The truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth. >> I swear. >> Thank you. >> Good morning. Is it Officer Simmons or >> Detective Simmons, but you can call me whatever you'd like. >> Detective Simmons. Um, it's April 17, 9:05 a.m. here for the deposition of Detective Simmons. Uh you were here uh during one of the earlier depositions uh of I believe officer Boggony. Correct. >> No sir, that was a different day. >> Okay. You were here for uh >> the plaintiff. >> The plaintiff's depositions, correct? And so you heard the uh the instructions from council about the way depositions go, right? >> Yes, sir. >> Okay. So, you're doing really good just answering affirmatively, correct? >> Yes. rather than nods, things like that. >> And then uh the court reporter can only transcribe one of us at a time. So we have to go a little bit slower than a normal conversation. >> Understood. >> All right. Great. Uh have you uh been deposed before? >> No. >> Okay. First time? >> Yes, sir. >> Okay. Have you ever uh been involved in any civil litigation? >> Yes, sir. >> Okay. Uh how many times? >> Just one other time other than this that I know of. >> Okay. And what was that circumstance? I was a chief of police for the Shepard Police Department, arrested a city council member and um uh they terminated my employment because of and then I sued the city on a whistleblower act and won. >> Okay. Uh so you were the plaintiff in a uh federal uh was federal claim. >> Correct. >> Okay. How long ago was that? >> Uh 2009 maybe eight nine. >> Okay. Okay. >> 2009. >> Do you know uh which jurisdiction it was in? >> Like was it Eastern District? >> No, sir. I don't. We never went to court, so they settled out. >> Okay, got it. So, there was never actual lawsuit filed. >> Uh, >> as far as you know. >> As far as I know. I don't >> Okay. How long have you been with the the Livingston uh Police Department? >> Since uh June of 2020. >> Okay. And the whole time you've been there, uh, was Chief Parish the chief of police? >> Yes, sir. >> Okay. Are you familiar with Texas Penal Code 38.02 regarding failure to identify? >> I am. >> Okay. Uh, what is your understanding of when a citizen is legally required to identify themselves to law enforcement in Texas? >> When they've been detained? >> When they've been detained. >> Arrest. >> Right. Detained for an offense. >> Okay. just detained. >> Correct. >> Okay. When's the last time you looked at Texas Penal Code 38.02? [sighs and snorts] >> I couldn't tell you. I look at various codes in different times. >> Okay. Have you uh have you arrested individuals before who had not identified themselves to you while you had them detained? >> Only one other time. >> Okay. What time? >> Only one time. I apologize. >> What time was that? uh gentleman was uh under an overpass uh burning. >> Okay. And you and and so did you uh arrest him specifically for failure to identify? >> No, I arrested him for the burning which would have been a citation and then for fail to ID. >> Okay. So the Okay. So you intended to cite him for the offense of the burning. So at that point, do do you understand that even when you're citing somebody, it's considered an arrest? >> Correct. >> Okay. And so you were not actually detaining that individual, you were arresting him when he refused to identify. >> Correct. >> Okay. So how about when you are just detaining somebody where you don't have probable cause to arrest, but you're just detaining them. >> Okay. >> Have you ever arrested anybody in that circumstance for [snorts] failing to identify? No, I've never had an incident like that. >> Okay. So then at the time of February 4, 2022 during that detention of the plaintiffs, uh you believed that the individuals in the vehicle were legally required to identify themselves. >> Correct. >> Okay. And what was the basis for that belief? >> Harassment. >> Okay. So was the basis um so you were detain detaining them for uh suspicion of harassment >> for probable cause of harassment. >> So you thought you had probable cause at the time? >> I I know I had it. >> Okay. You know you had it, but you didn't uh you didn't cite him for it, did you? >> No. >> You didn't arrest him for it? >> No. And uh it sounded like as well that uh and you never used the words uh to the plaintiffs during the stop harassment. >> Correct. >> And you only indicated that uh you were going to arrest the driver uh for failing to identify if he didn't give you an ID. >> Correct. >> Okay. So when did you form this basis uh that probable cause existed for harassment? Oh >> when they parked in front of the police department. >> Okay. So this was not a determination you made uh after February 4th. >> No. Goodness no. >> Okay. Does your police report uh indicate anything about your probable cause for harassment? >> Yes. >> All right. When did you draft that police report? >> Uh, was it the same day or was it another day? >> Honestly, I can't tell you. >> Okay. Uh, did you have any discussions with any other peace officers uh prior to or during