. I mean, you guys know the Texas Constitution 11B, right? There are three ways to go about holding someone in custody unless they're charged with capital murder, or they are and you're going to have a proof evident where you're going to seek death, or they're true habitual and commit certain enumerated crimes Other than that text constitution says that person is entitled to a bond period and in no way does it make a provision if it's their 10th or 11th or 12th crime, right? It also didn't say cashless, does it? No, it doesn't. But what I'm saying to you is there's no way that the judge by themselves, regardless of how many times they've gotten out, can give a no bond finding without the district attorney's office filing either an 11 a, b or C motion. And so when you see these, what I've been telling people for the last year is you got to stop saying I can't believe the judge did that because they can't do it by themselves. You got to start saying I can't believe the DA's office didn't file an 11 B motion and put on, put on just a small part of the new crime, because at that point, then the judge can hold him at no bond.
Speaker 1:But I truly believe in my heart of hearts that if you commit a crime right and we're going to remove murders, sex assault of a child, ag robbs because those I think you have inherently said you're likely to be a future danger to the community but everything else if you're not likely to be a future danger to the community while you're on bond, or a flight risk, or you can minimize those threats by some type of pretrial condition.
Speaker 1:I don't care what's in your bank account. I mean I don't care if you flew in on a jet or you spent last night under I-10. It should not factor in on whether you get out Once you have committed a crime while you're out on bond. You've answered yes to my first question period, full stop, right, you are a continuing threat to the community and we hold you in custody. But where everybody starts to fall down on that is it all sounds great at first, but if we're taking two and a half, three years to try a UUMV case, that's tough to justify holding somebody pre-conviction three and a half years in custody when we're paying $50 million to bust people Louisiana and Arkansas and West Texas Cause our jail.
Speaker 2:So just the county jail, just the county jail.
Speaker 1:So what we've got to do is you got to fix it all together. We've got to get down, and I think it's by waving jury trials on these little ones and doing court trials over and over and over I can do 10 of them a week. My officers get to learn how to testify. My young prosecutors get to learn how to introduce evidence how to actually do this.
Speaker 1:We see the numbers plummet because all you want to do is send them where they need to go.
Speaker 1:The county jail should be nothing but a holding cell for where they need to go, be it probation, be it a dismissal, be it TDC or state jail, Whatever it is, that's where we've got to get them a dismissal. Be it TDC or state jail, whatever it is, that's where we got to get them. And once we get that down to a reasonable timeframe, you're going to see a lot less angst in holding people in custody pre-conviction because the timeframe is shorter, and so I think that that's. I think that's the way that we can get to the point where we're not seeing this and regardless, you're not going to see 14 bonds and somebody get out. It's just we're going to create a group within the office whose job is to go do 11B motions right. Whose job is to evaluate whether an 11A motion is the appropriate avenue to go down and do this. An 11A motion is the appropriate avenue to go down and do this, Because what you're seeing is a lot of these judges.
Speaker 1:They don't want violent criminals walking out, but because we're not doing the 11Bs or doing them well, they're giving a high number and then over the course of a year, two years, they just keep whittling down the cash number to the point where they can get out again. They just keep whittling down the cash number to the point where they can get out again. That shouldn't be what bond is right, because then it becomes punitive. It's oh, if we can just winnow it down to this number, I can get out. It's not going to ensure that they come back to court, it's not going to ensure that they don't commit a new crime. So if I had my druthers, we would get cashless out of it. We would get cash out of the words for bond.
Speaker 4:You did say that, that you wanted to get rid of the cash, bonds and so forth, and you said three. I know three regarding three cases or, excuse me, crimes, harassment, assault causing bodily injury and criminal mischief. I can see harassment and criminal mischief to an extent. Explain to how. Regarding assault and bodily injury, especially when it comes to a victim of domestic violence.
