Threats against Tarrant County officials are dangerous. So is blaming the public and media | Opinion

The Tarrant County Sheriff’s Office, rightfully alarmed by threats against county officials, has found the culprits.

It’s your fault. Ours, too.

The Feb. 4 Commissioners Court meeting required extra security because of what officials deemed “credible” threats to commissioners. Extra deputies, metal detectors and bag searches were employed for what’s often a sleepy meeting, albeit one that’s recently seen more heated public feedback. It was the culmination of weeks of increasing tension over deaths in the county jail and over who’s allowed to speak or attend meetings.

Later in the day, the Sheriff’s Office issued a humdinger of an explanation — with no official’s name on it.

“Any threat of violence aimed at county personnel and/or elected officials will be investigated and those responsible will be prosecuted,” someone said. So far, so good.

“We can have disagreements on policy or politics, but threats against our civil servants crosses [sic] the line,” the statement continued. 100% agreement here.

“Unfortunately, the recent increase in negative commentary from both the media and the public has led some people to think it’s acceptable to make threatening statements towards our civil servants. We ask everyone — both the public and the media — to support peaceful, democratic processes and conduct themselves in an appropriate manner,” the office concluded.

Um, what?

First, there’s a leap of logic. No arrests connected to the threats have been announced, so how exactly does the office know that commentary is what’s driving them?

Then, there’s the lack of detail. Accusations of inciting violence are serious, even prosecutable. Anyone lodging such charges — and especially a public entity doing so — best bring receipts.

We could easily offer conjecture, too. Maybe what’s “led some people to think it’s acceptable to make threatening statements” is the stream of questionable deaths in the jail that Sheriff Bill Waybourn runs, including one that led to murder charges against two jailers. Or we could suggest that the decay in decorum started with County Judge Tim O’Hare berating a duly elected commissioner or the county penalizing a pastor who dared to speak a few seconds over the designated timeline.

We won’t do that. Unlike the unnamed speaker in the Sheriff’s Office, we believe that the people behaving unacceptably, perhaps criminally, are responsible, not the people speaking words about county government.

No one should condone violence or the threat of it. Nor should public officials use either to stifle dissent or legitimate news coverage or commentary.

Reporters covering the county, particularly the string of questionable deaths in the jail, ask questions to try to hold elected officials accountable. Those officials often won’t answer, which is their prerogative, so reporters seek information from other sources.

The Sheriff’s Office suggests that such coverage should be curtailed, lest someone use it to justify threats. Again, we could say transparency about what happened in the jail deaths could accomplish the same thing — and without threatening to infringe on the Constitution.

If the response at public meetings has intensified, perhaps the sheriff’s lack of transparency has something to do with it. Perhaps answers about whether Mason Yancy, a 31-year-old whose family says his pleas for diabetes medication while jailed went unanswered, leading to his death, would help.

Threats of violence are clearly wrong, and one thing the Sheriff’s Office got right in the statement is that they should be vigorously prosecuted.

But if county officials truly believe that the words spoken by people — citizens and journalists alike — seeking better performance and accountability from their government are the issue, then they should look in the mirror, too.

This story was originally published February 5, 2025 at 3:49 PM.