Real-time breaking news from the sky and the ground. This category features urgent events, aviation incidents, police activity, weather, and developing stories captured and reported as they happen.
James Elmore Jr. booking photo. His trial is currently scheduled to begin Aug. 31, 2026, in Galveston County.
James Elmore Jr. Trial Moves Forward
Nearly four decades after several young women were found murdered and their bodies abandoned near Calder Road in Galveston County, the case against James Elmore Jr. continues moving toward trial.
For many victims’ families, the upcoming court proceedings represent another chance to finally see justice.
After checking the Galveston County court docket, I confirmed the case is still moving forward.
According to the current schedule:
Discovery Conference: August 10, 2026
Pretrial Conference: August 21, 2026
Jury Trial: August 31, 2026
The trial is scheduled in the 122nd District Court before Judge Jeth Jones.
If the schedule remains unchanged, I plan to attend the trial and provide updates from the courtroom.
Laura Miller’s Family Has Waited Decades for Answers
Tim Miller, founder of Texas EquuSearch, has assisted in hundreds of missing persons cases across Texas and the United States.
Laura Miller was last seen on September 10, 1984, after stopping at a convenience store in League City to use a pay phone. Her mother had dropped her off because the family’s phone had not yet been connected after they moved into the area.
Laura never returned home.
Memorial sign highlighting four victims whose cases have been linked to the same recovery site during the investigation into Clyde Hedrick and several unsolved homicides.
Nearly 17 months later, on February 2, 1986, her remains were discovered in a wooded area near Calder Road. During that same search, investigators also found the remains of Audrey Cook.
For both families, the upcoming trial comes after decades of unanswered questions.
In an earlier interview, Texas EquuSearch founder Tim Miller discussed Laura Miller’s disappearance, the years of searching, and why the case has remained so important to investigators and her family.
Watch: Tim Miller Discusses Laura Miller’s Disappearance
Charges Against James Elmore Jr.
James Elmore Jr. booking photo. He is scheduled to stand trial beginning Aug. 31, 2026, in Galveston County.
James Elmore Jr. remains jailed while awaiting trial.
According to jail records, he faces the following charges:
Manslaughter
Two counts of tampering with physical evidence involving a human corpse
Possession of visual material depicting sexual assault
Possession of child sexual abuse material
His total bond is listed at $4.5 million.
As with all criminal cases, these charges are allegations, and James Elmore Jr. is presumed innocent unless proven guilty in court.
Clyde Hedrick Died Before Additional Charges Could Be Filed
Clyde Hedrick was convicted in the murder of Ellen Beason. Investigators were preparing to charge him in additional cases before his death in March 2026.
The upcoming trial follows the death of Clyde Hedrick, who for years had been publicly linked to several Texas Killing Fields investigations.
Authorities were reportedly preparing additional charges against Hedrick. However, on March 21, 2026, Hedrick removed his breathing tube and died before those charges could be filed.
Hedrick was convicted only in the death of Ellen Beason. He served prison time for that case and was on parole when he died.
Trial Could Bring Long-Awaited Answers
Whether new evidence or testimony emerges during the trial remains to be seen.
However, for the families of Laura Miller, Audrey Cook, Donna Prudhomme, Heidi Fye, and others connected to the Calder Road investigations, the upcoming proceedings represent another opportunity to seek answers after nearly 40 years.
I’ll continue monitoring the Galveston County court docket and, if the trial remains on schedule, will be in the courtroom beginning August 31 to provide updates.
Whether you’re traveling to attend court proceedings or visiting Galveston Island, you can compare hotels throughout Galveston County before your trip.
As I continue covering cold cases and court proceedings, a reliable body camera is an important part of documenting interactions in the field. This is similar to the type of equipment many journalists and investigators use.
Amazon Affiliate Disclosure
Disclosure: As an Amazon Associate, I earn from qualifying purchases. If you purchase through my links, I may receive a small commission at no additional cost to you.
Thumbnail for my investigation into why I tracked down Rebecca Beard witness Cherie “Rio” Starr and the questions her account raises about one of Brazoria County’s longest-running cold cases.
When I interviewed Rebecca Beard’s sister, Carol Mize, I expected to learn more about the ongoing search for Becky’s remains and the questions that still surround the case.
Paul Taylor Jr. pleaded guilty to Rebecca Beard’s murder in 1995. However, Becky’s body has never been found.
A photograph of Rebecca Beard featured alongside new details shared by her sister, Carol Mize, during an interview about the investigation and the questions that continue to surround Becky’s disappearance.
Instead of discussing only the search, Carol shared details from a witness deposition that stopped me in my tracks.
The witness, Cherie “Rio” Starr, described two shooters, a duck hunting box, and an alleged effort to conceal Becky’s remains.
Some of those claims appeared to overlap with information that had been discussed publicly over the years. Other claims seemed extraordinary.
I did not know what to believe.
As a journalist, I knew I had to ask the witness my own questions.
Watch Carol Mize’s chilling interview about the alleged duck box.
Why I Decided to Find Cherie Starr
One question stayed with me.
If someone witnessed what Starr later described in her deposition, why wait decades to report it?
I also wanted to know whether investigators could verify any part of her account.
Rebecca’s family believed her allegations deserved to be investigated. I wanted to hear directly from the person making those claims.
That is what journalists do.
We ask questions.
Why I Waited to Tell This Story
When I knocked on Starr’s door, her identity had not been made public.