Speaker 1:So I think, when you're talking about, especially, assault family members, stalking, harassment, all of these kinds of cases, right, there is no amount of money that I can get on an assault family member, especially a class A, that's going to ensure that that person's safe. Zero dollar, like it can be zero, it can be five grand, which is the most we can get on a first time. Right, those people are going to make that bond, yep, so what we should be doing is an 11A. Give me 60 days of no bond. You just sit right. I can't do an 11B on them, but I can do an 11A and during those 60 days, you ensure that the alleged victim has a safe place to be, has some resources that are going to ensure that that person isn't going to be victimized again while you're pending this case. Right, that is the only way that I know of that we can ensure those people.
Speaker 2:But wouldn't that lengthen the jail's population, or at least boast it by doing that, or I guess the case dependent it's case dependent.
Speaker 1:But if I'm doing that right, but I'm also PR bonding the first time UUMVs and the bird buildings and the PCSs and all the other things to get them out of jail Right Now, we got a heck of a lot more room and if I've waived jury trials, I don't have people sitting for three and a half four years. So the jail is set and can handle 10,000 people. The problem is we've got the same 8,000 in there for four years. Yeah, problem is we've got the same 8,000 in there for four years. At that point you're talking about a 2,000-person population before we have to bust them.
Speaker 4:Question on the PCS, because we talked about that again back in August about four grams, say. I have four grams caught on me for fentanyl, which what does that kill 500,000 people technically and so forth. Diversion, no diversion. And then are you going to accept the charges without having the lab results? Yeah, the lab results are. Yeah, come on, cause you know where we are with that right now. Right, so help me out.
Speaker 1:So, all right, give me an answer so the way that I want to view that is. I think, at least in the short term, fentanyl is in a class by itself, right, I don't want to get to the position where we were in the eighties with crack, where you got people that are doing 35 years for crack that now we just, you know, throw away, but fentanyl right now, both the public and the people are dying and they're scared, so that's a different animal. I carry Narcan every scene. I've ever made for that reason.
Speaker 1:So I think fentanyl is in a different category and I don't think we divert those. I think we bring those in and figure out what we're doing. But the other kind of dope I want to have, I think there have been models around the country that have these community courts and I don't know what it looks like here, but I think there is a way for us to go look at it. Where you don't take them to the JPC, they get taken, and because you never know if some of them have fentanyl or something, I don't think we as law enforcement can just let them go right for their own safety. So you've got to take them. But where you take them is different and I think if we take them to these community courts, which is a more localized, targeted diversion programs that staffed with mental health and addiction specialists in addition to prosecutors and judges, they set up those diversion programs in that location. Location. They're also partnered. You have representatives from the unions there, you have representatives from the JUCOs that are on site with those people, you're going to save a few of them, you're going to give a different avenue for the possession cases and, quite frankly, it's going to help get officers back on the street in a lot faster deal, where we're tagging this right, we're just tagging the dope. That person is dropped off here, not all the way down JPC, and that officer's back on the street. I think in some way we can do that pretty quickly to figure out if it works. But, unlike my predecessor, we're not going to do these things without getting input from the agencies that get involved.
Speaker 1:Yeah Right, I mean, in my mind it makes sense, like when we do no refusal offsite locations. It's so I can get warrants done, process the defendants and get that officer back on the street. I think there's some model that we can do like that, but I'm not the expert in that, and so we're going to figure out in collaboration whether or not that's something that's viable. Because, again, just like retail theft, I don't think most officers care where they drop that defendant off, right, they want to make sure that the person's off the street, that's not sitting on the corner, so that the grandma who lives right behind them has to deal with that for the rest of her life, and then you've got to hear about it every time you drive past the street. If we're doing something different with them, I think it's fine as long as it is in a collaborative way and it's beneficial to everybody.
Speaker 2:Just a little bit ago, clint was bringing up Travis County and the illustrious Jose Garza, which is, you know. That's a whole other story by itself, but one of the main problems that we see, not just in Texas, not just in Travis County, but across America, are these, quote unquote, uncle George Soros-funded district attorneys 64 minutes, guys.
