The problem with Anderson's reasoning is that this numbnuts was sure of his report.....or outright lied. I guarantee that had the video not been available, it would have gone 100% against the bartender

Any update on this? Knew Frick from the Corps, not well, but never seemed like someone who needed this in his life. It's sickening to think about all of the other college kids who have been screwed by this agent. Glad somebody finally fought back and won. Still doesn't make it even between Frick and TABC. Can't imagine the stress, time, and money lost because of a lie. He should sue.

I hope that they have to go back and review every sting that agent has worked on

TexasAggie_02 said:

---

I hope that they have to go back and review every sting that agent has worked on

---

This. If I were to have received a citation from this ***** in the past, I'd be lawyering up and fighting it right now.

Brian Alg said:

---

I contacted County Attorney Anderson on Monday and District Attorney Parsons on Friday to let them know that I think this is a big problem.

County Attorney Anderson's statements to the Eagle and the Chronicle indicate that he does not think this is a big deal. Parsons told me that his office does not comment on cases that they are looking at or investigating. Parsons may well believe that if a TABC agent breaks the law they are entrusted to enforce and then testifies falsely under oath that someone else committed the crime, they should face severe consequences. But given County Attorney Anderson does not seem to appreciate the gravity of this, I do not want to take that for granted.

County Attorney and District Attorney are both elected positions. I am considering putting together an informal petition to let them know that some people think this is a big deal. If anyone thinks it could be worded better, or that there is a better way to go forward with this, I would be super appreciative of any feedback. I asked CA Anderson if there was a better way to change his mind about the gravity of Jergins' actions and I have not heard back from him.

I was thinking something like the following:

County Attorney Rod Anderson and District Attorney Parsons,

The undersigned believe:

1. TABC agents that violate the laws they are entrusted to enforce should not be shown greater leniency than other citizens.
2. If TABC agents are not expected to tell the truth in their reports and on the stand, their reports and testimony should not be used as evidence.
3. If TABC agents are expected to tell the truth in their reports and on the stand, they should face serious consequences when they are not truthful.

---

The TABC is trying to block my open records request for the minor sting protocols that were in place in September 2016 and now. I have no confidence that they are adequately addressing what appears to be a serious problem with how they do these stings. And their stonewalling makes me think that they prefer to cover up problems rather than fixing them. If that is true, then any remedies are going to have to come from outside of the organization.

And another development, I just noticed that a second charge against Frick for what appears to be another minor sting by TABC in February 2017 was dropped last week by the County Attorney for the reason of "In the interest of justice." They did not check the box for "not enough evidence." I asked the Eagle if they are going to follow up. I really want to know what happened there. That would be insane if this happened twice.


This looks really bad. I am going to work on putting together 2 petitions. One for CA Anderson indicating that we want him to require a recording to corroborate TABC reports and testimony on sting operations in his cases. The other for DA Parsons indicating that TABC agents who untruthfully testify or report that someone has committed a crime should face severe consequences.

Severe consequences? Should be fired and do jail time - period!

You do know we have laws in place for people that testify untruthfullly or falsely report a crime, right? Not sure what you gain by petitioning the DA about existing laws.
Second, there is no way the prosecution is going to make stricter rules for cases from a state wide agency based on the bad behavior of one idiot. That particular agent, sure, I am sure he is on the Brady list now anyway.
I understand your rightful anger about the behavior of the agent, but if you don't mind my asking what happened that made you think the entire agency is staffed by people such as him? Have you had some sort of negative interactions with them?

cslifer said:

---

You do know we have laws in place for people that testify untruthfullly or falsely report a crime, right? Not sure what you gain by petitioning the DA about existing laws. Then why isn't the DA going after the "officer" for perjury?
Second, there is no way the prosecution is going to make stricter rules for cases from a state wide agency based on the bad behavior of one idiot. That particular agent, sure, I am sure he is on the Brady list now anyway. It's not just "one idiot", but the state has to be held to a standard. Manufacturing crimes or even the illusion of entrapment should be negated from the start. Especially a state agency known for poor decisions and actions.
I understand your rightful anger about the behavior of the agent, but if you don't mind my asking what happened that made you think the entire agency is staffed by people such as him? Have you had some sort of negative interactions with them? I have a friend who used to work for them. He got out as quickly as he could. His words were they are a corrupt group of bullies with no regard for the law.
TABC is an archaic and needless drain on Texas resources that serves no other purpose than to service itself.
The fact the Brazos DA hasn't brought that "officer" up on perjury charges also shows the lack of respect the rest of the court officers have for the regular public.
May they all burn in hell.