Because of that, I chose not to report her name or write about what happened that day.
I believed that was the fair and responsible decision.
Since then, Rebecca’s family has publicly discussed Starr. Brazoria County District Attorney Tom Selleck told the family that investigators do not currently consider her a credible witness.
That announcement could affect future investigative steps, including whether authorities continue searching locations connected to Starr’s allegations.
Now readers deserve to understand why I went looking for her in the first place.
What Carol Mize Told Me
Carol described allegations that were difficult to forget.
According to Carol, Starr claimed Becky was shot by two different people using two different guns.
Carol also said Starr described a duck hunting box and an alleged attempt to move and hide Becky’s remains.
The allegations were graphic.
If true, they could have changed the direction of the investigation.
They also raised obvious questions.
Why did no one hear this story for decades?
Why had the witness waited so long to come forward?
Those were the questions I wanted to ask.
Knocking on Doors Is Part of Journalism
During more than 30 years as a reporter, I have knocked on hundreds of doors.
Sometimes people answer questions.
Sometimes they decline.
Sometimes they close the door.
That is part of investigative journalism.
I introduced myself and asked Cherie Starr if she would answer a few questions about the Rebecca Beard case.
She told me she had no comment.
I thanked her and walked back to my Jeep.
What Happened When I Knocked on Cherie Starr’s Door
After knocking on Rebecca Beard witness Cherie “Rio” Starr’s door, I was issued a criminal trespass warning. I later requested the responding deputies’ body camera video through a public records request so readers can see what happened for themselves.
As I prepared to leave, Cherie Starr ran outside with another man.
They demanded to know who had given me her name.
I told them I never reveal confidential sources. Protecting sources is part of my job.
During the encounter, Starr said she was calling the district attorney, investigator Matt Wingo, and former DA investigator John Blankenship.
However, only local law enforcement officers responded to the scene.
According to my recollection, Starr then stood behind my Jeep while continuing to question me.
I did not believe I could safely back up while someone stood behind my vehicle.
I stayed where I was until deputies arrived.
They investigated the situation for about two hours.
Before I left, deputies issued me a criminal trespass warning and told me not to return to the property.
Why I Requested the Body Camera Video
I do not expect readers to rely only on my account.
That is why I requested the deputies’ body camera footage through the Texas Public Information Act.
As of today, I am still waiting for those records.
When I receive the footage, I will publish it so readers can watch the encounter and reach their own conclusions.
Transparency matters.
Why This Story Matters
Today, investigators have told the family they do not consider Starr a credible witness.
That does not change why I knocked on her door.
At the time, Rebecca’s family believed her allegations were important enough to investigate. I believed they were important enough to question.
I was not trying to prove Cherie Starr right.
I was not trying to prove her wrong.
I wanted answers.
That is my job.
Investigative journalism means asking difficult questions, even when those questions make people uncomfortable.
Whether readers agree with my reporting or not, I believe they deserve to understand why I knocked on Cherie “Rio” Starr’s door.
If you enjoy my investigative reporting, please consider checking out the books and gear I recommend for journalists and true crime readers.
Affiliate Disclosure: This post may contain affiliate links. If you purchase through these links, I may earn a small commission at no additional cost to you.
Rebecca Beard’s family continues to question evidence, sealed records, and investigative conclusions nearly four decades after her 1986 disappearance and murder.
Rebecca Beard Meeting: Family Presses Investigators on Evidence While Authorities Defend Their Conclusions
CLUTE, Texas — A recorded meeting between Rebecca “Becky” Beard’s family and Brazoria County officials reveals sharp questions about court records, physical evidence, witness statements and the continuing search for her remains.
Becky disappeared after leaving the Excalibur Club in Freeport in March 1986. Paul Taylor later pleaded guilty to her murder, but investigators have never recovered Rebecca Beard’s body.
During the meeting, Becky’s sister, Carol Mize, and mother, Linda Barnes, questioned Brazoria County District Attorney Tom Selleck, former DA investigator John Blankenship, investigator Tommy Hansen and others involved in reviewing the case.
Selleck prosecuted Taylor in the original case and now serves as Brazoria County district attorney. Blankenship is a former investigator with the DA’s Office who came out of retirement to help review the Beard case.
According to a professional biography presented for Hansen, he worked for the Galveston County Sheriff’s Office from 1973 until 2024. The biography states that he transferred his law-enforcement license to the Brazoria County District Attorney’s Office in January 2025 and remained assigned to an FBI task force.
Rebecca Beard’s Family Questions Court Records
Handwritten court notes and docket records became a major focus during the meeting as Rebecca Beard’s family questioned language, timelines, and evidence referenced in the original case.
A significant portion of the meeting centered on handwritten court notes and docket records from Taylor’s case.
Mize questioned language indicating that Larry Bullard planned to testify about “finding” Rebecca Beard’s body. She asked why the document appeared to reference a body when authorities have repeatedly said they never recovered Becky’s remains.
Officials disputed that interpretation. They said Bullard’s appearance concerned efforts to locate Becky’s body and the prosecution’s request for additional time to continue searching.
According to officials, the court had already selected a jury when Paul Taylor changed his plea before opening statements and testimony began. The court later released the jurors.
The family continued to challenge the wording in the court record. They argued the written language appeared more definitive than the explanation officials provided during the meeting.
