Pages

Sunday, April 24, 2011

Procession to a killing


Events over the years leading up to that deadly November weekend in San Marcos are viewed by many as the culmination of a long procession that was bound to end with someone being killed. In Hays County corrupt officials protect each other – and justice isn’t blind


Note: This is not fiction, folks. O'Dell has spent countless hours painstakingly researching the public record. He has crossed his t's and dotted his i's, as is the trademark of all of his reporting. Sometimes we think there is enough fodder in behind-the-scenes political shenanigans in Hays County to fill a three-volume crime and corruption mystery novel. All the more reason for the need for public watchdogs in our ranks. Feel free to contact O'Dell for more background and his information sources.

Send your comments and news tips to roundup.editor@gmail.com, to Mr. O'Dell at codell@austin.rr.com or click on the "comments" at the bottom of the story

By Charles O'Dell
Contributing Editor

In Hays County corrupt officials protect each other. When one gets caught others quickly and smoothly do their own internal investigation to address the problem and appear as if they are serving justice and the public.

It’s like asking an alligator to investigate any problems with missing people in the swamp. If you’re politically protected in Hays County you can get away with murder.


It was only a matter of time until protection of corrupt officials in Hays County led to someone getting killed.


It almost happened on September 5, 2008, when Nick Ramus, who lives next door to the San Marcos High School and was Will Conley’s candidate for Hays County Precinct 1 commissioner, pointed his shotgun (illegally loaded with five shells and a slug in the chamber) at Carolyn Logan, but fortunately thought better about pulling the trigger. Judge Linda Rodriquez found Ramus guilty of deadly conduct on April 27, 2010. Ramus is currently into his second attorney as he plays his typical delay game with the criminal appeals court. Logan still fears for her personal safety.


Ramus’ deadly conduct conviction is a side story. The larger Ramus story includes Hays County officials who allowed Ramus to break the law, then covered up for him, and together with Ramus became protected players in a broader scheme of corruption that some believe has resulted in the killing of a 19 year old who was at the wrong place, at the wrong time, and in unexplained circumstances.


A Brief History of Corruption and Official Protection

In March of 2005, when Tom Pope, Hays County Environmental Health Department OSSF Program Manager, was accused of violating state and county permitting laws he responded, “I’m the one who decides if and when I enforce the OSSF laws.”


After years of violating public health and safety laws rather then enforcing them, Pope issued Nick Ramus a permit on September 1, 2006, to operate his non-compliant oversize commercial septic system that Pope knew to be unlawful, and which still remains inoperable today, with the alarms turned off. Ramus only uses his illegal system to dispose of residential sewage. Protecting Ramus, Tom Pope, Conley and Barton, the Environmental Health Department and Hays County District Attorney Sherri Tibbe remain blind to the inoperable system and the Ramus property’s public nuisance condition.


In January 2007, Tibbe refused to investigate documented allegations of longstanding misconduct by Pope and others in the Environmental Health Department. Tibbe also refused to prosecute Ramus for being a public nuisance despite ample evidence and two previous convictions of his being a public nuisance. Just as Hays County Commissioners Will Conley, Debbie Ingalsbe and Jeff Barton did, Pope and Ramus came under Tibbe’s protection.


When commissioners’ court revoked the Ramus permit on April 17, 2007, commissioners Jeff Barton and Will Conley acted to protect Tom Pope by encouraging Ramus to sue Hays County. “We protect our staff,” said Conley. Barton and Conley also had hopes of using a Ramus lawsuit to force County Judge Liz Sumter out of office. Their dirty tricks almost succeeded.


Three months after having his permit revoked, Ramus sued Hays County as he had been encouraged to do by Barton and Conley, and in early 2008, was granted a partial summary judgment by visiting judge Robert Pfeuffer from New Braunfels. Carolyn Logan, who had her civil and property rights violated by Ramus with official approval, and who would become a target of deadly conduct by Ramus, filed as an intervener in the Ramus suit to protect her livestock and her land. Her intervention also foiled the Barton/Conley plan to engineer a large settlement with Ramus at taxpayer expense and blame Judge Sumter. As Logan put it, “My civil and property rights have been violated with help from public officials and no one should be rewarded for breaking the law. Ignorance of the law is no excuse and Ramus and his California partners knew that laws were blatantly being violated with Tom Pope’s blessing.”


The tide of fortune changed in the three years that followed.


Barton was defeated in his 2010 bid for county judge; Ramus and his attorney, Skip Newsom of Dripping Springs, let Judge Pfeuffer’s judgment languish for so long without taking any action (three and a half years) that Judge Pfeuffer recently declared his intent to dismiss the Ramus suit for want of prosecution; and Tom Pope continued to bask in the protection of Commissioner Conley and District Attorney Sherri Tibbe.