the drafting of your police report? >> Objection form. >> Um, like as in while I'm writing it? >> Yeah. During uh prior to you drafting the incident report or even during the drafting of the incident report, did you have any discussions with any peace officer concerning the incident? >> Officer Reyes. >> Okay. Anyone [snorts] else? >> No. >> Okay. >> What do you understand the uh the elements of uh do you know what Texas Penal Code uh addresses harassment? as in the statute number. >> Yes. >> I couldn't tell you the statute number. No. >> Okay. Do you uh describe in your words what you understand uh the elements of harassment to be? for >> the element of harassment in the case of this would be um them making me them communicating to me that they were going to harm me and placing me in fear of bodily injury and or the other officers or persons in the police department that I believed that they were going to try to assault. >> Okay, I'll [snorts] get to that uh that in a second. Uh what did you do to prepare for today's deposition? Uh took a shower, put on a pose. >> Okay. Uh did you have discussions with anybody about the substance of anyone else's deposition testimony? >> No. Okay. >> Did you have any uh discussions yesterday, for example, with uh Middleton? >> No, sir. >> Or today? >> No, sir. >> Okay. How about uh Barker? >> Uh not about this. >> But you talked to Barker uh yesterday? >> Today. >> You talked to him today, correct? >> Okay. How do you communicate with him? uh in person. >> Okay. But it wasn't about uh the plaintiffs. >> No, no, no, no. >> Okay. >> So, uh you mentioned that the uh the plaintiffs uh communicated uh that they were going to harm you, >> correct? >> How what tell me uh what that communication was. >> So, uh by them following me around and then following me to the store, waiting for me to get out. The way they parked at the store, the way that they followed me out of the store, the way they followed me down the street, the way that they came back to the police department, the way that they uh got the body armor on and everything, and the way that they uh parked in front of the police department, that was all them communicating to me a threat. >> Okay. Uh so did they verbally communicate any kind of harm to you? >> No. >> Okay. But verbal communication is only a small percentage of communication. >> I'm going to object to nonresponsive. >> Okay. >> It's everything after no. >> So then uh you were not aware in February of 2022 that in Texas, citizens are only required to identify themselves if they've been lawfully arrested. >> Objection. You're saying I didn't know the law for IDing? Yes, I do. >> My question was, were you aware in February 2022, February 4th, 2022, >> that citizens are only required to identify themselves when they have been lawfully arrested? >> Objection form. >> I did know that. Yes. >> Okay. So, they didn't need to identify themselves if they were just being detained. Y >> objection form. >> That's not true either. Okay, that's not true based on uh your have you read here you have and you didn't cite just for clarification you never cited any uh plaintiffs in this case for failure to identify correct >> again no >> even though they never did identify themselves cor >> correct >> okay so the text of 38.02 02 of the Texas Penal Code states, "A person commits an offense if he intentionally refuses to give his name, resident's address, or date of birth to a peace officer who has lawfully arrested the person and requested the information." >> Okay. >> Okay. Did it say uh that doesn't say anything about if you lawfully detain them, does it? >> Objection form. >> No, it doesn't say that in there. >> Okay. Are you aware of a city ordinance that would require individuals to identify themselves if they were detained? >> Objection form. >> No, I don't I don't I don't know that we have one. >> Okay. Do you understand the uh the legal standards uh for being able to detain someone? >> Yes. >> Okay. What what what do you need in order to detain them? >> Reasonable suspicion. >> Okay. Uh describe in your own words uh reasonable suspicion. >> Uh more than mere suspicion and less than probable cause. >> Okay. Uh so does do hunches form the basis of reasonable suspicion? >> Of reasonable suspicion? >> Yes. >> Uh no. >> Okay. So you you do you agree then that you would need something more than like a gut feeling? >> Yes. >> Okay. Uh, and then in order to arrest somebody, what do you need? >> Probable cause. >> Okay. And what do you understand probable cause to be? >> Um, the articulable facts of me, a police officer, that uh a crime is occurring, did occur, or is about to occur. >> Okay. So what do you understand uh in your own words uh what do you understand would constitute uh the crime of harassment? >> I'm sorry. I thought I just told you that. The uh scaring of me by them communicating uh them placing me in fear of bodily injury or death by the communication of them following me around and the rest of their actions. >> Okay. And so you uh you