Speaker 1:I'm so disappointed, hey, yeah.
Speaker 2:It took us a while to get there.
Speaker 4:It was number one on my list, by the way. Just let me clarify that.
Speaker 2:You know one of the things. I'll be straightforward when news came about that Kim Og had lost, that she had beat her in the election, I was very excited and I made a post and I kind of got some Facebook messages and Instagram messages of saying are people worried and concerned that you were number one Soros-funded and that there are some rumors about what they say, that you were going to be more radical, more liberal than. Kim Ogg.
Speaker 3:And there's a belief that if you take a dollar from Soros, you are beholden to his, his instructions, yeah, what, what, what do you? What does?
Speaker 4:he get in return. That's a bit. That's the question of every officer, right and everyone regarding it. And when you take sources money, what is he promised? What does he get in return? Because, let's, we, we talked about this, this, you know, pre pre-show, regarding across the country, these large cities across, can they do the la's, the new york's, uh?
Speaker 4:the harris, county oaklands all fund da's from george sources, camp right, all radical da's. Highest crime rates across the country, failing economies we could go on and on. All George Soros-funded individuals. How are you going to be different from everyone else here in Harris County?
Speaker 3:Did he give Kim money, Kim Ogbunny, last time?
Speaker 1:No, he gave her money in 16.
Speaker 3:Yes, 16, so the first time. So he stopped and provided your campaign this time. What made him change, do you?
Speaker 1:know I, I don't know, and how much did you get by? The way, just curious for the record, I think we, I think it was 1.6, okay million um somewhere in that neighborhood which, which for those, for the listener and viewer out there, uh, politics in harris county.
Speaker 2:Harris county again, the third largest county in texas, yes, uh, there's a lot a a lot, a lot of things that cost in a campaign. So I mean, that sounds like a very large number, and it is, but your total campaign cost.
Speaker 1:I think we spent north of $4 million. Okay, I raised over $4 million.
Speaker 2:Okay.
Speaker 1:And so look it is. I have friends who are right-wing Republicans. It always has it always.
Speaker 2:You notice that Now you've slid his head over.
Speaker 1:I didn't do it toward the middle of the table. But it's always made me laugh. And now actually meeting with you know, never met mr soros um I. I seriously doubt that I will ever meet mr soros um, but meeting with them has just reinforced. He has become a boogeyman for the right. That is really undeserved in a lot of ways. Um, when you look at the amount of billionaires for Democrats versus Republicans, the Republicans dump with their billionaire people all over the place a lot more than Ms Soros ever has.
Speaker 4:But, sean, I've got to interject this because, you know me, I'm not shy of saying it, but the fact of the matter is that might be true. However, their mission is not to destroy America Well the unique thing is….
Speaker 1:I have to say that for the record. I can. I can promise you that two things. I can promise you that there are no. There are no strings attached to the money, and I know a number of the prosecutors in different jurisdictions who have gotten support from that group. It is, it doesn't come with any strings. Before they decide whether or not they're going to support someone, they listen to the whole platform, right, and they listened to the exact same platform that you and I've talked about a number of times and they decided to get in on this race strictly because of that.
Speaker 2:Is his views more of like a community approach with the criminal justice reform? Is that essentially what he's trying to kind of evolve into? Is that why he's tapped in? Because me, being a Texan, I question why an older Californian guy would have New York Well, he lives in California too, the dude's got property everywhere, right but why he would give two shits about what's going on in Harris County, texas, with the politics. And that's what's concerning to me, because we say it all the time is that we welcome I'll say it on record, we absolutely welcome anybody that comes from anywhere, as long as it's legal to, to, to transition into Texas. But don't move here, because Texas is awesome the way it is and bring bullshit politics with it to make it to where you came from.
Speaker 3:Absolutely agree when I think the bad rap he got is everywhere he inserts himself. Those communities are all kind of on fire in a shithole and I guess it's a coincidence, but wherever he seems to insert himself usually goes down the drain.