Pre-Sentence Document Marked Not for Public Inspection
The family also questioned an envelope marked “Pre-Sentence Investigation,” “Judicial Document” and “Not for Public Inspection.”
Officials explained that judges use a pre-sentence investigation, commonly called a PSI, to review a standard report before sentencing. They said the restriction applied only to the PSI and did not mean anyone had secretly sealed evidence about Becky’s body.
Mize said she received the document among additional pages included with the records she purchased. She questioned why those pages were not part of the original page count.
The group also discussed the roles of the district clerk, deputy district clerk and judge in preparing, filing and maintaining court documents.
Family Raises Questions About the Shotgun
The possible murder weapon became another major point of discussion.
Taylor’s account has reportedly included a handgun. However, the family questioned why a shotgun appeared in the case evidence records.
Mize questioned why the evidence records appeared to show someone entered the shotgun into evidence after Taylor entered his plea. Officials disputed that timeline. They said investigators collected the firearm earlier and later returned it after the case concluded.
The conversation included references to two officers signing the weapon into evidence and to a man associated with the shotgun. The exact spelling of several names mentioned in the audio remains unclear.
The disagreement highlights a central concern for the family: whether the dates and descriptions in the evidence records fully match the official explanation of the case.
Officials Continue to Believe Paul Taylor Acted Alone
Paul Taylor Jr.‘s booking photograph from the Rebecca Beard murder investigation. During the meeting, officials defended the original prosecution and said they continue to believe Taylor acted alone in Becky’s murder.
Selleck and the investigators defended the original prosecution and said the available evidence continues to point to Taylor as the sole person responsible for Becky’s murder.
Officials said there was enough evidence to present the case to a grand jury, obtain an indictment and prepare for trial. Taylor ultimately changed his plea after the court selected a jury.
They also discussed a more recent interview with Taylor. According to officials in the meeting, that interview did not give them a reason to believe another person participated in the crime.
One official said the combined experience of those reviewing the case exceeded 100 years and that they had not developed a “gut feeling” that Taylor’s conviction was wrong.
Why Paul Taylor Led Investigators to a Search Site
Officials said Paul Taylor led investigators to this search area because he believed he buried Rebecca Beard there. During the meeting, they distinguished that location from what they believe may have happened to her remains afterward.
The family asked why Taylor led investigators to a location if he also claimed he did not know where Becky’s body was.
Officials drew a distinction between the location where Taylor believed he buried Becky and what may have happened to her remains afterward.
They said Taylor could identify the area where he believed the burial occurred but could not explain whether the remains had later been moved, scattered or affected by environmental conditions.
The family also discussed a tow truck driver, Jack Daniels, who reportedly pulled Taylor’s vehicle from a ditch around the time of the crime.
Investigators Say the Search Has Not Ended
Rebecca “Becky” Beard disappeared after leaving the Excalibur Club in Freeport in March 1986. During the meeting, officials told her family investigators continue searching for her remains nearly four decades later.
Officials told Mize and Barnes that investigators have not stopped looking for Becky.
They described the difficulties of recovering remains after four decades in a coastal area affected by hurricanes, flooding, animals, vegetation and natural decomposition.
An investigator said other homicide cases involving remains left in similar environments have also ended without a recovery.
Officials said credible information about a new location would still be investigated.
“Nobody’s giving up,” one participant told the family.
Family DNA Available for Future Comparisons
The meeting also included questions about DNA.
Officials said DNA from Becky’s biological relatives is available for comparison if unidentified remains are discovered in the future.
They explained that unidentified remains can be entered into national databases and compared with family reference samples. No match involving Becky had been reported at the time of the meeting.
The family said having DNA available is important because remains could be uncovered years later during construction, land development or another investigation.
Officials Address Witness Rio’s Statements
Witness Rio reportedly led investigators to this location in the Brazoria National Wildlife Refuge while describing his account of Rebecca Beard’s disappearance. During the meeting, officials addressed Rio’s statements as family members questioned his version of events.
The family also questioned claims made by a witness identified as Rio.
Rio has reportedly described multiple people participating in Becky’s assault, death and the movement of her remains. The account has included unusual claims involving an alligator and an ambulance.
Several participants said they had never previously heard that version.
Officials said numerous people named or connected to Rio’s account had been interviewed. They said investigators were unable to corroborate the substantive portions of the account concerning the crime or the people allegedly present.
They acknowledged that some general details could be confirmed, including the existence of certain locations. However, they said that did not verify the allegations about what happened to Becky.
Family Continues to Challenge the Official Account
The meeting showed a clear divide between the family’s unresolved questions and the conclusions defended by authorities.
Mize and Barnes pressed officials about the court record, the shotgun, witness accounts, search locations and the lack of Becky’s remains.
Officials maintained that Taylor acted alone, that the original prosecution was supported by sufficient evidence and that no credible information has changed that conclusion.
For Becky’s family, however, the absence of her remains and the conflicting language found in records continue to leave questions nearly 40 years after her disappearance.
Related Rebecca Beard Coverage
Read more about the conflicting information surrounding legal representation for Paul Taylor and what the Beard family says it was told:
Books examining unsolved disappearances and cold-case investigations can provide insight into how evidence, witness statements and investigative decisions are reviewed decades after a crime.
Investigative journalism books offer a closer look at court records, public-information requests, evidence logs and the challenges reporters face when examining conflicting official accounts.