were in a marked uh police vehicle, correct? >> Yes, I was. >> And you were uh you were on duty. >> I was. >> Okay. And so you uh and you as a police officer acknowledge that you're a government employee. >> Correct. >> All right. And at any point did you observe any of the plaintiffs uh violating any traffic laws? >> Uh no. >> Okay. And so I understand your perception of them being uh following you. Uh but other than the following, did you observe them uh make any threatening or obscene gestures to you? >> The whole thing uh is a totality. It was a threatening and obscene gesture to me. Yes. >> Okay. >> So the answer would be yes. >> But you never actually charged them with harassment, did you? >> No, I did not. >> Okay. >> [snorts] >> So, if you believe you have probable cause for harassment, why didn't you state that uh to the plaintiffs during the detention? >> Because I don't tell the everybody what I'm doing as a police officer. >> Why didn't you tell it to Reyes? >> Do I have to tell him? >> I I don't need to tell him. That's why I didn't tell him. Okay. You let the plaintiffs go after uh officer Reyes informed you that Brandon White was in the vehicle. Correct. >> Uh released him after I confirmed that that was Brandon White by Officer Reyes walking up and pointing him out to me. Yes. >> Okay. So, if you have probable cause for harassment, uh why would learning one passenger's identity uh in the stop? Because at that time I felt that they weren't there to uh kill us any longer and that they were there to uh just record us and and bait us into doing something that uh they could post on their YouTube channel. And uh I was so relieved at that fact that I let him go. >> Okay. So then would you uh would you state then that once you recognized uh that these individuals film police that you no longer had probable cause for harassment? >> Definitely not. I did still have the elements I could have made the arrest but as a peace officer we have the right not to make the arrest as well. Therefore I did not. >> Okay. So, um, if I understand your position correctly, uh, prior to you identifying, uh, Brandon White, you had no idea what these guys were doing, >> correct? Other than trying to kill me. >> Okay. Did trying to kill you. Okay. And and that's that's based on more than just a hunch that they were trying to kill you. >> That was based on my probable cause. Yes. >> Okay. What? Tell me specific articulable facts that existed on February 4th, 2022 that the plaintiffs were trying to kill you. >> Very good. [snorts] So, as they uh as I passed Walmart, they pulled out and got behind me. Um I changed lane, sped up. They did as well. I then went to a gas station to see if they were going to follow me in. They did. I went to drive around the gas station to see if they would follow me around the gas station and they began to follow me around the gas station. And then they stopped and when I drove around the gas station, I parked in front. I saw their vehicle backed into a parking spot so that they could easily get out and uh flee. And I sat and watched and nobody got out of the car. Then I walked in the store watching behind me the whole time because I believe that they're up to no good and uh get a drink, give them some time to uh come into the store. They never came into the store. I exited the store, went back out to my car. They're still seated in their car. I backed out of my parking spot. They pulled forward. I left through the parking lot. They drove through the parking lot following me. Right behind me. I turned out onto the road. They were right behind me. I turned right. They were right behind me. Following me. I drove into an empty parking lot where there was no traffic at the time because I believed that if I was going to get into a gun battle, I needed to make as much room as possible to not get anybody in the uh crossfire. They went straight. I watched them. They made a right on the feeder road. I left, went back to the PD. They I'm talking to officer Reyes in the uh patrol car. As they come driving by, and as they come driving by, I said, "Tito, that is the car that's following me." He backed out and followed the car and then called me and said, "Hey, they're at the corner down here. This guy's just put on body armor." And got back in the car. Roughly, as they were driving through, I apologize. As they drove through, I got their license plate and ran their license plate while the Tito was following them. And I got a return that it came back out of the radio. So, uh, now they're from, uh, a place where I know there to be, um, high narcotics and and, um, uh, cartel members and being a former narcotics agent, could this be somebody that's coming after me? And uh then when they parked, they came back around the block and parked in the second parking spot there facing the door to the to the PD, the back door to the PD where they had a clear um shot. And that's when I decided this has gone far enough. >> And at the time, uh they were parked in the bank. Well, let me back up. Did