Speaker 1:Well, when you look at it, he is. That group is very intentional about the places that they go. It's where they're going to get the most effect, right? I mean, you're talking about Harris County. We're the third largest county, not in Texas? Well, it's the electorals, that's the issue.
Speaker 4:Let's clarify that it's the electorals. He's going to the areas, the most popular areas that have the most influence in legislation in state and federal. That's a fact. He's not going to give me a small little Marshall, texas. Yeah, exactly, he's not going to-.
Speaker 3:He controls Dallas County Harris.
Speaker 4:County, Travis County. He controls Texas he pretty much controls. Dc Absolutely, and that's exactly the standpoint I got to tell you again.
Speaker 1:I've had this conversation with guys I've grown up with over and over over beers. He is not the boogeyman that that anyone thinks he he truly has they. That group has a vision of what criminal justice reform can look like and he doesn't typically that that group doesn't typically jump into other types of politics. He's really passionate about the stuff that we're talking about.
Speaker 4:But Sean, I got a question on that If he is so passionate about it, why hasn't he going? Why is he going to the DAs? Why has he never approached law enforcement itself, the ones that are actually on the front lines doing it day in and day out, not DAs, because I'm not saying all DAs stand behind desks and so forth, but the majority of them do, Sure Fact. And so if he's so involved in community… Policing Policing exactly. Or criminal justice reform, Exactly reform Then why is he going to the front lines and speaking to any of them? Why is it only the ones that make the change in the law or dictate how the law is?
Speaker 1:ran. I don't know the answer to that, I just know that. But you can see that we have to convince our listeners, our fellow officers. The reason why? Well, obviously, when you talk about the way that people like Mr Soros, that people like the Dunns right, the Dunn brothers, people on both sides of the aisle, the way they can affect change is by giving money to like-minded people, and so that is his path. And so I don't think typically, other than sheriffs, you don't have frontline law enforcement agencies that are elected. They are appointed typically, and so the way that you can affect the most change in the criminal justice space is by the DA's office in elections. And so I think that's what you're seeing.
Speaker 1:But, at the end of the day, the bottom line is I'm not changing my vision for how we can make Harris County work and be equitable and be safe for everyone, for anybody. I'm not changing it for you three and TMBA. I'm not changing it for the Soros groups. I'm not changing it for you three and TMBA. I'm not changing it for the Soros groups. I'm not changing it for Texas organizing project. I'm not changing it for working families parties. I'm not changing it for anything.
Speaker 1:I've been in this long enough. I think I have a pretty good plan going forward and I promise you I'm going to screw it up a number of times and in a number of ways, but the one thing that I can promise you is I'm not owned by any one group, but I will listen to and talk to everyone and figure out how we can do this the right way. And so when I screw up, I'll come right back here in this wonderful big room and we'll talk about it and you can tell me and we'll figure it out, and then we're going down the line right.
Speaker 1:And I will sit there and I will field phone calls from the Houston ministers against crime. I'll listen to Texas organizing project. We're going to talk about all of it and at the end of the day I'm going to do what I think is the right thing. But at every step of there a lot of people are going to have input.
Speaker 2:You know, one of the things that that that you've we've talked about is things that you can improve and we look forward to you improving you, being a prosecutor for so many years and seeing the good, bad, the ugly, the. What can cops do For anybody listening to this podcast, watching this show? What can law enforcement do besides this and besides having the meetings and the communications? But what can you know? The 26-year-old patrolman in Mansfield, texas, or the 32-year-old cop in Pearland right now? What can we do better on our end to strengthen not only the cases but strengthen the relationships between the DA's office? You know, maybe not having an attitude when they are on hold, small things like that.
Speaker 1:You pointed it. Yeah, yeah, yeah, because y'all don't have to be on hold.
Speaker 2:I didn't mean it that way, I'm sorry bro His call is still important to him. His call is still important.
Speaker 4:He has to press three yeah but I'm going to clarify I'm just busting my balls.
Speaker 2:I did not bust your balls.