Editor’s Note
This article is based on audio from a meeting involving Rebecca Beard’s family, Brazoria County officials and investigators. Statements are attributed to the people heard in the recording. Some names and portions of the conversation were difficult to understand and should be confirmed through original records before being treated as established fact.
Amazon Affiliate Disclosure: As an Amazon Associate, I earn from qualifying purchases at no additional cost to you.
Paul Taylor Jr. booking photo from the investigation into the 1986 disappearance and murder of Rebecca Beard. His recent prison messages are compared with statements discussed during a meeting with Rebecca Beard’s family regarding legal representation.
Rebecca Beard Family Questions Statements About Paul Taylor and Legal Representation
An autographed 1985 photo of Rebecca Beard inscribed, “To John, Love Always, Becky Beard.” The image is included in the Beard family’s article examining conflicting accounts about Paul Taylor Jr. and legal representation.
The family of Rebecca Beard says newly reviewed prison messages from Paul Taylor raise questions about statements made during a meeting with Brazoria County officials regarding legal representation and the Texas Innocence Project.
According to Rebecca Beard’s sister, Carol Mize, family members met with officials to discuss developments in the decades-old murder case. During that meeting, participants discussed whether Taylor had been offered legal representation.
Carol Mize Says Officials Claimed Paul Taylor Declined Legal Representation
According to Carol Mize, participants at the meeting stated that Paul Taylor had been offered legal representation but declined the offer.
That statement prompted questions from the Beard family after reviewing messages Taylor later sent from prison.
Paul Taylor’s Messages Tell a Different Story
Screenshots of prison messages sent by Paul Taylor Jr. that are compared with statements discussed during a meeting with Rebecca Beard’s family regarding legal representation and the Texas Innocence Project.
In a message provided to the Beard family, Taylor wrote:
“I HAVE NO ATTORNEY OR FUNDS!”
He also wrote:
“NO ONE HAS EVER CONTACTED ME ABOUT RIGHTS, HELP, OR TEXAS INNOCENT PROJECT!!”
Taylor added that he was unaware of a sealed case document, writing:
“DIDN’T KNOW ABOUT CASE SEALED…”
In a more recent message to Investigative Reporter Tammy Rose, Taylor wrote:
“I MEAN NO DISRESPECT TO YOU and (REDACTED) ! BUT I’LL GIVE A STATEMENT WHEN THIS IS OVER!!”
Conflicting Accounts Raise New Questions
Carol Mize says officials stated Paul Taylor declined legal representation that had been offered to him. Taylor’s prison messages later presented a different account, raising new questions in the Rebecca Beard case.
According to Carol Mize, officials stated during the meeting that Paul Taylor declined legal representation that had been offered to him.
Taylor’s own written messages present a different account. In those messages, he states that he has no attorney, no funds, and was never contacted about rights, legal help, or the Texas Innocence Project.
At this time, Tammy Rose has not independently verified which account is accurate. The article reflects statements made during the meeting, as described by Carol Mize, alongside Taylor’s own written messages.
Editor’s Note
This article is based on statements made during a meeting attended by Rebecca Beard’s family, as described by Carol Mize, and on messages attributed to Paul Taylor. The statements represent differing accounts and are presented to accurately reflect what each party said.
⸻
If you enjoy following long-term investigations and behind-the-scenes reporting, check out the gear I personally use in the field and while traveling.
If you’re fascinated by unsolved mysteries and criminal investigations, browse my collection of recommended true crime books covering some of the most compelling cases ever investigated.
Former Deputy Kent McGowen Responds to Susan White 911 Call, Allegations Before 1992 Shooting
By Investigative Reporter Tammy RoseThe Interview
More than three decades after the fatal shooting of Susan White, former Harris County Sheriff’s Office Deputy Kent McGowen is publicly responding to allegations White made before the shooting, including claims she voiced during calls to 911.
In an exclusive interview with Investigative Reporter Tammy Rose, McGowen discussed the August 25, 1992 shooting, disputed allegations that he sexually harassed White, addressed why she repeatedly mentioned his name and shared courtroom demonstration photographs that he says support his version of events.
The interview pairs portions of White’s 911 call with McGowen’s current account, allowing readers to compare both versions of events.
Viewer Note: This story contains discussion of a fatal officer-involved shooting and includes portions of a 911 call that some readers may find disturbing.
⸻
Before entering law enforcement, Kent McGowen served in the U.S. Air Force. He later worked as a Houston police officer and Harris County deputy before the Aug. 25, 1992, fatal shooting of Susan White that led to two criminal trials and his eventual conviction.
Background not the Case
Before beginning his law enforcement career, Kent McGowen served in the United States Air Force.
After leaving the military, he joined the Houston Police Department before later serving with the Harris County Sheriff’s Office. During his career, he received commendations and officer recognition awards.
After serving in the U.S. Air Force, Kent McGowen joined the Houston Police Department before later serving with the Harris County Sheriff’s Office.
Background on the Case
Before beginning his law enforcement career, Kent McGowen served in the United States Air Force.
After leaving the military, he joined the Houston Police Department before later serving with the Harris County Sheriff’s Office. During his career, he received commendations and officer recognition awards.
McGowen’s career changed forever on August 25, 1992, when deputies serving a felony warrant fatally shot Susan White at her home.
A jury convicted McGowen of murder in his first trial. An appellate court later overturned that conviction. A second jury convicted him in 2002. He ultimately served approximately 19 years in prison before his release in 2021.