they ever follow you home? >> What do you mean home? >> Did they ever follow you home? Describe home. Did >> you have a residence, correct? >> Okay. >> That's on your driver's license. >> Well, some sometimes I consider work home. >> Are you registered to vote? >> I am. >> And did you register? Is your registration address the PD? >> No, but it could be. >> Okay. So, you have a home where there's a bed, right? >> Correct. >> Okay. Did they follow you home? >> No. >> Okay. Did they follow you in your personal vehicle? >> Um, I don't know. As far as you know, did they follow you in your personal vehicle? No. >> Did they ever follow you into any restricted area? >> Did they f No. >> Okay. And uh Okay. And so prior to you initiating a stop, did you have any information as to whether or not these guys were armed? >> I imagined them to be armed. Yes, >> you imagined them to be. But did you know? >> Everybody in Texas has a gun. So in my mind, yes. >> But so I'm not talking about in your mind, right? I'm talking about if any officer was in your situation, they can point to a specific article fact that they were armed. >> I would think any officer would think in my >> I'm not asking you that. I'm not asking you to think of what other officers. I'm saying point to a specific article fact that any other officer can point to to say yes, they were armed. the following, the everything. >> Okay. >> Specifically that they were armed. >> Do you have any specific articulable fact prior to you initiating a stop that these individuals were armed? It's a yes or no question. >> Yes. >> Yes. What specific article fact did you have that these individuals were armed? >> The totality of the circumstances, as I've said before. >> Okay. We don't. So everything you said up to that point, the fact that they were following you in public spaces means they were armed. >> Objection form, >> right? >> Objection form. >> So the fact that they are following me, that they are following somebody who has a specific set of instances. >> Okay. I'm going to object to nonresponsive. It was essentially a yes or no question. >> Okay. I answered yes. >> So let me ask you this then. How many people uh in your uh law enforcement career have you pulled over? >> Oh goodness. I can't say. >> Can't can't even count. Right. >> Correct. >> Okay. Is it reasonable for individuals that you pull over to think you're going to kill them? >> Objection form. >> It's not reasonable. Right. >> Correct. >> Even though you follow them, right? >> How long did I follow them? >> It doesn't matter. You to pull someone over, you follow them, right? >> Objection form. >> Uh I get behind them. Okay. >> Okay. You get behind them. You initiate a stop. >> Correct. >> Right. And you get out and you talk to them. Right. I do. >> And you're armed. >> Yes, I am. >> Okay. And but it's unreasonable for them to think that you're going to kill them. Right. >> Correct. >> Okay. So, uh, when you went to the gas station, what drink did you get? >> A Coke. >> Okay. Coke. Uh, even though you thought there was going to be a shootout. >> Coca-Cola. Yes. >> Okay. >> You don't want to be thirsty. At any point, did you call up any backup? >> No. >> All right. >> Did you ever initiate a felony stop? >> No. >> Do you know what a felony stop is? >> Yes. That's why I answered no. >> Okay. What is a felony stop? >> Yeah. It's when more than one car is uh there you order them out of the car at gunpoint and have them walk back and all that good stuff. Okay. Had you uh you mentioned uh your experience as a narcotics officer. Uh, had you ever worked uh in Laredo? >> No, but I've arrested uh many people that are uh associated with Laredo. >> Okay. But you never worked in Laredo? >> No. >> Okay. Did you have any uh in uh intelligence or any information whatsoever uh that the blue Prius uh with that specific license plate was involved in the drug trade? >> No. >> Okay. Matter of fact, when you ran the license plate, did you receive any information whatsoever to indicate it was involved in the drug trade? >> No. >> Okay. What information did you receive uh when you uh ran the license plate >> that the vehicle was from Larredo and the owner? >> Okay. Were there any active warrants? >> No. >> Matter of fact, you knew uh it it told you who the registered owner of the vehicle was. Correct. >> Correct. >> And that was Mr. Ring Cone. >> Uh his father. >> Okay. So you did have some identifying information even before you u pulled up behind them. >> Correct. >> Okay. >> So I understand you're talking about the totality of the actions of the plaintiffs, right? We we I think we've covered that. But were there any specific words or gestures that you observed the plaintiffs do that gave you cause for concern? >> Him speaking Spanish. >> Okay. Anything else? >> Uh, no. Uh, cuz once he started speaking Spanish, I had no idea what he was saying. >> Okay. And uh you also observed too uh when you went up to the vehicle that the individuals uh at least one of the individuals uh was filming