A San Marcos Weekend Turns Deadly


Early on the Saturday morning of November 13, 2010, Julie Parsons, Tom Pope’s first wife, made a 911 call to the San Marcos Police Department at 4:55:25am and reported a “break-in” and fondling of her 18 year old daughter, Emma Pope. Parsons told the 911 operator, “They took her cell phone and they were in a bedroom and there is porn on the computer.” “Oh my god,” Parsons is heard to exclaim.


Parsons then called Tom Pope, who had just moved back into the home of his second wife, Michelle Pope, from whom Tom had been divorced just three weeks earlier. Police officers arrived at the Parsons residence twenty minutes after the 911 call was made. They found no evidence of forced entry and nothing was missing from the home. Emma’s cell phone had been lying beside the laptop. Emma and a girlfriend had arrived home at 2:30am and the two of them went to bed without waking Parsons (Emma’s mother). The girlfriend who Emma had said, “slept right next to me,” reported sleeping while the intruder was in the house and Emma said she couldn’t identify the intruder. Yet, Police Incident Report No. 84912, dated 11/13/2010, indicates burglary of habitation and identifies Elijah Espinoza as Offender # 001, despite nothing reported missing from the home and no identification or physical evidence linking Espinoza.

Tom Pope arrived at the Parsons house that same morning and spoke with officers investigating the reported break-in. One of those conversations appears to have given Pope an idea for the deadly plan he put into play that night.

Pope would later tell Officer Duwayne Poorboy when he was investigating Pope for shooting and killing 19 year old Elijah Espinoza, that a female officer had told him the day before, “It’s pretty hard to catch people like this. One of the best ways is for homeowners to shoot them.” Pope would tell a detective that, “It’s frustrating when you see your kid get hurt and you weren’t there to do anything about it and you feel like – I was going to do something about it if I could.” Early Sunday morning, November 14, 2011, another 911 call was made from the Parsons house, this time by a distraught older daughter, Ava Pope, visiting from college and reporting that, “My father shot and killed a young man in their yard.”

Judge, Jury and Executioner

Pope told the police that he rode his scooter over to the Parsons house on Saturday and parked it in the garage. “I didn’t drive my car over to the house. I didn’t want anyone to know I was at the house,” Pope said. Detective Dan Royston asks, “When you say anyone, do you mean the neighbors or anyone?” Pope answered, “I mean molesters, potential intruders.” When Royston asked if Pope had any previous involvement with the police, he responded, “We do a lot of shooting at my brother’s place east of Sequin and the neighbor across the street is a police officer for San Antonio. He never complains but a new neighbor complained one night when we were shooting at 2am.” “I’m pretty practiced with guns – shotguns, pistols,” said Pope. “We have this old refrigerator and would blast away at it.” “I got a ticket for trespassing when I was in college,” Pope added.

Pope went on to describe how he made preparations for what he expected to happen. After Emma and Ava came home about 1:45am Sunday morning, “We sat around and talked till about 2am, then went to bed. Ava went to sleep on the couch. I turned out all the lights and milled around the house,” Pope told the investigator. “I had the revolver in my pocket,” a 38 caliber Smith & Wesson. Pope said that he also had a loaded 44 magnum pistol in the pantry and had brought a loaded shotgun with him that he placed under the sofa on which Ava had fallen asleep that night. “About 2:30 or 2:40, I walked outside to see over the fence. We sort of suspected that maybe the neighbors – there’s like three or four college kids, boys that moved in and one of them had left a note on one of my daughter’s friends car telling her she’s cute or something like that. I went back in the house and turned off all the lights. I suspected the guy was coming back.” “Do you have any idea why this guy would have picked Julies’ house,” Detective Royston asked Pope? “Well, he had 30 friends in common on Facebook with Emma,” Pope replied. “He probably saw pictures of her, you know, on his common friends,” Pope said.

Pope told Royston that he considered his father/daughter relationship to be “average.” His daughter was, “Not really dating anyone but pretty interested in a guy who plays for the University of Texas football team. She’s always got boys interested in her.” “Any boys that you don’t approve of,” asked Royston. “I told her college football players are not necessarily the best to get involved with. She tells me to, fuck off when I say that,” Pope said. “Is he black, white, Hispanic,” asked Royston? “Black” said Pope. Emma would tell investigators after the shooting that, “A black guy had sent flowers to my house on my birthday and he rides a bike to the gym. Creepy guys are everywhere I go.”