Book About the Case
Journalist Jerry Langton later examined the case in Reasonable Doubts: How Rumor and Innuendo Convicted Deputy Kent McGowen of Murder. The book explores the investigation, the two trials and McGowen’s conviction.
In addition to the trial record, Kent McGowen has provided investigative records and expert reports that he says support his account of the shooting.
Among the records McGowen provided is a forensic review by consulting forensic scientist Dr. Edward E. Hueske.
Hueske prepared the review during McGowen’s legal proceedings.
McGowen also provided a statement he wrote at the request of Harris County Assistant District Attorney Baldwin Chin, then chief of the Harris County District Attorney’s Office Post Conviction Integrity Review Unit, during the office’s review of his case in 2011–2012.
According to McGowen, the statement summarizes the case and his account of events as they existed during the Harris County District Attorney’s Office Post Conviction Integrity Review in 2011-2012.
After two criminal trials stemming from the Aug. 25, 1992, fatal shooting of Susan White, Kent McGowen was ultimately convicted of murder. He served approximately 19 years in the Texas Department of Criminal Justice before his release in 2021.
⸻
Watch the Full Investigation
The television report below includes exclusive interview excerpts with Kent McGowen, courtroom demonstration photographs and additional background on the Susan White case.
⸻
Listen to Susan White’s 911 Call
The audio below captures one of Susan White’s calls to 911 before deputies entered her home.
During the recording, White repeatedly asks dispatchers for help and expresses fear as deputies remain outside the residence.
The call contains emotional language and may be disturbing to some listeners.
Susan White’s 911 Call Before Deputies Entered The Home
The video and audio above include one of Susan White’s 911 calls before deputies entered the home.
During the recording, White repeatedly asks dispatchers for help while describing people outside her home.
The recording contains emotional language that some listeners may find disturbing.
⸻
McGowen Strongly Disputes White’s Allegations
Kent McGowen while serving with the Waller County Sheriff’s Office at age 19, before joining the Houston Police Department pending completion of his background investigation.
During his interview with Investigative Reporter Tammy Rose, McGowen firmly denied White’s allegations.
According to McGowen, he never sexually harassed White, never stalked her and never had the repeated contacts she described.
“I had never pulled her over. I’d never spoken to her,” McGowen said during the interview.
McGowen believes White confused him with another deputy who previously worked in the area.
He told Tammy Rose that investigators later uncovered witness statements he believes support that explanation.
According to McGowen, White mistakenly identified him after seeing him during the arrest of her son and others connected to a burglary investigation.
⸻
Why Did White Know McGowen’s Name?
Susan White. Investigators and former Deputy Kent McGowen have offered differing explanations for why White repeatedly mentioned his name before the August 25, 1992, shooting.
One of the questions surrounding the case is why White repeatedly mentioned McGowen by name before the shooting.
McGowen offered his explanation during the interview.
He said White arrived at the scene after deputies arrested her son and began asking officers who “McGowen” was.
According to McGowen, several deputies pointed in different directions while trying to identify him, causing White to approach multiple officers before eventually speaking with him.
McGowen believes that encounter explains why she later knew his name.
He disputes claims that he had an ongoing personal conflict with White before the shooting.
⸻
McGowen Says White Mistook Him for Another Deputy
McGowen also challenged allegations that he repeatedly stopped or harassed White before the shooting.
Instead, he told Tammy Rose that another deputy had previous contact with White and believes she mistakenly associated him with those earlier encounters.
McGowen said he never received phone calls from White, never contacted her outside official duties and never had a personal relationship with her.
He also pointed to subpoenaed telephone records that he says failed to show communication between them.
Those statements reflect McGowen’s account. Investigative Reporter Tammy Rose continues reviewing court records, witness statements and other documents connected to the case.
⸻
McGowen’s Description of White’s Condition
McGowen also discussed White’s condition while deputies attempted to serve the warrant.
According to McGowen, White appeared to be slurring her speech as deputies tried to communicate with her through the front door.
He told Tammy Rose he believed White was impaired and described her behavior as confused and erratic.
McGowen said those observations influenced how he interpreted her actions that morning.
His statements represent his account of the encounter and should not be interpreted as independent findings of fact.
⸻
The Warrant That Led to the Shooting
Left to right: Confidential informant Michael Shaffer, Susan White and Jason Aguillard, Susan White’s teenage son.
According to McGowen, deputies went to Susan White’s home to serve a felony retaliation warrant after investigators alleged she threatened a confidential informant connected to a burglary investigation.
McGowen said he first attempted to obtain the warrant during the overnight hours but claimed a judge was unavailable to sign it. He returned the following morning with the approved warrant and several deputies to serve it.
He told Investigative Reporter Tammy Rose that deputies knocked on the front door for several minutes, repeatedly identified themselves as members of the Harris County Sheriff’s Office and asked White to come outside.
According to McGowen, White refused to open the door.
McGowen said deputies eventually forced entry after obtaining permission from a supervisor.
⸻
McGowen Describes What Happened Inside
According to McGowen, deputies entered the home and began clearing rooms while searching for White.
He told Tammy Rose he saw White move through the house toward a bedroom. He followed her and said she picked up a handgun after entering the room.
McGowen said he ordered White three times to drop the weapon.
He claims White raised the handgun toward him and began placing her finger on the trigger.
Believing his life and the lives of the other deputies were in danger, McGowen fired three shots.
