Dean verdict was in. Did judge really need to slap mayor, council member for reacting?
Former Fort Worth police officer Aaron Dean is convicted and sentenced for killing Atatiana Jefferson, and after three long years, our city and Jefferson’s family can try to move forward.
Well, not quite. First, we must wait for state District Judge George Gallagher, who presided over the trial, to declare whether two Fort Worth leaders will be punished for daring to speak about the verdict. On Dec. 16, he imperiously summoned Mayor Mattie Parker and City Council member Chris Nettles for a Jan. 4 hearing to answer contempt of court charges for violating a gag order.
We’ll stipulate that Gallagher, like any judge, must ensure that verdicts are untainted by bias, that jurors are not swayed by public statements and that a defendant’s rights are upheld. When there’s a conflict with other priorities, a judge must make a difficult call.
Gallagher was in his rights to enforce a gag order, as both Parker and Nettles were sworn witnesses in the case dating to hearings on Dean’s request to move the trial to another county. But in this case, it was an overreach.
The jury’s verdict was in and announced when Gallagher took his action. Jurors had yet to sentence Dean, but they were unlikely to be exposed to comments by Parker and Nettles.
Gallagher should have given greater consideration to the gravity of restricting the speech of two Fort Worth leaders at an important moment in a case with vital implications for the community.
Neither Parker nor Nettles were to be witnesses in the sentencing phase. Their tangential connection to the case and the resulting gag order were an example of an overly aggressive approach to muzzling people over a long three years in resolving Dean’s guilt.
Once the change-of-venue question was settled, why shouldn’t Parker or Nettles be able to react? Gag orders in big cases are understandable, but they are an impediment to free-speech rights and should not be undertaken or enforced lightly.
When James Smith, the neighbor who called police out of concern over Jefferson’s open door, protested at the courthouse before the trial began, he was sworn in as a witness, presumably to shut him up over concerns that his presence could sway potential jurors. That’s an abuse of the process.
In the case of Parker and Nettles, Gallagher might have considered whether what they said was even that impactful or controversial.
The mayor’s statement read: “Today’s verdict provides a measure of justice, though it does not change the fact that a tragedy occurred that should have never happened. This tragedy for me has always been about Atatiana Jefferson — about her life as a daughter, sister, and aunt, and her lasting legacy. Many people in our community are hurting, and we must come together with compassion and grace. Our prayers are with the jury as they continue their service in the sentencing phase. May God bless Atatiana’s memory and continue to be with her family.”
How that possibly could have affected a jury’s thinking on punishment is beyond us. But the mayor is a lawyer and, one could argue, should’ve been more cautious while under a court order. Perhaps Gallagher wanted to make a point.
Nettles’ case is more complicated. He represents the neighborhood where the killing occurred and is becoming a prominent voice for Black residents of Fort Worth. He condemned the manslaughter verdict, saying: “Justice still hasn’t been served. This verdict is a slap in the face to the Black communities in Fort Worth and across the country. This verdict says that a white man can murder a Black woman in her own home with nothing more than a slap on the wrist — literally. I don’t know where we go from here, but I do know that things need to change.”
It’s worth remembering that Gallagher inherited this case when the defense successfully argued that Judge David Hagerman had shown bias against Dean. It had all the flashpoints around race and law enforcement, exacerbated by a three-year delay. Gallagher kept the trial on track and ensured a fair, clean process.
With that done, there’s no need to sanction civic leaders. He should cancel the hearing and leave Parker and Nettles to the work the community needs from them.
BEHIND THE STORY
MOREHey, who writes these editorials?
Editorials are the positions of the Editorial Board, which serves as the Fort Worth Star-Telegram’s institutional voice. The members of the board are: Cynthia M. Allen, columnist; Steve Coffman, editor and president; Bud Kennedy, columnist; Ryan J. Rusak, opinion editor; and Nicole Russell, editorial writer and columnist. Most editorials are written by Rusak or Russell. Editorials are unsigned because they represent the board’s consensus positions, not the views of individual writers.
Read more by clicking the arrow in the upper right.
How are topics and positions chosen?
The Editorial Board meets regularly to discuss issues in the news and what points should be made in editorials. We strive to build a consensus to produce the strongest editorials possible, but when we differ, we put matters to a vote.
The board aims to be consistent with stances it has taken in the past but usually engages in a fresh discussion based on new developments and different perspectives.
We focus on local and state news, though we will also weigh in on national issues with an eye toward their impact on Texas or the Dallas-Fort Worth area.
How are these different from news articles or signed columns?
News reporters strive to keep their opinions out of what they write. They have no input on the Editorial Board’s stances. The board consults their reporting and expertise but does its own research for editorials.
Signed columns by writers such as Allen, Kennedy and Rusak contain the writer’s personal opinions.
How can I respond to an editorial, suggest a topic or ask a question?
We invite readers to write letters to be considered for publication. The preferred method is an email to letters@star-telegram.com. To suggest a topic or ask a question, please email Rusak directly at rrusak@star-telegram.com.