Premeditated Execution

“I turned off all the lights. I suspected the guy would come back. I walked around. I was watching the back door a lot.” Here’s Pope’s chilling description of the killing. “He came around the back yard. I watched him and he knew exactly what he was doing and where he was. He made a beeline for that back door. He wasn’t trying to be careful at all, you know, you know. He wasn’t snooping at all. He was in a hurry (long pause) – yeah.” “I saw him moving real fast toward the back door and he had his hand about to open the door. That’s why I opened fire on him – all five shots. Then I opened the door and he turned around and ran and I went after him. I tried to shoot again but the gun was empty. And I followed him out and he fell down out front. I looked at him, shined my flashlight at him and ran back into the house. We called 911. I grabbed the phone but was shaking too much to call. Then after we called I went back out to see how he was doing and he was struggling to breath. I figured he was close to death and I came back in and the police showed up. That’s about it.”

The autopsy showed gunshot wounds near the neck, in the chest, in one arm and in the middle of his back. Tom Pope, who had laid in wait in the darkness, shot five times though the back door window, opened the door and ran after the unarmed mortally wounded boy and tried to shoot him in the back, claimed to police that he “feared for his life.” “What was I supposed to do?” Pope asked as Ava spoke with the 911 operator.

One option clearly would have been to lock the back door, call 911 and let the police do their job. Instead, Pope acted out his “frustrations,” and, “did something about it if I could.” What if the young man was a friend of Emma’s or her girlfriend, Bertie Schneider, who had slept next to Emma on Saturday morning? Espinoza’s cousins, Sarah Garcia and Eliyona Cuevas were good friends of Bertie. What if Espinoza had been invited to the house and was about to knock on the door? No one knows or is saying.

More Official Protection


On November 14, 2010, Tom Pope shot and killed a 19 year old after lying in wait with three strategically located guns. “What was I supposed to do?” Pope had said. Tibbe took the evidence before a grand jury and obtained a “no-bill” (no indictment) of Pope. In their investigation of the killing, San Marcos police rushed to judgment and gave misinformation to the media that defamed the dead boy and prejudiced the public (potential grand jury members). By all appearances they protected Tom Pope. Pope asked Officer Poorboy, “Am I going to get into trouble? Poorboy, “Not in my report.” “I guess either way is fine with me if they take it to the grand jury because that just covers all the bases,” Pope told another investigator.

In his final interview with police on Monday, November 15th, Detective Royston asked Pope, “How are you doing?” Pope replied, “Not everyone gets thrown into state school. Makes me feel better,” referring to the fact that Espinoza had spent time at the Crockett State School, a facility of the Texas Youth Commission. Pope didn’t know this when he ambushed Espinoza at the unlocked back door. It’s safe to assume that Hays County District Attorney Sherri Tibbe did not seek an indictment of Pope for planning to shoot and kill without any warning an unarmed 19 year old young man who arrived on a bicycle and approached the house as if invited. Pope didn’t even lock the back door against an “intruder” of which Pope claimed to police that he, “feared for his life.” Tibbe protected Tom Pope again just as she has done since taking office in January 2007.

Blaming Others

Then, as if to distance himself from the Ramus deadly conduct conviction, justify his own deadly action the night before, and paint himself as a public official victimized for doing his job, Pope launched into a revealing diatribe. “I’ve been involved in my job in the last four years with a big controversy,” Pope told Detective Royston. “I don’t know if you’ve heard about it on Old Bastrop Road. This Ramus guy who got charged with pointing a shotgun at his neighbor. This lady who harasses him, Carolyn Logan, lives next door to him and she’s associated with Charles O’Dell who’s this guy that calls himself a public ah, oh ah, that guy that ah, what do you call guys that are always doing open record requests on everybody?

"He does them to us just to harass us you know, but---anyway, they’re both corrupt people and they’re both, I think our county judge is corrupt too and they have influence over Judge Sumter our county judge who fortunately got voted out.” Pope suddenly asks, “Is the tape recorder on?” Royston indicates that it is. “Oh well,” Pope continues, “Anyway, this Charles O’Dell guy, he’s – he went to Sherri Tibbe about three years ago and accused me of all kinds of stuff. Taking bribes, and drug payments and all kinds of crap and this guy out there he doesn’t like on Old Bastrop Road. So you know - she pretty much – he had three pages of accusations – luckily Sherri Tibbe knew it was bull crap.” “Anyway, my name was thrown around a lot on Newstreamz website here a few years ago, or a couple of years ago on Newstreamz that just came out. I guess you’ve read that. I know some of the guys at Newstreamz but I just don’t want my name or you know, I just don’t think it’s a good idea for me to put my opinion in whatever,” Pope concluded.

Precession to a Killing


Events over the years leading up to that deadly November weekend in San Marcos are viewed by many as the culmination of a long procession that was bound to end with someone being killed. Pope felt that he was protected against any consequences, just as he has been protected in the Ramus fiasco and other violations of the laws Pope had sworn to uphold. In Hays County corrupt officials protect each other – and justice isn’t blind.