you. Correct. >> I noticed that uh most of them if not all of them were filming. Yes, sir. >> Right away. >> Yes, sir. Right away. >> Okay. Even the indivi individuals in the back seat. >> I did see the phones. Yes. >> Okay. So, you were able to see the individuals in the back seat. Did it appear to you that the uh tent might have been unlawful? >> The tent? >> The window tenting? >> Yes. >> Uh I don't think there was any unlawful tent on the windows. It wasn't something I could see into the car very clearly. >> Okay. Uh and you observed that the uh the bank uh they they were parked in actual parking spot. Correct. >> It was street parking. Yes, sir. >> Okay. [snorts] So, if you truly believe that the plaintiffs uh were coordinating a potential attack, why did you approach their vehicle alone without backup and without taking any precautions? >> Oh, precautions were taken. Um, >> well, let me do it this way. Did you call for backup before you approached the vehicle? Uh, no need to because uh I've worked with officer Reyes for a while and I knew he would be coming right away. >> But you didn't you didn't call Reyes until you realized you needed a Spanish speaker. >> Correct. >> So when you approached the vehicle, right, when you approached the vehicle after you pulled up behind it, uh you did not call for backup, right? >> Correct. And then uh when you got out of your vehicle uh you did not have your hand on your firearm. >> I did not. >> And you walked right up to the vehicle. >> I did. >> And you began communicating with the plaintiffs. >> Correct. >> And uh you observed that they were armed. >> I observed that they all had cell phones in their hands. >> Okay. But you knew they were armed. >> I knew they were armed >> and you didn't care. >> Correct. >> Okay. And then once you called Reyes, it was because uh you needed him to help translate. >> Correct. >> And Reyes came and he walked right up as well. Right. >> Correct. >> He didn't have uh his weapon drawn. >> No, he did not. >> Right. And Reyes came up and was able to immediately communicate. >> I'm sorry. >> Reyes came up and was able to immediately communicate with everybody. >> Correct. Yes, sir. >> Okay. And once you identifi once you realized uh one of the individuals was Brandon White uh the stop had terminated. Right. >> Correct. >> Okay. [sighs] >> Did you uh work the following day? >> Uh worked the entire weekend. Yes. No. >> Okay. And then how about that Monday? No, I was off. >> Okay. >> Well, so I work nights. >> Okay. >> So, Sunday night into Monday morning, but I was I would have left by, you know, sixish. >> Okay. Did uh did you have any communications with uh Detective Barker uh prior to him going to get an arrest warrant? >> No. >> Did you have any communications with uh Detective Middleton uh prior to him obtaining arrest warrant? >> No, sir. Uh, okay. So, neither of those individuals communicated with you concerning uh the substance of your incident report, >> correct? >> Okay. How about uh Chief Parish? >> No, sir. >> Okay. Uh, Lieutenant Drake. >> No, sir. >> Okay. Uh, once you drafted the incident report, uh, look real quick. You know, I had a had a note to print that out yesterday and I somehow What's your uh PD ID number? >> My badge number or my employee number? >> Your PD ID number for when you do incident reports, the number you put in, is it 339 or was it? >> No. >> Okay. >> 339. >> What was your PD ID number? would be 653. >> That's my payroll number. >> Okay. And >> 217. >> And then what's your uh So 653 when you go into the badge system? >> Oh yes. Uh that's how it logs me knowing me. Correct. >> Okay. And then um and then your your badge number at the time. >> 217. >> Still today. >> Okay. So when you wrote the incident report, did you actually identify a charge in the incident report or was it just an incident report? >> It just an incident report. >> Okay. >> I believe. >> So you didn't actually put in the charge a charge of harassment in the report? >> No, sir. >> Okay. And so when you do an incident report, uh what do you what what's the next steps? So, you put in an incident report. There's no charge on it. What happens next? >> Oh, uh the uh C will get it. >> Okay. >> And then is your involvement pretty much done at that point? as a patrol officer generally speaking. >> So on this matter, uh once you wrote your incident report, uh did you have any other uh involvement in the case? >> Uh just the arrest. >> Okay. Who did you arrest? >> Uh Mr. White. Brandon White. >> Okay. So, you're uh you testified earlier uh that you indicated uh you're that you thought the pointifs were harassing you in your incident report. Correct. >> I believe that the incident report does uh show the circumstances to be harassment. Yes. >> Okay. Do you know if you actually used the phrase or the charge harassment in your narrative? I don't know. >> Okay. But you'd acknowledge that the report speaks for itself, right? >> Yes. >> When's the last time you reviewed your uh narrative in your incident report? >> I couldn't