He has consistently maintained that he acted in self-defense.
Prosecutors disputed that version of events during both criminal trials.
⸻
Courtroom Demonstration Photos
Former deputy Kent McGowen recently provided Investigative Reporter Tammy Rose with these courtroom demonstration photographs, which he says were used during legal proceedings to illustrate his version of the Aug. 25, 1992, fatal shooting of Susan White. The images reflect McGowen’s account and are presented for context alongside court records, the 911 call, and his interview.
McGowen recently provided Investigative Reporter Tammy Rose with courtroom demonstration photographs that he says were used during legal proceedings to explain his version of the shooting.
Several photographs include handwritten descriptions showing where McGowen says he was standing, where White was positioned and where he believes the handgun came to rest after the shooting.
Other images illustrate the angle from which he says he observed White inside the bedroom.
The photographs are not crime scene photographs. Instead, they are courtroom demonstrations created to illustrate McGowen’s account during litigation.
⸻
One Issue Continues to Draw Attention
One issue discussed during Tammy Rose’s interview involved which hand White used to hold the handgun.
McGowen maintains White pointed the weapon with her right hand before he fired.
During the interview, Tammy Rose asked McGowen about reports indicating White was left-handed.
McGowen stood by his account and said the position of the handgun after the shooting matched what he remembered seeing inside the bedroom.
That issue remains one of several points that have been debated for years.
⸻
McGowen Says Jurors Never Heard Everything
During the interview, McGowen repeatedly argued that jurors never heard all of the evidence he believes supports his account.
He pointed to witness statements, subpoenaed records and other documents that he says were unavailable or never fully presented during trial.
McGowen also criticized how the case was investigated and prosecuted.
Those claims have not been independently verified by Investigative Reporter Tammy Rose and remain part of McGowen’s account of the case.
⸻
Two Trials, Two Different Juries
The Susan White case was presented to two different juries.
McGowen’s first murder conviction was later overturned on appeal, resulting in a new trial.
Following that second trial, another jury convicted McGowen of murder in 2002.
He ultimately served approximately 19 years in prison before his release in 2021.
Since leaving prison, McGowen has continued speaking publicly about the shooting and maintains he acted lawfully while serving the warrant.
⸻
Why Revisit the Susan White Case Now?
More than 30 years after the shooting, Kent McGowen continues to challenge the conclusions reached during his criminal case.
Since his release from prison in 2021, he has participated in interviews, worked with author Jerry Langton on a book about his case and continues to review court records and investigative documents.
His recent interview with Investigative Reporter Tammy Rose offers readers an opportunity to hear his account in his own words while comparing those statements with court records, courtroom exhibits and the 911 call placed by Susan White.
As with any decades-old criminal case, many questions remain disputed.
Tammy Rose will continue reviewing court records, witness statements and other documents connected to the investigation as additional records become available.
⸻
Editor’s Note: This article includes court records, historical documents, portions of Susan White’s 911 call, and an interview with Joseph Kent McGowen. McGowen disputes allegations made against him before the shooting. The interview is presented so readers can review his response in full.
This interview is part of an ongoing investigative series examining Kent McGowen’s criminal case and new claims he has made since his release from prison.
Readers can also follow Tammy Rose’s continuing investigation into McGowen’s allegations involving convicted serial killer Roy Alan Stuart.
Investigator Matt Wingo Raises Questions About Roy Alan Stuart Prison Journal Story
Before publishing my interview with former Harris County deputy Kent McGowen and his handwritten prison journals about convicted serial killer Roy Alan Stuart, I contacted investigator Matt Wingo seeking an interview and comment.
I did not receive an interview before my publication deadline.
After the story was published, Wingo text messaged and emailed me several times expressing concerns about the accuracy of information contained in McGowen’s journals. Although one of his text messages stated he did not want further contact, he continued sending additional emails outlining what he believes are significant factual problems.
Why I Reported the Story the Way I Did
The messages document that Wingo and McGowen communicated. They do not independently establish that every claim discussed in those communications is accurate.
July 13, 2023 text message exchange between investigator Matt Wingo and former Harris County deputy Kent McGowen discussing Roy Alan Stuart. The messages include discussion of an estimated homicide count and references to reviewing additional investigative records.
One issue readers should understand is the homicide count.
Before publication, I had seen a July 2023 message between Wingo and McGowen in which Wingo wrote:
“I have him killing 14 but that’s light, what we know about.”
However, because I was unable to interview Wingo before publication, I did not feel it was appropriate to publish his estimate as fact without giving him the opportunity to explain how he reached that number.
Instead, I reported what Kent McGowen told me during my interview and clearly identified him as the source of those statements. Throughout my reporting, I repeatedly noted that many of the claims contained in McGowen’s journals remain unverified.
Editor’s Note – July 10, 2026
After Investigator Matt Wingo contacted me to point out factual errors in my original article, I reexamined Kent McGowen’s original handwritten journals. During that review, I determined that I had misinterpreted several entries involving investigator communications. The journals document communications between Kent McGowen and investigators—including letters, telephone calls, emails, text messages and other correspondence. Upon reexamining the journals, I determined I had incorrectly interpreted some entries as documenting in-person meetings as I had previously interpreted.
The underlying claims in this article remain attributed to Kent McGowen’s interview and handwritten journals unless otherwise noted. As with the original publication, these allegations have not been independently verified by this news organization.