---

cslifer said:

---

You do know we have laws in place for people that testify untruthfullly or falsely report a crime, right? Not sure what you gain by petitioning the DA about existing laws.
Second, there is no way the prosecution is going to make stricter rules for cases from a state wide agency based on the bad behavior of one idiot. That particular agent, sure, I am sure he is on the Brady list now anyway.
I understand your rightful anger about the behavior of the agent, but if you don't mind my asking what happened that made you think the entire agency is staffed by people such as him? Have you had some sort of negative interactions with them?

---

It's not just 1 agent. There's a long pattern of corruption going back years.

expresswrittenconsent said:

---

cslifer said:

---

You do know we have laws in place for people that testify untruthfullly or falsely report a crime, right? Not sure what you gain by petitioning the DA about existing laws.
Second, there is no way the prosecution is going to make stricter rules for cases from a state wide agency based on the bad behavior of one idiot. That particular agent, sure, I am sure he is on the Brady list now anyway.
I understand your rightful anger about the behavior of the agent, but if you don't mind my asking what happened that made you think the entire agency is staffed by people such as him? Have you had some sort of negative interactions with them?

---

It's not just 1 agent. There's a long pattern of corruption going back years.

---

SPECS sued and won against them for their corrupt enforcement.
They are the mafia.

Scruffy said:

---

cslifer said:

---

You do know we have laws in place for people that testify untruthfullly or falsely report a crime, right? Not sure what you gain by petitioning the DA about existing laws. Then why isn't the DA going after the "officer" for perjury?
Second, there is no way the prosecution is going to make stricter rules for cases from a state wide agency based on the bad behavior of one idiot. That particular agent, sure, I am sure he is on the Brady list now anyway. It's not just "one idiot", but the state has to be held to a standard. Manufacturing crimes or even the illusion of entrapment should be negated from the start. Especially a state agency known for poor decisions and actions.
I understand your rightful anger about the behavior of the agent, but if you don't mind my asking what happened that made you think the entire agency is staffed by people such as him? Have you had some sort of negative interactions with them? I have a friend who used to work for them. He got out as quickly as he could. His words were they are a corrupt group of bullies with no regard for the law.
TABC is an archaic and needless drain on Texas resources that serves no other purpose than to service itself.
The fact the Brazos DA hasn't brought that "officer" up on perjury charges also shows the lack of respect the rest of the court officers have for the regular public.
May they all burn in hell.

---

---

Dude, i think you have had enough internet for the day. Saying that "all court officers" can "burn in hell"??? Wtf is wrong you??

I think what the comments are trying to address is that, no one but a parent can serve an alcoholic drink to a minor - does't matter what your job is. Just because she worked for TABC doesn't mean she can legally accept alcohol from them - right?

Therefore, an MIP should be on the table for her, as should providing alcohol to a minor, which I believe is "contributing to the delinquency of a minor" for the agent.

If companies/agencies can give alcohol to underage workers, then that changes things; but I don't think that is a rule is it? I guess that police can buy drugs from drug dealers and be in possession of said drugs without risk of arrest/suit (or w/e)... TLIAC, does this scenario fall under that kind of category?

TLIAC already addressed that earlier in the thread.

I think the argument for the minor being charged in this instance is silly.

It gets off-topic and is a red-herring.

In the end, this TABC officer who lied in court about what happened, needs to lose his job. That should be an easy open-and-shut policy for any LEO. You shouldn't get a second chance for that type of action.

91_Aggie said:

---

In the end, this TABC officer who lied in court about what happened, needs to lose his job. That should be an easy open-and-shut policy for any LEO. You shouldn't get a second chance for that type of action.

---

Something.....something......thin blue line.....protect our own ......something.....something.........

When someone has the power to arrest and file a statement of fact that can negatively affect another person's reputation, livelihood, and freedom, the person granted that power needs to be damn sure of his statement. One single incident of this sort should kick in a requirement that stings consist of two or more agents and body cams on everyone involved.

@Rexter

What do you think we can do to get this implemented?