52 comments:

Peter Stern said...

Does Ms. Logan have a court order of protection against her neighbor Mr. Ramus?

Barbara said...

The Ramus affair will be considered on April 26 in Commissioners Court in Executive
Session (Item 22). The Court may possibly report in open court after
Executive Session.

Anonymous said...

Seriously O’Dell, do you really think anybody but you cares about this crap? This blog is beginning to look like the National Inquirer of Hays County. Why don’t you write about what your buddy Obama is doing to this country rather than this unimportant tripe? I don’t care, get it?

No justice, no peace said...

What this procession of events shows is premeditated murder by a man who could easily be in your back yard tomorrow inspecting your or your neighbor's septic system.

Do you want Tom Pope on your property?

Anonymous said...

I would rather Tom Pope be on my property then the sketchy burglar hoodlum.

Not trusting Hays County to do the right thing said...

Tom Pope's daughters should be telling the police what really happened and they will, eventually.

Those girls know what went on that night and of all people, they must feel the most awkward about it.

Tom Pope, apparently, has neither a conscience nor a soul. He lay in wait to murder somebody that night and that is exactly what he did.

The truth will out. Someday.

confused said...

Anonymous to Dr. O'Dell:

"Why don’t you write about what your buddy Obama is doing to this country rather than this unimportant tripe?"

I thought I read in the blog comments last year that Dr. O'Dell was a Republican.

Will you O'Dell bashers get your stories straight?

Rob Roark said...

Thank you for going the distance, and requesting the transcripts through freedom of information. No other journalism outlet in the county has chosen to do this, and so I fail to see where "Anonymous"'s comment applies. Facts do not appear to be made up here, and Pope tied in the Ramus deal with this on his own over the open microphone.

So, if these same transcripts were made available to our District Attorney, why was she unable to get this past a grand jury? Incompetence, or just a partial effort?
I am a strong believer in the "Castle Law" in protection of private property, but with an unarmed young man being shot by someone who admits to lying in wait, I fail to see how this can be strongly pushed in this case. Who is out there fighting for the truth to come out? It's no wonder people have no faith in our county court systems when it comes to defending our rights as citizens. The only recourse ends up being to go to civil lawsuits that end up costing our county and municipalities more in the long run.

(Anonymous, I have no problem - or fear - of using my real name. I really could care less about what Obama is doing to the country at the federal level, or what Charles writes about that. If our Liberties are being taken away by the inactions of our elected District Attorney to start pushing for protection of those in this county who may not be in the establishment, or may not have unblemished records, then we have lost the battle right here in our own backyard. Time for you to get a spine, use your name, and accept that each of us chooses a different path to get involved.)

Anonymous said...

i believe the NOTE dialogue has a mistake in it. It looks to me like charlie is dot-ing his t's and crossing his eyes

Anonymous said...

this is what happens when elected officials protect the likes of Ramus and Pope... they think they can do ANYthing and get away with it. so far they're doing pretty good with it.

Hays County is a more dangerous place for everybody until Ramus, Pope and those who conspire to protect them are off the streets.

this isn't a right-left discussion either. its either for official abuse and corruption, or against.

Anonymous said...

Mr. Tom Pope is harmless.

Harmless Mr.Tom Pope can come to my house any time he wants for official business. He can come armed if he likes because he is harmless.

Harmless Mr. Tom Pope can come to my house any time, day or night, for any reason as long as he comes to the front door and knocks and identifies himself. He can come armed if he wants because he is harmless.

If harmless Mr. Tom Pope walks, rides a bike, skateboards, or rides a jackass to my house after dark, approaches my back door, does not knock or otherwise identify himself, he will be shot. I wont wait to see if it is harmless Mr. Tom Pope or if he is armed because I dont care who it is or if they are armed. I will automatically know that they are up to no good and will assume that they are armed. You see, I am Mr. Harmless also---until actions of others reach a certain point.

I think harmless Mr. Tom Pope would expect this behaior of me.

Truth said...

A couple of the comments re: Charles's article just goes to show how endemic corruption and apathy to that corruption is in our society. We are so jaded to Wall Street, Washington DC, state and local corruption that we have become an immoral dysfunctional society.

This is why the rich and the famous are above the law and our country is in economic decline. It used to be the Republican Party was the moral party. Now they are worse than the Democrats for ignorance and corruption - although the Democrats are doing their best to hold their own.

Thanks, Charles, for at least making the effort.

Charles O'Dell said...

"I am Mr. Harmless..."

and who, "...does not...otherwise identify himself, he will be shot."

You just approached this blog without identifying yourself.

Why should readers believe you when you claim to be harmless?

Pope's actions are a matter of public record, and we don't even know who you are.

Which should we believe...the public record or an Anonymous who claims to be "Mr. Harmless?"