Speaker 4:Prior to this podcast, I think I've been very calm.
Speaker 2:You have. No, I am absolutely proud. I'll set a record. I'm very proud of Brian Lithcombe for holding it together. Sometimes his passion is misconstrued as anger.
Speaker 3:Thank you, I can clarify that. Thank you, I didn't think two gummies would work.
Speaker 4:No testing, no testing. But yeah, so I mean?
Speaker 2:what can law enforcement do on our end to improve the quality of service or the quality of work and strengthen relationships with DA's offices?
Speaker 1:That's such a good question, you know, because it does have to come both ways. I really think, just like my young prosecutors need to go out on just ride-alongs but they need to go out to scenes and see the kind of stuff that they're asking these officers to do, I think we need to have more collaboration and more interaction with the officers coming into court sitting through a docket. I really I want to. I'm going to encourage that from every agency. Come, sit in the docket, put on a suit. I know how much it hurts y'all, but put on a suit. We'll sit you up front and you just listen to the negotiations and the back and forth. See what that looks like.
Speaker 1:Sit in with a prosecutor, even on a DWI, on an assault family member, not just with your witness meeting.
Speaker 1:Sit with them as they prepare for that trial. Understand the stress on this end about standing up in front of 65 people and picking a jury and then going forward and cross-examining and fighting defense attorneys and fighting with judges. Get what that's like too, and you're never going to get it fully, just like we're never going to get what it feels like to approach a car at 1230 at night on the side of a dark road going to get it fully, just like we're never going to get what it feels like to approach a car at 1230 at night on the side of a dark road, like I've never felt that terror and I don't. I don't know what I would do, but I at least understand that it exists. And so I think on the officer side, especially the 26 year old patrol, come in Like the next time you get subpoenaed to a case, call the prosecutor and just say, hey, can I come early? Can I just sit and talk with you? Get to know a couple of the prosecutors you work with.
Speaker 1:Because, at the end of the day, not only are we all just human and live in the same communities, we all share a vision of criminal justice, safety, right. Whether you're a reformer or not, we all want to do the right thing, whatever we think that is. As long as you get that and start from that position, I really think we ain't that different.
Speaker 3:But it also goes back to relationships, communication, and if you build a relationship and you have communication, you end up building trust. That's completely gone. But I like that idea because you know if you get in in a year and you see man, their intox manslaughter cases are kind of not great out in Paralina, pasadena send a prosecutor out there during in-service and go, hey, I don't want to have to kick these back. So let me share some of the things I'm seeing of how can you build a better intox manslaughter case?
Speaker 4:Absolutely, and I think there's a great opportunity for that to go out, especially for these young troops in the academies. Yes, go, bring in a prosecutor, let them know. Just give them, because I mean, we go through the penal code, right, when you're going through the academy, get your TCO license, et cetera, and so forth, so you're learning the law why not have a prosecutor? You pop in every once in a while to these new academies and explain hey, this is what? Because they're going to know obviously more than that officer at that point in time, because they're fresh, right, they haven't even been on the streets. But give them an idea of what you're looking for so they know prior to going out there to make sure. So why not start at ground zero?
Speaker 1:So my last, the last seven years that I was at the office, I taught every cadet class at HPD penal code and courtroom demeanor. Wow, every class.
Speaker 3:And it's just great you know when I get popped for speeding now, because I've taught that person If you speed, if I speed, I don't.
Speaker 1:It's just building those relationships, it's making them feel comfortable in a different setting than what they do every day. And I think it's got to go both ways. And you're exactly right, it's just got to be the trust. And so what I want to do when I come in is start absolutely in all of the academies, but also those first, second, third year officers. Yes, I want to bring them in and have mock trials and sit around and teach them how to testify, because in the vast majority of my trials in the DA's office as a whole, the only expert you got is the officer.
