‘Soros-Backed’ Texas DA Accused of Evidence Tampering, Witness Retaliation in Army Sgt. Self-Defense Murder Case

Lawyers for Army Sergeant Daniel Perry accused Travis County District Attorney José Garza of tampering and retaliation against a detective witness. They say the district attorney prevented the detective from presenting evidence to the grand jury supporting Perry’s self-defense claim in the alleged murder of a protester in Austin. The accusation resurfaced on Thursday in a letter from the defense attorneys to the Texas Board of Pardons and Paroles. Texas Governor Greg Abbott recently asked the board to consider a recommendation for a pardon.

Defense attorneys F. Clinton Broden and Doug O’Connell sent a letter to the Texas Board of Pardons and Paroles to present evidence in support of the governor’s requested pardon recommendation. Governor Abbott made the request on April 8 following the conviction by a Travis County jury of murder in the Daniel Perry self-defense trial, Breitbart Texas reported. The letter from the defense team (attached below) reveals exculpatory evidence that was not allowed to be presented to the jury by the trial judge.

The letter resurfaces a previously made accusation that Travis County DA Garza tampered with evidence prepared by the lead investigator during the time leading up to the grand jury hearing. A motion requesting an evidentiary hearing regarding the initial allegation was denied by the trial judge. The judge denied the evidentiary hearing request but did not rule on the merits of the allegations, Fox 7 reported.

“As the Board will no doubt learn, the lead detective in this case was forbidden by the Travis County District Attorney from mentioning a great deal of exculpatory evidence to the grand jury which considered the case in the first instance,” the attorneys wrote. While acknowledging the DA is not required to present exculpatory evidence to the grand jury, the defense team added, “there is a very clear legal distinction between choosing not to present exculpatory information to a grand jury and tampering with the testimony of a grand jury witness by shaping that witness’s testimony as to what that witness is allowed to say under fear of reprisals.”

“In fact, when the decorated detective later explained in an affidavit that he believed the Travis County District Attorney tampered with his grand jury testimony, the District Attorney did retaliate by putting the detective on a Brady list which ultimately caused him to resign after almost 30 years of exemplary service at the Austin Police Department,” the attorneys continued.

A Brady list is compiled by prosecutors or police departments and contains a list of law enforcement officers who “have sustained incidents of untruthfulness, criminal convictions, candor issues, or some other type of issue placing their credibility into question,” according to a presentation published by the International Association of Chiefs of Police.

“Being placed on a Brady list is the kiss of death to a homicide detective’s career,” Breitbart Texas legal analyst Lana Shadwick said. “The detective can no longer serve as a homicide detective because they would not be able to testify in court about the evidence they gathered during the investigation.”

In August 2021, Detective Fugitt filed an affidavit (attached below) detailing the allegations against District Attorney Garza. In that sworn affidavit, Fugitt stated:

I firmly believe the District Attorney’s. Office, acting under the authority of Jose P. Garza, tampered with me as a witness. Often witness tampering is subtle. In this case, there were foreseeable consequences if I did not comply and tailor my grand jury presentation as directed and failure to do so would adversely affect my working relationship with the District Attorney’s Office for the foreseeable future. I was afforded no choice but to comply with the directives that were issued to me by Jose Garza through his assistants.

I am familiar with the crime of witness tampering as set out in the Texas Penal Code and under the circumstances believe myself to be a victim of such tampering.

During the trial which concluded on April 7, Detective Fugitt testified as a witness for the defense.

The letter from the attorneys to the Board of Pardons and Paroles also contains the defense motion filed this week that alleges multiple incidents of juror misconduct. In one of those incidents, a juror brought in outside research he conducted away from the jury room, Breitbart Texas reported.  The juror then allegedly used that research and his interpretation of that research to shape his own opinion in the case and to influence other jurors.

Houston criminal defense attorney and legal analyst Carmen Roe told Breitbart Texas after examining the motion, “Assuming the truthfulness of this juror’s sworn testimony, there is no question that an ‘outside influence’ occurred.”

“If a juror performed legal research and instructed the other jurors on the burden of proof that was inconsistent with the Court’s specific instructions, then there can be little doubt that this amounted to an improper ‘outside influence’ that reasonably impacted the jury’s verdict on a critical issue in a murder trial – defendant’s self-defense claim,” Roe concluded.

Following the jury’s return last week of a guilty verdict, Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton sharply criticized Travis County District Attorney José Garza who he described as a “Soros-backed” prosecutor, Breitbart Texas reported.