You ask too much.

Anonymous said...

The Author of the article claims that a shotgun was "...(illegally loaded with five shells and a slug in the chamber)..." To my knowledge, the actor waws not hunting migratory game birds. Therefore, it is not illegal to remove a plug from a shotgun and load as many rounds as possible into the gun when using that firearm for home or self defense. Due to the inaccurate claim that the actor "...illegally loaded..." his gun, I stopped reading the article, since the tremendous amount of "fact checking" the Author is noted for, seems somewhat lacking. I don't know any of the issues relative to the prior actions of the targets of the article, but when someone writes an article with false statements claiming a properly loaded shotgun is "...illegal" it makes one lose interest in the story.

Anonymous said...

Thanks Charles for more of your lies and half truths. The only premeditation here was by the would be rapist who thought he might give it another go on the second night. What's any normal dad going to do on the night following a home invasion and attempted rape of his daughter? I guess sit on your Duff with your finger up your a++ ,,,, Thats what the (dis) honorable Sir Charles would do!

Anonymous said...

It is a fact that the people that know the least about guns are the ones that oppose gun rights. The term “Illegally loaded Shotgun” exposes O’Dell and his 2nd Amendment foes. They just “know” guns are bad. The previous Anonymous that explained the difference between hunting rules and the lack of laws or regulations regarding home defense shotguns said it best.

I use a 12 gauge pump shotgun for home protection, loaded with 7 alternate slugs and 00 buckshot loads. That is a perfectly legal gun and loading for that purpose and the safest weapon for home defense. Anyone on my property or banging on my door at 2:00 AM is not considered harmless as one individual found out recently.

Anonymous said...

Sensationalist journalism at its finest. National Enquirer has nothing on you Odell...

Charles O'Dell said...

“To my knowledge…”

Where did you get your “knowledge” of the situation about which you comment? Did you read the news articles that quoted one of many Ramus stories? Was it the Ramus story that the “gun wasn’t loaded,” or the one where he, “was going dove hunting (without a license), or the one to a Statesman reporter that he went out there and, “intended to shoot Logan?”

Clearly, you were biased before you began reading the article! Why not purchase a trial transcript and get your “knowledge” from official facts.

Is your, “home or self defense” now the cure-all for shooting anyone, anytime? Neither of these were issues in the Ramus deadly conduct trial.

Ramus made so many claims concerning his deadly conduct incident that you could throw a nickel from the sky and it would fall down and hit one of his stories.

Spin, lies and rumor have been rampant in the Ramus deadly conduct trial and conviction. Seems you can’t stop attempting that old official Ramus protector’s strategy.

The Ramus and Pope cases have nothing to do with gun rights. That’s just a red herring to divert the discussion away from the deadly conduct of these two men.

Good luck hunting.

Charles O'Dell said...

"Thanks Charles for more of your lies and half truths."

Can you be specific so someone can sue me for defamation or libel?

Anything inaccurate quotes you spotted?

Thanks for your help.

Charles O'Dell said...

"Sensationalist journalism at its finest."

You know what's really sad?

This is all true.

Read James Stewart's Tangled Webs.

"The broad public commitment to telling the truth under oath has been breaking down."

Anonymous said...

Mr O'Dell,

I think your anonymous posters realize that you have some sort of vendetta against public officials, hence the reason for hiding their identity. Who will be the next victim of O'Dell's blogs?? Your goal appears to be to get people fired under the assumption that they are corrupt. You've so twisted this reporting to suit your aim of showing how corrupt local government is and have totally missed the opportunity to step back and think that maybe this Mr. Pope actually was just defending his children. It sounds as though you have your mind made up to destroy the Hays County goverment one employee at a time. Does this come from a wrong that was done to you at some point in the past and that your unforgivingness will eventually make you happy through revenge? Hmmm, at first blush, I think this will just encourage you to drag more government employees down the drain. And what happens when you are slighted by the next Walmart cashier? Class action suit, anyone?

Well, you do have your following and I think that your main goal here is attention, so....mission accomplished. Good luck in taking down Hays County! Kudos for your lackluster reporting and skewed evidence. Hmmm, I notice you dind't include a copy of the police report, just your version.

Oh well.

Signed,

Anonymous...and for good reason.

Anonymous said...

Oh, Charles:

You fail to leave out Mr. Pope's real crime. His real crime was not finding in favor of your lady, Ms. Logan. Oh how it seems that you are so motivated to avenge him for crossing Ms. Logan. In fact, you even tie the two events together in your article.

Could it be that you and Ms. Logan have something to hide? A secret romance? Inquiring minds want to know....

Anonymous said...

"Passivity in response to injustice is no virtue and, Controversy in defense of truth is no vice."

Angry Dad said...