tell you. >> Did anyone uh review your incident report uh to see if it was complete? as in like a supervisor would do. I don't understand. Uh again, I couldn't tell you. >> Once we write them, they'll go to C. So, >> and if they had any questions about the substance of your report, they would ask you. >> Yes, I would think so. >> Has that happened in the past? >> Yes. >> Okay. But in this instance, uh no one uh no one reached out to speak to you about your incident report? No sir. >> Okay. >> So, uh you uh you didn't make any [clears throat] any decision whatsoever uh to charge uh any plaintiff in this case? >> No, I didn't make a decision to charge anybody. If I was going to arrest him, I would have done it that night. >> Okay. And so, uh you weren't involved in any uh discussions with anybody concerning uh charging the plaintiffs in this case? >> No, sir. Okay. So, had the plaintiffs not identified themselves or I take it back because they didn't identify themselves. Uh, had you not uh learned Brandon White was in the vehicle, did you intend to arrest them for failing to identify or at least the driver? >> I was going to arrest them for harassment. >> Okay. Even though you never mentioned it uh during the stop at all. >> Correct. Okay. You were not going to arrest uh at least Mr. Rone for failing to identify? >> I was going to arrest all four persons in the vehicle for harassment. >> But my specific question was >> no. >> Okay. Failure to identify. >> No. Okay. Were you familiar with u first amendment auditors prior to this incident? >> I known of them. Correct. Yes. >> Okay. What was your uh what did you know generally about first amendment auditors? >> Uh that they like to go around and um uh video instances with the police. >> Do you understand if they have a right to do so? >> I understand they do have that right. >> Okay. Uh the uh how about uh any of the plaintiffs? Were you familiar with any of the plaintiffs prior to February 4, 2022? >> No, sir. >> Okay. You referred to uh at the time of the incident, you referred to Mr. White as Mr. Popular. You recall that? >> No. >> Okay. Uh when Reyes informed you, Officer Reyes informed you, uh that that's Brandon White, America first in the back seat. Mhm. >> You walked up to the vehicle and said, "Oh, who's Mr. White?" "Oh, you're Mr. Popular. Does that sound familiar?" >> That sounds like something I would say. >> Okay. So, uh, what knowledge did you have of Mr. White prior to February 4, 2022? >> Uh, just that he was, uh, arrested in Coran for burglary of a vehicle when he entered their um, police cars. that he was following him around that the chief trying to get an interview with him or or you know um talk with him uh that he had been uh throughout the city and county. >> Okay. Uh how did you become aware of these uh incidents? >> Uh just rumor mill. >> Okay. Like uh other uh police officers, >> correct? >> Okay. Uh, did you receive uh was there any guidance or discussion with any Livingston Police leadership? >> No, sir. >> Okay. Had you prior to February 4th, had you watched any of Mr. White's videos? >> No, sir. >> Okay. Uh the uh prior to February 4th, 2022, uh there were signs erected at in the Livingston uh employee parking lot. Correct. >> Yes, sir. >> Okay. Why were those signs erected? >> I couldn't tell you. >> Okay. Okay. Do you recall any uh discussions uh internally uh concerning the erection of those signs? >> No, sir. >> Okay. So, you don't know if it had anything to do with Brandon White at all? >> No, sir. I do not know. Okay. Is it against the law uh for uh a vehicle to follow a cop car around the city of Livingston? >> No, sir. >> Okay. And I I want to go into a little bit more detail on the uh search warrants. I know generally you said you weren't involved or sorry the arrest warrants you weren't involved but I just want to break it down. Uh did you provide any input uh for the arrest affidavit? >> No sir. >> Okay. Uh well, other than my report. >> Okay. >> No, no, no verbal communication with anybody. >> Okay. No one were you even asked questions concerning your report, whether it was complete or final around the time the affidavit were being drafted? >> No, sir. >> Did you uh review the affidavit before they were submitted to the judge? >> No, sir. >> Okay. >> Were you asked at all whether the uh whether you would were you given the opportunity to review the affidavit? No, sir. >> Uh, did you testify before a grand jury in this matter? >> No, sir. >> Do you know who did? >> No, sir. >> Uh, are you aware that Chief Parish uh uh released a press release concerning this incident? >> Am I aware now or was I aware then? >> Are you aware now? >> I am aware now. >> Okay. Did you review that press release? >> Never seen it. >> Okay. So you were never provided any opportunity uh to review uh the press release prior to his publication. >> Correct. >> Was any of your conduct that night uh reviewed by any supervisors? >> I imagine so. Yes. >> Okay. Do do you actually know? >> No. >> Okay. at the time uh February 