Speaker 1:He is the expert. She is the expert that is supposed to be testifying about this. That's correct. And when you look at real experts or you look at homicide detectives or things like that, they know how to testify right. I mean, they look at the person questioning them and they turn and talk to the jury and you're just like God, thank you for that. And so if we have young officers that understand that the quality of our cases are going to get better, we're going to win more cases we should win and we're going to build that rapport In return it makes a safer community Absolutely correct.
Speaker 2:But it's easy for us to and I'll say it again, kudos to you for stepping up here and coming over here and getting on the podcast, because it just shows your commitment, it shows that you're open to have a conversation. But it's really easy and cops are bad at it to pull that pin out and throw these grenades but then not say flashbangs, sorry, flashbangs, yeah, we're not really throwing flashbangs.
Speaker 2:But, what can we do better in our area? How can we prepare this case better? To prepare a winning case for you guys? Because that's the reality. Essentially, if it's a football team, we're handing you the ball to score the touchdown.
Speaker 1:Good point, dick Wolf, who is an amazing guy, that created Law Order. The first thing he ever said on that show is they're two separate but equal parts the police who arrest the offenders, and the prosecutors who prosecute, I thought it was.
Speaker 2:These stories are not based on actual events, except they all were.
Speaker 1:They really are separate but equal entities and unless you really understand that, you're not going to do anything.
Speaker 3:So one question our listeners are going to be mad if we don't ask. We have a lot of conservative listeners.
Speaker 1:No.
Speaker 3:And they think anybody with a D after their name is Bernie Sanders. What's your opinion on the death penalty?
Speaker 1:So this is the question that I have gotten asked a lot. And look historically in the state of Texas and in the United States, the death penalty has been so overused. It has been disproportionately used against black and brown people and poor people, and I think that there is a zero percent chance that we have executed an innocent person in this country. I think it's a travesty. I think it's a travesty and I think, if there was a real other alternative and I personally think it would be life without parole in solitary confinement that doesn't exist.
Speaker 1:So, as it sits right now, there are people who there is no safe place for in this community, in any lockup in any way, shape or form other than the death penalty. I think that percentage is extraordinarily small. I think it should be reserved for the absolute worst of the worst, most dangerous future danger people that we've ever seen, and I think we almost have a higher burden of proof in our own mind beyond a reasonable doubt. It needs to be just about beyond all doubt. All of that being said, there are people I have been in this job long enough Pure evil exists.
Speaker 1:Oh yeah, 100%, and there are people that I believe the death penalty is appropriate. Okay.
Speaker 4:I can live with that.
Speaker 1:Well, I'm good, I'm glad I mean dude if Brian can live with that well I'm good, I'm glad I mean dude if brian can live with it I'm just leaving now while I'm ahead.
Speaker 2:Yeah, that's a pretty high bar to to hit. Yeah well, brian, did you got everything on your list that we touched base on. You know what we bounced all around.
Speaker 4:I was trying to go on.
Speaker 2:You know my order, but oh no, this show is not about order.
Speaker 1:That you ain't lying, it's not so and boys, I do want to tell y'all that this won't be the last time you have me on here.
Speaker 1:It's awesome so you can absolutely keep the list longer and longer. I feel like you and I are going to have conversations outside of this podcast. Yes, we are, but I want everyone listening to know that I love what you guys do, that I love what you guys do. I love and respect the hell out of every sworn officer on the planet, especially in my community. I am always going to be here to answer questions. I'll do it on this podcast. I'll be available to phone.
Speaker 3:Whatever y'all need, I'm always going to be available to talk and I respect the hell out of that Cause. One of the problems in our country right now is if you have an R or D, then we if you don't agree with me, then you're wrong and we can't even be friends and our kids can't run around together and you're the, you're Satan.
Speaker 3:And for you to come on and not know what we may ask or not ask just man to man, I respect the hell out of that because it takes some intestinal fortitude to be like screw it, I'll show up and stand up for you. But you said it offline earlier, we're not always going to get along, but we can sure cuss, discuss, argue, fight, and then we'll go have a beer together. I respect the heck out of that because if we can't, if everybody in the world agreed there's a problem and there would be no, there would be no advancement. But we ought to be able to duke it out and then let's go figure out and it wasn't personal. Let's, let's go break.