How about this. Why don't Dr. Do-Gooder PUBLISH the records of the interview between the police and Mr. Pope? I see twice where Dr. Do-Gooder says "Pope feared for his life...". That is taken out of context, if it's even in the report. Notice he is going verbatim from a report at one point, but never says or shows where in the body of the report that Mr. Pope was "fear (-ful) for his life"? I say typical O'Dell BS. "Dotting his i's and crossing his t's" - come on Ochoa, this is just about as crappy a piece of real journalism as I have ever read. Amateurish at best, and slanderous and salacious at worst.

Also, Dr. Do-Gooder says that this "unarmed young man" shows up as if he has been invited...riding a bicycle at two in the morning, and coming to the "back door"? Who in the HELL do you know that is invited over at TWO in the MORNING, and comes to the BACK DOOR? Unless they are up to no f*cking good. The State of Texas has a law that if someone trespasses or enters your house with intent to harm, you can blast their ass...it would appear that this was the case with the "unarmed young man" who in my reading of the testimony that Dr. Do-Gooder quotes from (and doesn't offer any rebuttal too saying it is incorrect)appeared to be up to no good, and got his ass shot for his trouble. Did Pope know he was coming? Not certainly, but suspected. If dipshit hadn't of come back to the scene of the alleged crime the night before for more "goody" than he wouldn't have gotten blasted by the concerned dad. Put yourself in Pope's shoes, a teenage daughter allegedly molested the night before, or had a concern of being followed by "creeps", and then the dutiful dad comes over to protect his daughter, and then dipshit comes showing up at TWO IN THE MORNING GOING TO THE BACK DOOR - what the hell do you think he's going to? Blast his ass to kingdom come! Any redblooded dad who loves his daughter would do the same!

Lock the door and call the police? How stupid! If the guy HAD been armed, do you think for a minute that he would have hesitated to break in to wait for the police to arrive? Or would he not with the intent to commit harm, have committed the harm he apparently was there to cause, and then run BEFORE the police arrive?

Jeez, I used to think that Charles was just stupid, but now I think he is maliciously stupid. Not one ounce of freaking common-sense.

I am calling on Ochoa demand that Charles documents and provides the documents that he claims to have, and to own up to the bullshit allegations that he makes with his mythical string of "protections" - how do you dot the i's and cross the t's on speculation like this? You can't! So put up your sources or shut up and get the hell out of the journalism business.

Charles O'Dell said...

Angry Dad,

I'll be happy to burn you a copy of the 29 CDs and DVDs produced in response to our open records request. Just email me your name and address.

I'll even give you the index we created of what's on the CDs and DVDs so you don't have to go through many hours of listening and re-listening, viewing and re-viewing, and transcribing pages of interviews with Pope and others quoted.

In the meantime, check out this link for another source of the "feared for his life" quote:

http://www.myfoxaustin.com/dpp/news/local/castle-doctrine-defense-used-in-san-marcos-intruder-shooting-11152010-ktbcw

jwigginsburns said...

To Angry Dad-I don't know about stupid. In fact, I believe Charles O'Dell is a pretty smart guy. However, malicious is certainly an accurate description.

Anonymous said...

OK, Dr. Not Do Gooder:
Now that you consider yourself an expert crime analyst...Even better than a whole police department: Why don't you mention the fact that the "boy" who was shot had in the weeks prior, been released from a state correctional facility, where he had spent years being punished for similar crimes? Oh but that wouldn't be relevant to your cause would it?
Oh and for anyone wanting a copy of the investigation,,go to the police dept, rather than obtain the Dr's edited copies, he does have a record of just reporting his favorite half of the story.

Charles O'Dell said...

"Oh and for anyone wanting a copy of the investigation,,go to the police dept"

Good idea.

Anonymous said...

The thing I admire most about Charles O'Dell is that he knows when he publishes a piece like this, that all sorts of anonymous nitwits will attack him from every possible angle, and he publishes it anyway.

Why? Because these anonymous nitwits don't matter.

NOBODY will defend Pope or Ramus with their name attached to it, except for... Jeff Barton, Will Conley and their owners (Kinneys, Jim Green, etc) and their minions (Lila, etc).

EVERYBODY knows Ramus is three times convicted in Hays County - once for Deadly Conduct, twice for Public Nuisance - as well as found guilty of ethic violations in his Conley/Kinney/Green supported race for Commissioner.

EVERYBODY knows that Pope seriously abused his power at environmental health department, and fraudulently approved Ramus' illegal septic.

EVERYBODY knows that Conley and Barton covered for Pope and took Ramus under their wing in order to try to oust Liz Sumter.

Nitwits everywhere... making every accusation.

Thank you to Charles O'Dell.

Anonymous said...