I haven't had any luck in reaching out to the TABC directly. But perhaps somebody else might be able to do better there. I also got the impression from Sen. Schwertner's and Rep. Raney's offices that they do not plan to do anything on this. My idea was that a petition indicating that a lot of folks (voting folks) think this is a big deal might convince them to make it a priority. Perhaps they would decide to bring it up with the folks reviewing the TABC in the Sunset Commission this Spring.

But that might not be the best approach. I would be happy to put in some legwork (or moral support) on another plan. Maybe we could encourage people to call Raney's, Schwertner's and/or somebody else's offices?

District and County Attorneys have discretion of which cases to prosecute, except in the case of neglect or failure of duty by a peace officer. For those they have no discretion, and must present the case to a grand jury, whether misdemeanor or felony (CoCP 2.03). Since you claim (@Brian Alg) to have ensured the DA and CA are aware of this neglect and/or failure of duty of this peace officer, you should expect the clerk to have a record of true bill or of no bill, unless it was sealed for some reason or a warrant is pending service.

Based on your communications though, I think it is pretty unlikely that the DA or CA took this to a grand jury. The DA and CA are both good guys, and probably just didn't think about it in this context. But they should. The law is very clear. They are our only safeguards against this type of abuse, and need to take the responsibility they sought out seriously.

As a bit of local flavor, this particular statute is one that Bill Turner used against Ronnie Miller's appellant point of selective prosecution in his gambling case. Turner argued that he had discretion not to pursue the other 24 individuals, but no discretion not to pursue Miller because of his status as a peace officer. The appellate court sided with Turner.

@ Stucco

Thank you so much for pointing out both CoCP 2.03 and the case involving the lake house. That case is super interesting.

I contacted County Attorney Anderson and CCed DA Parsons to see if there was something about the case regarding the February 2017 incident that would indicate that there might be another case that would need to be brought before the grand jury because of CoCP 2.03. He did not go into details, but he quickly replied to let me know that there was nothing in that case that indicated there was a misstatement in the report or anything like that.

So my earlier speculation regarding that second case was wrong.

Now that I am sure Parsons is aware that CoCP 2.03 might apply in the September 2016 case, I do not think the petition to DA Parsons is necessary.

Right now my plan is to go ahead with a single informal petition to CA Anderson that goes as follows:

"Petition to Brazos County Attorney Rod Anderson
We, the undersigned, ask that you require audio/video recording to corroborate the reports and testimony of TABC agents when prosecuting TABC sting operation cases."

I would collect date, name, signature, zip code, and whether the signer wants to be updated on the issue come 2020 primary season (I would collect contact info on a separate page if "yes"). I would be happy to make any changes to that if anyone has any suggestions. I would also be happy to help out with another plan if somebody has another suggestion.

Got a copy of records related to the September 2016 incident from an Open Records Request to TABC.


Agent Jergins' description of the incident (dated 9/21/2016):

"At approximately 10:30 pm, Agent Jergins entered the location behind the minors. The door staff checked the identification of the minors prior to entry into the location. The minors walked to the bar and [redacted] order a tall Dos Equis Draft beer from the bartender and paid $4.75 for the alcoholic beverage. The defendant was described as a white male with short brown hair wearing a dark colored polo shirt. The defendant checked [redacted] valid identification and sold the alcoholic beverage to [redacted]. After the transaction at the bar the minor gave the beer to Agent Jergins who verified the draft beer as an alcoholic beverage. Agent Jergins and the minors and exited the location. The time of sale was marked at 10:34 P.M. At no time did any employee or the defendant attempt to remove the alcoholic beverage from the minors due to their age."


Agent Meyer's (a member of the open/identification team) incident report (dated 9/16/2016):

"Agent Jergins entered the location directly behind [redacted] and [redacted]. The door staff checked [redacted] and [redacted] valid [redacted] Driver Licenses and both proceeded inside. Both minors approached the bar and [redacted] ordered a tall Dos Equis draft beer from the bartender. The bartender did not ask for identification. [Redacted] was then served the Dos Equis draft beer. [Redacted] paid the bartender $4.75 for the beer. After the transaction, [redacted] gave the beer to Agent Jergins. The beer was left at the location. The minors and Agent Jergins then left the location."


The volunteer also signed a statement (date was redacted [[EDIT: I was given two copies, the other one shows the date, September 28, 2016]])

"On the 16th day of September, 2016, at approximately 10:34 pm, while at the licensed premises known as Rebel Draft House, which is located at, 301 University Drive, College Station, Texas, I purchased and received alcoholic beverages, namely a Dos Equis draft beer, from a person who was identified by Agent Rodney Meyer of the Texas Alcoholic Beverage Commission as [the bartender], an employee of the aforementioned license premises. I paid a total sum of $4.75 for the aforementioned alcoholic beverages.