Speaker 2:what the mindset is is that because you do have a d next to your name, is that you're scared to recognize and say I support law enforcement 100%. I support law enforcement and the fact that you're not scared to man. You've got my full support and I appreciate the hell out of it. Yeah, just like Clint said.
Speaker 4:You know, and a huge thing for us is when we called him back in August, we were the first ones he met with. I believe correct, you were and I mean we're not a small agency, but we're a mid-sized agency, but we're not HPD and we're not the sheriff's office, right, but he was the first ones we called. We called Sean, the first ones, you know, or he came out and we were, you know, the first ones. It's impressive and he's never not answered you. I really do appreciate it and I hope we definitely have more conversations in the future.
Speaker 1:Appreciate you coming on man, we will. This was fun yeah absolutely.
Speaker 3:I got some questions. I like asking, in your career doing this, what's your best day and what's your worst day?
Speaker 1:Best day. I think the best day that I ever had was God. There's so many words. I think the best day I ever had was the last trial. I tried before I left to run. I knew it was going to be my last trial. I'd gotten very, very close with the victim's family. It was a felony murder and I knew, no matter how this election turned out, this was the last time I was ever going to be a rank-and-file prosecutor I was ever going to actually get to speak as just an ADA, just somebody that was there and this case had pinned for God since February of 18, and I tried it in November of 23, or 22. And so you know, during all that time I was at the scene when it happened and I got to take it all the way to the end. And so they came back with a guilty and multiple decades in prison. Multiple decades in prison and getting to hug the wife and the three kids um in the courtroom right after, and knowing that that was it for me.
Speaker 3:That's the closest to closure. They're going to get a little closure for you, I guess, absolutely.
Speaker 1:Just all the way through. It was really a full circle moment for me. You know, in that day I started thinking about as an intern, trying my first dwi, thinking god, this is the coolest job in the world, and then giving to recognize that it was the coolest job in the world, that many years later, um. And then that widow introduced me at my um, my launch party, and just having those kind of moments. So I think that that was my best day as a prosecutor.
Speaker 4:I think it's awesome because you also you just you had faith in the system. Yeah, it worked and that's fantastic it was long but it worked.
Speaker 1:You know, we had COVID during that time too, but the worst day, um, the worst day that I ever had at as a prosecutor was turning in my watch Because, again, I always had intentions of coming back to lead the office.
Speaker 1:But trust me when I tell you February of 23, that was unknown whether that was going to happen and taking that leap of faith and giving up the job that I quite frankly believe I was born to have, which is advocating for what's right in every case. That was the hardest day of my life professionally, just driving home by myself. It still kind of chokes me up, home by myself, and I, yeah, it still kind of chokes me up thinking about it. And now thinking that I get to come back is how old are you? 44.
Speaker 3:Damn kid. What would 44 year old Sean tell 14 year old Sean?
Speaker 1:Don't throw as many pitches Cause two rotator cuff surgeries later on. I am here.
Speaker 4:Yeah, yep.
Speaker 1:All right, and that was fun.
Speaker 2:Well, we like to end this. Since you're not in law enforcement. You can jump in here if you want to, but Brian.
Speaker 4:Yes, sir.
Speaker 2:What's your favorite cop movie or law enforcement cop movie? What's your favorite cop car and your favorite drink of choice? My?
Speaker 4:favorite cop movie oh my gosh Training Day.
Speaker 3:That's a good one. That's a good one.
Speaker 4:Yeah, fantastic, favorite car by far. I don't care what they say, I think Crown Vic's the best damn police car that ever walked the earth or drove on this earth. The fact that Ford got rid of it, I'd go to hell with them. So that's just a fact. You said Crown Vic, crown Vic by far, and best drink. You know what? I'm a simple guy. I like a nice cold beer.