Let me get this straight. Ramus was protected by the politicians of Hays County. We know this because he sued them to get his septic system, and they prosecuted him for the gun incident. Pope then knew because of Ramus' conviction that he had a license to kill at his discretion. Makes perfect sense to me.

Sam Brannon said...

The story was bound to come out sooner or later. Thank you, Charles O'Dell.

I didn't believe the original news stories as they were reported in the media. They just didn't add up.

I'd say if anyone is honestly concerned about whether Mr. O'Dell is telling the story accurately, take him up on his offer to view the CDs with the documentation.

I'll bet the grand jury didn't hear any of this, and that's a damn shame.

Anonymous said...

I am the mother of Emma Pope. If you could have seen the look of pure terror and fear on her face and in her body that first night and today in her heart and soul you would KNOW that the intruder was not invited. And I would defend Tom Pope any day. He is as good as they get.. And really...no one was more surprised than us when the intruder showed up the second night. The police assured us he wouldn't. Mr. Odell please drop this for Emma's sake. I am begging.

Anonymous said...

Well said, Mom.
Let's respect this ladys request.

Anonymous said...

No Sam Brannon: The grand jury was privy to more than what Charles O'Dell saw and so kindly mis-interpreted for us. That's why they made the just and lawful opinion.

Reality Check said...

My take on the Pope events are not at all like the sentiments expressed by many of the goobers above. I don't see the "white macho redneck father being a hero who is protecting his helpless cheerleader daughter from the big bad mexican criminal just out of Guantanamo from his latest bout as a serial abuser rapist" interpretation of events.

My take is this:

Pope's daughter, who is emotionally vulnerable because of her angry and above the law redneck father and in need of love from any man who shows her attention, wanted to be a littel edgy - not unlike all teenagers her age - so she gets to know this tough guy vato who uses his street skills to get her interest.

So the daughter invites him over to her house - again - after the girl's mother gets all pissed off that some low class minority is trying to do her daughter. So the estranged racist wife tells Pope who knows he is protected by his white Republican mates if he gets all vigilante like. So he waits and sets a trap and shoots the kid in the back like a coward to finish him off.

Pope calls the cops who already know him and were aware of the previous complaint. So they decide to minimize the murder investigation because what's another dead mexican with a criminal record anyway.

Pope gets sympathy from his county friends and poltical connections who all want to live in the same
gated community for mostly white people anyway - so they all get and let Pope off with a warning.

Now, I don't know if those are how the events unfolded ezactly but I know corruption and white redneck collusion when I see it; and that is what is happening here.

All you racist gun nuts can pretend this is all some liberal conspiracy - but frankly your white supremacy gun nut interpretation of these events is pure Tea Party fantasy and full of racist holes.

Anonymous said...

O'Dell, Brannon, Logan
Do they all live together now?
Beam me up, Scotty

Anonymous said...

Gentlemen (& I use the word loosely) The remarks made about Emma Pope in reality check's poorly worded comments are why women don't report sexual assaults as often as they should. It does not matter what happened in her life, who her parents are or who her friends are or were she was attacked and should be commended for reporting the attack to the Police and her father for defending her the following night. If the Grand Jury no billed him that is good enough for me.

Leave the poor woman alone. If you want to attack each other go right ahead.

Honor her Mother's request and leave Miss Pope out of your posts she has suffered enough without some insensitive person attacking her all over again.

I will not sign my name because I don't want reality check coming after me the way he did Miss Pope.

Reality check is the one making the racist remarks not the rest of the posters. So who is the redneck? I am confused!

Anonymous said...

“Reality Check” is a long time Troll and Flamer to this Blog. He first used the moniker, Ralph but now changes around to other labels that include the word “Truth” which has nothing to do with him, for sure. This is a very sick leftist or anarchist that is only on this Blog to cause trouble and now wants to inflict pain on anyone he perceives to be a “Goober”. He is always the one to first bring race into the discussion and slams, rednecks, white people, gun nuts, and so on.

His last post about the Pope family, which you can bet he has never met, is beyond the pale and shouldn’t have been allowed on this Blog. Haters are counterproductive to this forum and I hope the Editor will do a better job of eliminating their kind here.

Charles O'Dell said...

"I am the mother of Emma Pope."

For the record, Julie Parsons is the mother's name, NOT Anonymous---and this is the first post about the daughter.

Anonymous is not only trying to introduce a "sympathy card" to sway readers, but also is engaged in identity theft.

The anonymous nitwits are pulling out all stops.

Anonymous said...

Couple of quick responses to the liberal Charles O'Dell sycophants out there - could it be that Julie doesn't know or didn't know to put her name down? Maybe it's easier to just hit "Anonymous" - what a dipwad that would accuse someone of covering up or being anonymous otherwise.