2022, who is your supervisor? >> Uh that's a good question. Uh February >> was it >> Can you ask somebody else? >> Uh I don't know. >> Okay. >> Who is it now? >> Uh right now I work directly for uh Lieutenant Mitchell. >> Okay. So, at some point, Lieutenant, I assume you're trying to question whether there was an intermediary between you and the Lieutenant Drake at the time. >> There would have been, I'm sure, but uh at that time we were going through some um some changes in in personnel. Um I worked for Chad Ward, Sergeant Ward for a long time, but I don't know if he was still there at that time. I know we didn't have a a sergeant uh on shift. Uh but I don't know if that's because they were on vacation or because we were trying to fill that position. >> [snorts] >> What specific uh training did you receive concerning uh the difference between Well, let me back up. Uh give you some context here. Uh individuals uh do you agree that individuals have a right to criticize police? >> Oh, yes, sir. >> Do you acknowledge individuals have a right to argue with police? >> Uh when they're not violating the law? >> Well, >> yes. Right. Do you think arguing with police can violate the law? >> I think that if people are violating the law and then argue with the police, not good. >> It's not good. But is it illegal? >> No. >> Okay. Uh so do [snorts] you understand the difference between constitutionally protected activity and criminal harassment? >> Objection form. >> I do. >> Okay. Had you received any uh uh specific what specific training did you receive concerning an individual's first amendment rights? >> No specific training other than general training in the police academy. >> Okay. And how long ago were you in the police academy? >> 2007. >> Okay. Are you do you know if uh for example filming police is a first amendment uh activity? >> Do I know if it is? I know it's not illegal. >> Okay. So yes, >> but you know uh that that it's a specifically a first amendment activity. >> Correct. >> Okay. How how did you learn that? >> The freedom of speech. >> Yeah. How did you learn that filming police is a first amendment activity? >> Oh, just the news, I guess. >> Okay. But no specific training on it? >> No. >> Okay. Once you drafted your uh your incent, did you ever go back to review it for like accuracy or if you needed to add any supplements? >> I did go back and look at it. I never made any changes. >> And at the time you drafted the police report, uh did you review your body camera footage? But I don't know. >> Okay. Do you usually review your body camera footage when drafting incident reports? >> Sometimes yes, sometimes no. So that's a hard question to answer. >> Okay. But you can't recall if you did it here. >> Correct. I do not recall. So, what um concerning harassment? Um, at what point did you think you had probable cause uh to to arrest or charge the plaintiffs with harassment? Once they uh parked in the parking spot, I had everything I needed for harassment. >> Okay. So, prior to uh Okay. So, prior to them parking in the parking spot, you think you would have only had reasonable suspicion? >> Uh, no. pretty much after the phone call with uh Officer Reyes when they put on the body armor and then came back and parked. I mean >> Okay. When you heard that they had put on body armor, uh were they following you? >> Yes, they were. >> Well, let me back up. Where were you at? >> I was standing under the sally port of the police department. >> Okay. And could you observe the plaintiff's vehicle at that point? >> No. >> Okay. So, at that specific point, uh, plaintiffs were not following you. >> I would consider the whole thing to be following me, >> but I'm talking at that specific point, you were at the police station, right? >> I was. >> And Reyes was actually following the plaintiffs, >> correct? >> Okay. And so, at that specific instance, uh, you were not in your vehicle, right? I >> was not. >> Okay. Uh, had you reported to dispatch any concerns about uh that your life was being threatened? >> I had just run their license plate. >> Okay. But did you report to dispatch that >> your life was being threatened? >> No. >> Okay. >> So at So once you got the information from Reyes, you thought you had probable cause at that point uh to arrest the plaintiffs for harassment. >> Correct. >> Okay. So, when you uh went to uh when you pulled up behind them at the bank, uh what investigation is it that you needed to do? >> Uh get them out of the car and find out who they were so I could put them in jail. >> Okay. Why didn't you do that? >> Uh cuz after learning that it was Mr. White and learning that uh they weren't there to kill me, just so relieved, I didn't arrest him. Okay. So, prior to you even pulling them over, you thought uh your intent was to arrest them for harassment, >> correct? >> Okay. Uh but but you didn't do that. >> I did not. >> Okay. All right. Uh thank you for your time. I I will reserve all future questions for time of trial. I'll reserve the time. >> It's 9:51 a.m. for operator.