I in no way or manner, verbally or otherwise, misrepresented my age to [the bartender], the person from whom I purchased the aforementioned alcoholic beverages, nor have I ever previously misrepresented my age to [the bartender], or any other employee of the aforementioned licensed premises."

cslifer said:

---

Ok...does that prove something?

---

It proves all 3 lied from the start.

cslifer said:

---

Ok...does that prove something?

---

Looks pretty bad for the agent. Now instead of just a moment of "oops I got it wrong" on the stand, we have a written statement in direct contradiction to the video evidence.

I'm concerned that our CA doesn't see anything wrong with this.

Scruffy said:

---

expresswrittenconsent said:

---

cslifer said:

---

You do know we have laws in place for people that testify untruthfullly or falsely report a crime, right? Not sure what you gain by petitioning the DA about existing laws.
Second, there is no way the prosecution is going to make stricter rules for cases from a state wide agency based on the bad behavior of one idiot. That particular agent, sure, I am sure he is on the Brady list now anyway.
I understand your rightful anger about the behavior of the agent, but if you don't mind my asking what happened that made you think the entire agency is staffed by people such as him? Have you had some sort of negative interactions with them?

---

It's not just 1 agent. There's a long pattern of corruption going back years.

---

SPECS sued and won against them for their corrupt enforcement.
They are the mafia.

---

Specs was completely screwed by these corrupt asshats. Total wine paid them off to keep Specs from expanding while they built like crazy all over HOUSTON. They cost Specs a large piece of market share.

TABC has been the most corrupt State agency for as long as they have existed. They make the Starr County Sheriff and Judge look like Boy Scouts. Follow the dang money.

Build It said:

---

Scruffy said:

---

expresswrittenconsent said:

---

cslifer said:

---

You do know we have laws in place for people that testify untruthfullly or falsely report a crime, right? Not sure what you gain by petitioning the DA about existing laws.
Second, there is no way the prosecution is going to make stricter rules for cases from a state wide agency based on the bad behavior of one idiot. That particular agent, sure, I am sure he is on the Brady list now anyway.
I understand your rightful anger about the behavior of the agent, but if you don't mind my asking what happened that made you think the entire agency is staffed by people such as him? Have you had some sort of negative interactions with them?

---

It's not just 1 agent. There's a long pattern of corruption going back years.

---

SPECS sued and won against them for their corrupt enforcement.
They are the mafia.

---

Specs was completely screwed by these corrupt asshats. Total wine paid them off to keep Specs from expanding while they built like crazy all over HOUSTON. They cost Specs a large piece of market share.

TABC has been the most corrupt State agency for as long as they have existed. They make the Starr County Sheriff and Judge look like Boy Scouts. Follow the dang money.

---

While I don't disagree, the issue at hand is with two specific TABC agents entering our community under the guise of public service and attempting to frame a local with a crime. And further our DA and CA seeing this as a non-issue.

I hope the people starring these comments are calling our locally elected officials and letting them know this is not acceptable.

Update:

I contacted County Attorney Anderson and asked if given:

- Agent Jergins' falsified report made shortly after the incident;
- The volunteer's falsified affidavit made shortly after the incident;
- Agent Meyer's report that includes Agent Jergins' and the volunteer's mischaracterization of events as well as his inclusion of an additional fabricated detail (that the bartender did not ask for identification);
- Agents Prior's and Noble's failing to inform the CA's office that the bartender disputed the Agents' earlier descriptions of events and that he had video evidence backing him up (this is from a recording from a TABC body cam when the bartender got the second citation in February 2017); and
- Agent Jergins' indicating at trial that he should have known better than to do what he did.

He was still planning on taking on TABC sting cases without corroborating evidence. His response: "I can't go into details, but we are reviewing the TABC cases that we have and actively working with TABC to improve future cases to insure the accuracy of the reports, including the use of audio/video."

I followed up to see if he was going to be releasing information about the plan once they get it worked out. I will post here with his response.

I have not heard back from DA Parsons regarding the volunteer's falsified affidavit and the two TABC Agents' falsified reports.

one set of rules for them, one set of rules for the rest of us

Pick up that can, citizen!