Secondly, I'm probably the racist redneck who would shoot anybody - white, black, brown, green or purple who either sexually assaulted my daughter, or who said that they were going to sexually assault my daughter. Does that make me a redneck? I don't give a rat's ass if it does - that's your opinion and coming from the likes of those posting against me exercising my rights of protecting my home and family are just ignorant obscurantists who willfully ignore the second of the ten amendments that we like to call our "Bill of Rights". You (and I) have freedom to rant on this stupid blog about the matter; but to say that someone doesn't have the right to protect his family from criminals who have no good intent, regardless of race, is absolutely ignorant.

Charles O'Dell said...

"...who either sexually assaulted my daughter, or who said that they were going to sexually assault my daughter..."

The SMPD admits there is no evidence to show that Espinoza was at the Parsons' home on the Saturday morning when an intruder was reported. The 911 caller reported a break-in and stolen cell phone. SMPD found no evidence of a break-in or of anything stolen. The daughter reported waking up to the sound of her shirt being torn. There was no report of a sexual assault on the daughter or the girlfriend "sleeping next" to her. There was no screaming, fighting or hasty retreat of the intruder through the unlocked back door.

There is no evidence to show why Espinoza approached the (unlocked) back door approximately 30 minutes after Pope turned out the lights on Sunday morning.

Anyone is free to speculation and assume, but we reported the evidence as gathered by the SMPD.

Tom Pope admits he lay in wait and fired five shots through the back door window as Espinoza "reached" for the door handle. If the door had been locked, Espinoza would have had to knock, leave or attempt a break-in. If he had tried to break in then we would know why Pope unloaded his gun on the unarmed boy.

All the anonymous speculation, assumptions and misinformation are what they are.

The RoundUp report sticks to the same evidence the SMPD collected and DA Sherri Tibbe had for the grand jury. Only the grand jury members know what she presented to them.

RoundUp readers know what the SMPD evidence is. All the rest is Anonymous nitwits trying to change the subject and to discredit the messenger.

Readers can make up their own minds about what the evidence shows---and doesn't show.

Truth (not Reality Check) said...

The last O'Dell summary - if true and if based on what was public record - pretty much sums it up:

Regardless of the details and the hostile and very extreme paranoid comments herein, Pope clearly acted with the intent to assassinate the boy - and did so without looking at other options.

And the fact that he got away with it indicates a cover-up.

No justice, no peace said...

That dead boy did nothing but touch a doorknob.

Is that a capital offense in Hays County?

Apparently.

Anonymous said...

It is if it's my dorknob at 2:00am and he is coming for my daughter. Ever hear of the Castle Doctrine?

Anonymous said...

Come on Odell. Tell the truth! The police did have evidence that your "boy" was the same that broke into the house the night before. Just kidding, I wouldn't expect you to report the other half of the story.

No justice, no peace said...

If the police had evidence that the boy had broken into their house the night before, then why didn't they arrest him?

Anonymous said...

The Castle Doctrine is meaningless in this case since none of the conditions that justify the use of force were documented by LAW ENFORCEMENT.

Just another excuse for justifying good ol boy vigilantism.

Anonymous said...

All good 2nd Amendment supporters - and I am one - should be coming down hard on both Pope and Ramus.

If we try to wrap the 2nd Amendment around such bad behavior, we weaken our own position, and strengthen the argument for more regulation, and maybe even bans.

Pope should be aggressively prosecuted for his killing of that boy. Ramus' is walking free while during his extended appeal process. If we 2nd Amendment supporters stand for this, we lose.

Anonymous said...

This is yet another sickening attempt by Charles O'Dell to drag someone's name in the mud. We've seen it happen time and time again.

Charles, you ought to be ashamed of yourself. The real victim here is Emma Pope. Let's give the girl some peace.

Charles O'Dell said...

"The real victim here..."

On what evidence do you base your opinion?

Have you examined the SMPD evidence?

I have---exhaustively, and what I report is supported by the evidence.

If it wasn't, I'd be up to my neck in slander and/or libel suits.

You post your unsupported opinion anonymously and expect others to be swayed?

Who would be so shallow?

Submit an open records request for the SMPD CD/DVDs of evidence, review them and then post a comment with substance.

And, "This is yet another sickening attempt to drag someone's name in the mud..."

"Someone's name?" Surely you are not referring to that convicted criminal, Nick Ramus, whose blog comments are
so easily recognized. Right?

Anonymous said...

Ha, isn't it funny that this article has to be preceded with "This is not fiction, folks" . Sorry, that does not mean a thing comming from Mr. O'Dell.

Anonymous said...

This is a perfect example where our second amendment rights are needed. rape a daughter once... Shame on me, try it the next nite
.... Shame on you!! This golden boy of Charles was apparently released from prison before rehab was completed.