Speaker 1:There you go, john, all right. Best cop movies to watch.
Speaker 3:Yes.
Speaker 1:Yes, it's a great movie. I watched it again the other day.
Speaker 4:I love the fact that they call it a shot. I didn't think of that. That was a good one. It's still like training day, though.
Speaker 1:Oh, I mean, come on Again, Denzel.
Speaker 4:Denzel.
Speaker 1:Yeah, exactly, oh. And then Cop car See for me because I like space Tahoe, Put the gun safe in the back and everything yeah.
Speaker 4:By the way, when I come back, that's by the way, when I come back, that's going to be the car I drive. Let me clarify have you ever drove a Crown Vic? Yeah, I mean, you can't kill a Crown Vic. You understand that?
Speaker 1:The DA's office when your car went into the shop. The DA's office has like six old Crown Vics that they've just pulled out.
Speaker 4:Because they last and they last See that, clarify that they last and they last See that.
Speaker 1:Clarify that. I mean dude, you got the police interceptor engine. And war wagons no shocks, and so you just go back out. Yeah, yeah, war wagons.
Speaker 4:Sure Still goes.
Speaker 1:I mean, it still goes.
Speaker 4:Still goes. You know look, I'm a man of finer taste that we currently keep buying and the great thing is you've got to add. You know, every time you fill up you've got to check the oil because they burn oil like a city. So I mean so that's the kind of things that we want to continue to spend money on is cop cars that continue to burn oil.
Speaker 2:But hey, the best cop car ever built was a Ford. We're going to get rid of that. Well, the reason they got rid of Crown Vix is because they were what's your favorite drink of?
Speaker 1:choice Drink of choice. Irish whiskey that's good Black Bush, and I know it's from Northern Ireland, but it's Bushmills Like nice Need to run a rock.
Speaker 3:One rock, that's my man.
Speaker 2:Maybe we'll have that as a celebration drink in November. There, you go I love that At the celebration night. Sounds great, yeah, well, that's about wraps this up. You got anything else?
Speaker 3:Big Dog, no, I sincerely appreciate you coming on and I think it's important for people to hear, because there's a lot of assumptions made. Always when you hear that guy's a Democrat or there's a whole lot of labels that fly around. Yeah, and I appreciate somebody having the integrity to say I'll stand up and answer for whatever. Fire away, because before we came on they were joking around about what we were going to ask and you were like fire away, I'll be upset if you don't ask the hard questions.
Speaker 1:There are no off-limits questions. Especially when you're talking about something as important as the DA's office, I think that everybody should be able to ask every question possible before you make a decision on who's going to be the.
Speaker 2:DL hey, Nat, hit that camera towards me. And Brian hey Jose Garza. Sean Teer is what courage looks like. I want to take just a few pages out of this man's book, and we hope you can come on too and explain yourself, just like he did.
Speaker 4:Can't agree more Truly.
Speaker 2:I appreciate it All. Right, that's it. That's all I wanted to say.
Speaker 4:I got to say, sean, I appreciate it. All right, that's it. That's all I wanted to say. I got to say, sean, I got to give you credit because I know when we first met, you knew where I stood on the aisle, by all means. And I'm not going to change. For real, I am a very conservative person. The fact of the matter is you coming out here and doing this and then just not only meeting with us prior to kudos to you man Really appreciate it.
Speaker 2:I Take care, stay safe. Hit that subscribe button. We've got some upcoming stuff coming up Texas Peace Office Memorial. Texas FOP Spring Board Meeting and the TMPA's annual conference joint with FOP. Sean open invitation July 26th to the 28th Might have a speaker.
Speaker 2:Yeah it'd be pretty good to have there 700 cops. You'd feel safe. A few cocktails, maybe some Irish whiskey Be a good time. You can feel safe. A few cocktails, maybe some Irish whiskey Be a good time. You're on? Yeah, let's do it. You guys take care, stay safe. God bless you and, as always, may God bless Texas.
Speaker 1:Amen Thank you.