Additional Documents Reviewed
Excerpts from Kent McGowen’s original handwritten prison journals referencing communications with investigators and agencies regarding information he said Roy Alan Stuart shared while they were incarcerated together.
In addition to the handwritten journals, I also reviewed text messages, emails, and other communications exchanged between Matt Wingo and Kent McGowen regarding Roy Alan Stuart as part of this reporting.
The Questions That Remain
Several important questions remain unanswered.
Which Texas Ranger or Rangers were referenced in McGowen’s journals?
Can the journal entries regarding investigator communications be independently corroborated through public records or other witnesses?
Which portions of the journals can be independently verified?
Which claims cannot currently be verified?
Are there additional public records that support or contradict McGowen’s account?
I intend to continue reporting on these questions as more information becomes available.
⸻
More Resources
If stories about cold cases, victims, and investigative journalism matter to you, these books and reports may also be helpful.
Disclosure: As an Amazon Associate, I earn from qualifying purchases. If you purchase through my affiliate links, I may receive a small commission at no additional cost to you. Thank you for supporting my independent investigative journalism.
New Messages Show Multiple Law Enforcement Officials Responded to Kent McGowen Regarding Roy Alan Stuart Information.
By Investigative Reporter Tammy Rose
Additional text messages obtained during my investigation into Roy Alan Stuart show Kent McGowen exchanged text messages with multiple law enforcement officials after providing information from his prison journals.
The messages do not verify the allegations contained in McGowen’s journals. However, they do document that officials from multiple agencies acknowledged receiving or discussing the information and, in some cases, indicated they intended to review the material.
FBI Safe Streets Task Force Acknowledged the Request
In a text message dated January 5, 2023, FBI Safe Streets Task Force Lt. Tommy Hansen responded to McGowen regarding the Roy Alan Stuart journals.
Hansen wrote:
A January 5, 2023 text message from FBI Safe Streets Task Force Lt. Tommy Hansen acknowledges Kent McGowen’s request to review his Roy Alan Stuart prison journals. Personal phone number has been redacted.
“Myself nor Agent Brown have forgot about request to meet with us and review your diary notes ref Roy Alan Stewart.”
He continued by explaining that both investigators were handling several major cases before adding:
“We both have a number of major ongoing cases. We will reach in few weeks to meet.”
The message documents that McGowen’s request remained under consideration while investigators focused on other active investigations.
John Blankenship Responded to McGowen’s Information
On May 2, 2023, McGowen received another text message from John Blankenship after sending additional information.
In a May 2, 2023 text message, John Blankenship told Kent McGowen he had discussed the Roy Alan Stuart information with his supervisor and that a Texas Ranger would work on the matter.
Blankenship wrote:
“I ran our conversation by my boss… he wants our new Texas Ranger to work on this.”
He added that he would contact McGowen again once they had a plan in place.
The message indicates McGowen’s information was discussed internally and that a Texas Ranger was expected to become involved.
Texas Ranger Contact
Kent McGowen provided this contact entry identifying Texas Ranger Lieutenant Jeff Wolf while documenting his efforts to share information related to Roy Alan Stuart with law enforcement. The phone number has been redacted for privacy.
McGowen also provided a contact entry identifying Texas Ranger Lieutenant Jeff Wolf.
While a contact listing alone does not establish what communications occurred, it is consistent with McGowen’s account that he attempted to provide his journals to multiple law enforcement agencies.
What the Messages Show
The text messages do not establish that Roy Alan Stuart’s alleged confessions were verified.
They also do not confirm that investigators concluded Stuart committed the crimes described in McGowen’s journals.
What they do show is that officials representing multiple agencies acknowledged receiving or discussing McGowen’s information and communicated with him regarding his request to have the material reviewed.
Those communications provide additional documentation supporting McGowen’s longstanding claim that he repeatedly attempted to bring the information to law enforcement after documenting his conversations with Stuart in prison.
Continuing Investigation
I continue to review prison journals, text messages, official records, and other documents related to Roy Alan Stuart.
If you have firsthand information regarding Roy Alan Stuart, the prison journals, or any of the cases discussed, you can contact me confidentially.
As with all of my reporting, allegations contained in the journals remain unverified unless supported by independent evidence or official records.
Disclosure: As an Amazon Associate, I earn from qualifying purchases. If you purchase through my affiliate links, I may receive a small commission at no additional cost to you. Thank you for supporting my investigative journalism.
The requested records involve outside attorneys hired by Brazoria County in connection with the John Mendoza Jr. shooting investigation.
July 2, 2026: Brazoria County District Attorney’s Office notified requester Kevin Henry that it was asking the Texas Attorney General to determine whether records related to outside legal counsel could be withheld under the Texas Public Information Act.
Brazoria County DA Asks Texas Attorney General to Withhold Records on Outside Counsel Hired After John Mendoza Jr. Shooting
By Investigative Reporter Tammy Rose
Why did Brazoria County hire outside legal counsel following the fatal shooting of John Mendoza Jr., and why is the District Attorney now asking the Texas Attorney General to keep those records from the public?
Those are questions at the center of a new Texas Public Information Act dispute after podcast host Kevin Henry requested documents related to outside attorneys retained by Brazoria County following the officer-involved shooting.
The records request seeks documents that would show:
The attorney engagement letter.
The scope of legal representation.
Financial terms of the agreement.
Communications regarding hiring outside counsel.
Authority used to retain the attorneys.
Invoices and payment records.
