From Fox News: A criminal case tied to the 2020 Austin, Texas, George Floyd riots is erupting into a broader controversy, with prominent law enforcement groups calling for the Soros-backed district attorney to resign over accusations of misconduct, political coordination, and withholding key evidence.
Attorneys for Austin Police Department officer Chance Bretches filed a motion in Travis County district court to dismiss the case against him, alleging prosecutors in DA Jose Garza’s office violated the officer’s constitutional rights and compromised the integrity of the case by not disclosing alleged behind-the-scenes communications with Austin officials about potentially holding the city or police leadership criminally responsible for harming injured protesters.
Bretches is facing charges of aggravated assault by a public servant after being deployed as part of a crowd-control response during the 2020 riot, where officers worked to disperse demonstrators and restore order in downtown Austin. His attorneys argue he relied on department-issued “less-lethal” beanbag rounds that were later called into question, contending the equipment itself was defective and contributed to the injuries at issue.
The defense in the case alleges that “secret meetings” occurred between Austin city officials and prosecutors in 2023, during which the possibility of criminal charges against the city for defective beanbag rounds (which caused greater harm than intended) was discussed.
This claim relies on sworn declarations: one from a former city manager who personally met multiple times with DA José Garza and his team to address potential city culpability, and another from a former city council member aware of internal communications indicating the DA’s office was considering such charges.
The defense argues these meetings and related evidence showing the city’s possible criminal responsibility were required to be disclosed by the prosecution.
“Prosecutors can hold meetings with anybody, there’s nothing illegal about that,” Bretches’ attorney Doug O’Connell told Fox News Digital. “The problem in this case is the district attorney felt he had enough evidence to indict the city as a corporate entity, which would make the city an alternative suspect or an unindicted co-defendant.”
O’Connell contends that Garza initiated Brady disclosure obligations.
“If you follow that logic, then the basis of his indictment of the city, which never materialized, is, in fact, Brady,” O’Connell said. “Even if he thought he had enough evidence and later determined he didn’t, it’s still Brady. It’s a violation of the Michael Morton Act, a violation of the court’s order, and the defendant’s constitutional rights.”
Brady v. Maryland (1963) is a U.S. Supreme Court ruling that requires prosecutors to disclose any material evidence favorable to the accused (exculpatory or impeaching), as withholding it violates due process under the Constitution—regardless of the prosecution’s intent—and applies even without a specific defense request in later interpretations, with “material” meaning a reasonable probability of changing the trial outcome.
The Michael Morton Act (Texas law, effective 2014, amending Article 39.14 of the Texas Code of Criminal Procedure) goes further than federal Brady requirements. Named after Michael Morton—wrongfully convicted for 25 years due to withheld evidence—it mandates broader, automatic discovery upon defense request: prosecutors must promptly disclose nearly all case-related evidence (e.g., police reports, witness statements, documents) in an “open file” approach, not just material favorable items, to promote transparency and reduce wrongful convictions in Texas cases.
“It’s clear they didn’t turn over the evidence of why they felt they could indict the city, and the city was legitimately scared about this enough that the city went out and hired their own criminal defense attorney,” O’Connell said. “So one of two things is true, either he had the evidence and he didn’t produce it to us, or he didn’t have any basis to indict the city, and he was just threatening them, and that would be official oppression anyway.”
Two police organizations, Combined Law Enforcement Associations of Texas (CLEAT) and the Austin Police Retired Officers Association (APROA), have called for Garza’s resignation, citing his alleged animosity towards police.
“It’s kind of the final straw, everything that’s been going on with the continuing political prosecutions of Austin police officers who are out simply doing their job and doing the job the way that we’re trained to do their job,” retired Austin police officer Dennis Farris told Fox News Digital.
“His focus has been on the cops and now we’re finding out that he did some shady stuff and it’s time for him to go,” Farris added.
Read more at Fox News
The Dennis Michael Lynch Podcast archive is available below, with the most recent on top. Never miss an episode. Subscribe to the show by downloading The DML News App or go to Apple Podcasts.
