Calling the Fort Bend Sheriff’s Office’s investigation “incompetent” and the district attorney’s prosecution “abusive” and “unprofessional,” one of the attorneys on Fulshear Mayor James Roberts’ defense team presented a report during Tuesday’s city council meeting on Roberts’ recent exoneration on criminal charges.
Fulshear resident and attorney Richard Tate presented the ten-minute public report, painting a picture of prosecutorial misconduct and police incompetence in bringing criminal charges against Roberts.
LAWYER REPORTS ON ROBERTS CASE – Fulshear attorney Richard Tate, a member of Mayor James Roberts' defense team, gave city council a report on the mayor’s exoneration on criminal charges. Tate called the prosecution of Roberts “unprofessional” and “abusive.”
Tate was a member of Roberts’ defense team, which also included high-profile defense lawyer Rusty Hardin.
Roberts was exonerated on two misdemeanor charges after a six-day trial in Richmond last week.
In one case, Judge Jim Shoemake issued a directed verdict of not guilty on a charge Roberts illegally imposed a lien on Fulshear property owner Jim Gibson. In the second case, in which Roberts was charged with illegally ordering a survey with city funds, the jury found the mayor not guilty.
Speaking before a packed council chamber, Tate also called the prosecution of Roberts “a perversion of the justice system.”
“Just when I thought the prosecution had reached a new low in its abusive tactics, another abusive tactic emerged. In the end, the elements of unfairness that were displayed by the prosecution throughout the investigation, the grand jury presentation, the indictment and then the conduct of the trial were too long to mention,” Tate said.
Tate did, however, share what he termed his “short list” of prosecutorial abuses. The problems began, he said, with a shoddy investigation by the Fort Bend County Sheriff’s Office.
“There was an incompetent, tunnel-visioned detective who rushed to judgment and ignored incredibly relevance evidence that the carports that were originally alleged to have been stolen from Mr. Gibson did not even belong to Mr. Gibson,” Tate said. “That evidence was available to the prosecution as early as Feb. 9, 2007. It should have ended the investigation right then and there.”
Tate also said investigators should have known to question Gibson’s version of events.
“The second item was a decision by both the detective and the prosecution to completely ignore Mr. Gibson’s well-documented history of dishonesty, violence and unreliability – information that was readily available to them in the sheriff’s files and in their own files.”
The third item on Tate’s list was the fact that the DA’s prosecutor had a predetermined goal of removing Roberts from office.
“Third, and most distressingly, there was a lead prosecutor who had one result in mind, and the result he sought to bring about was the resignation of the mayor. And he intended to do so even if it meant ruining the mayor’s reputation, draining his financial resources and destroying his health,” Tate told the meeting.
Tate’s criticism of the prosecution did not stop there. He also accused them of withholding evidence that showed Roberts’ innocence, as well as of intimidating witnesses.
“Next, I witnessed the employment of certainly unprofessional, and probably unconstitutional, conduct by the prosecution and/or the investigators – one or the other – when they withheld exculpatory evidence that clearly demonstrated the mayor’s innocence and should have ended the investigation early on,” Tate said. “I witnessed the use of threatening and intimidating tactics, both during the investigation and during the trial, toward witnesses in an attempt to force those witnesses to testify in a manner more favorable to the prosecution.”
Tate added he also saw “petty, unprofessional conduct” on the part of the DA’s trial lawyers when they refused to reveal the names of witnesses they intended to call and made repeated improper objections to defense questioning. He said even the judge admonished prosecutors for their behavior.
“Prosecutors made repeated and knowingly improper objections during the cross-examination of witnesses by the mayor’s defense counsel at a time when the witnesses were being severely discredited by Mr. Hardin. The prosecutor was scolded openly and very thoroughly by the judge for doing so,” Tate pointed out.
He said the DA’s office was simply trying “to throw enough mud against the wall” in the hopes of convicting Roberts.
“As you know, two of the charges were dismissed prior to trial. Following the close of the evidence, the judge dismissed the third (charge) and the jury took less than 45 minutes to resoundingly and unanimously exonerate the mayor on the fourth (charge),” Tate added.
He said all eight jurors – the six regulars and two alternates – all agreed Roberts was innocent.
“When all else failed and their case was, frankly, crumbling around them, the prosecutors resorted to character assassination of both the mayor and (City Secretary Diana Gordon) Offord. I think that was the saddest day of the trial for me,” Tate said.
Tate added his co-counsel had similar feelings about how the case against Roberts was handled.
“(Hardin) said in his 33 years of practice that this was one of the worst – if not the worst – case of prosecutorial abuse he’s ever seen,” Tate recalled.
Despite having the odds stacked against him, Tate said the fact that Roberts was ultimately exonerated showed the justice system still worked.
“The mayor fought an uphill battle against overwhelming odds against the overwhelming power of the state, misguided as it was,” Tate said. “He prevailed; he’s been completely exonerated and I believe if you would talk to those six jurors, and even the two alternates, that they would readily express the degree of their disdain for the prosecutors’ treatment of the mayor.”
Tate ended his presentation with an apology to Roberts.
“As a citizen of Fort Bend County, I apologize to you for what happened,” he said.
Tate’s remarks brought a standing ovation from the crowded council chamber. Roberts also briefly commented, but avoided directly addressing the case.
“I thank everybody; it’s wonderful to have as many friends as my wife and I have in Fort Bend County,” Roberts told the crowd.
Roberts’ legal saga began almost two years ago, when the mayor was indicted March 19, 2007, by a Fort Bend County grand jury on charges he stole two carports from Gibson. According to the indictment, Roberts illegally authorized the removal of the carports from Gibson’s property.
Gibson filed a complaint with Fort Bend County Sheriff’s Office, which led to the indictment of Roberts on felony theft charges. Prosecutors dropped the theft charges in January, but moved forward with the two misdemeanor charges instead.
According to information presented during the trial, a business associate of Roberts, Jessie Montes, claimed the carports belonged to him and Montes arranged to have the structures moved.
Montes had one of the structures placed on Roberts’ property adjacent to a car wash owned by the mayor. Roberts said he gave Montes permission to put the former carport on the property, but it was to be used by Montes.
Roberts’ attorneys introduced evidence indicating the incident stemmed from a business dispute between Montes and Gibson over ownership of the structures, and not as a result of any criminal action by Roberts. The judge and jury ultimately agreed Roberts broke no laws.