According to the request, the records involve outside attorney Norman Giles and the law firm Lewis Brisbois Bisgaard & Smith LLP in connection with matters involving John Mendoza Jr., John Mendoza Sr., and attorney Charles Adams.
DA Requests Attorney General Ruling
On July 2, 2026, the Brazoria County District Attorney’s Office notified Kevin Henry that it was seeking a Texas Attorney General ruling on whether records related to outside legal counsel could be withheld under the Texas Public Information Act.
Instead of immediately releasing the records, Brazoria County Criminal District Attorney Tom Selleck notified the Texas Attorney General that his office intends to seek permission to withhold portions of the requested information.
In the July 2, 2026 letter, the DA cites several exceptions under the Texas Public Information Act, including:
Confidential information
Litigation exception
Law enforcement exception
Agency memoranda
The Attorney General will ultimately determine whether those claimed exemptions apply.
Kevin Henry Challenges the County’s Position
Kevin Henry filed the public records request seeking contracts, invoices, communications, and related records concerning outside legal counsel hired by Brazoria County in connection with the John Mendoza Jr. investigation. The Brazoria County District Attorney’s Office later notified him it was seeking a Texas Attorney General ruling on whether some of those records could be withheld.
Kevin Henry argues the requested documents involve public expenditures rather than protected legal advice.
In his filing, he contends that:
Engagement letters for outside legal services are generally public records.
Financial terms of public contracts are typically subject to disclosure.
Outside counsel was retained before litigation was filed.
The public has a strong interest in understanding how taxpayer money is being spent following the fatal shooting.
Henry also argues that disclosure is particularly important because the request concerns the death of John Mendoza Jr. during an encounter with a Brazoria County Sheriff’s deputy.
Why This Matters
When government agencies retain outside attorneys, taxpayers often pay those legal expenses.
The records requested could provide additional information about:
When outside counsel was hired.
What work the attorneys were retained to perform.
How much taxpayers may ultimately pay.
The legal scope of the representation.
Whether those documents remain confidential now rests with the Texas Attorney General’s Office.
What Happens Next
The Attorney General will review both Brazoria County’s arguments for withholding the records and Kevin Henry’s response opposing those claims.
If the Attorney General orders disclosure, Brazoria County may be required to release some or all of the requested documents. If the ruling favors the county, portions of the records could remain withheld.
I’ll continue following this public records dispute and provide updates as additional filings become available.
The Texas Attorney General will now determine whether the requested records must be released or whether the county may lawfully withhold some or all of them under the Texas Public Information Act.
More John Mendoza Jr. Coverage: Follow my ongoing investigative reporting into the John Mendoza Jr. shooting, including public records requests, legal filings, the outside counsel controversy, attorney statements, and previous developments in the case.
Recommended Reporting Gear
As an Amazon Associate, I earn from qualifying purchases at no additional cost to you. Every purchase made through these links helps support my independent investigative reporting and allows me to continue covering stories like this one. Thank you for your support.
Sheriff Department Scam Call: I Almost Fell for It
By Investigative Reporter Tammy Rose
I receive unusual phone calls almost every day as a reporter. Most are tips, questions, or requests for information.
But one phone call caught me completely off guard.
Someone claiming to be with a sheriff’s department called and said I had missed a federal grand jury summons. The caller sounded calm, professional, and convincing. They provided a name and a badge number, then even transferred me to what appeared to be the sheriff’s office.
For a moment, I believed it.
In fact, I drove to the sheriff’s office to find out what was going on.
That’s when I learned the call wasn’t legitimate.
They Called Again
This week, I received two more calls that appeared to be from the same scam.
This time, I didn’t answer.
Instead, I let the calls go to voicemail because I immediately recognized the warning signs from my previous experience.
The voicemail claimed to be from someone identifying themselves as:
“Anthony Little, badge number 5254…”
The recording was difficult to understand, but it was enough to remind me how convincing these scams can sound.
(Listen to the voicemail below.)
Why This Scam Is So Effective
The people behind these calls know exactly how to create panic.
They often claim you’ve:
Missed jury duty.
Missed a federal grand jury summons.
Have an outstanding warrant.
Must respond immediately to avoid arrest.
The goal is simple: convince you to act before you have time to think.
Fortunately, I already knew something wasn’t right because I had experienced a similar scam before.
What Should You Do?
If you receive a call claiming to be from a sheriff’s office or another law enforcement agency:
Stay calm.
Do not provide personal information.
Never send money or gift cards.
Do not follow payment instructions given over the phone.
Hang up and contact the agency using its publicly listed phone number.
Legitimate law enforcement agencies do not typically demand immediate payment over the phone or threaten arrest unless you act immediately.
One Lesson I Won’t Forget
Looking back, I don’t mind admitting that I almost believed the first call.
That’s exactly why these scams continue to work.
If someone who spends a career asking questions can momentarily wonder whether a call is real, imagine how convincing these callers can sound to someone who has never encountered this type of scam before.
The experience reminded me that it’s always better to verify information through official channels than to react out of fear.
Have You Received One?
Have you received a similar phone call claiming to be from a sheriff’s office or another law enforcement agency?
Tell me what happened in the comments below. Your experience could help warn someone else before they become the next victim.
If these scammers call me again, I may answer—not because I believe them, but because I want to expose exactly how these scams work and share that information with you.
Products That Can Help Reduce Scam Calls
Receiving repeated scam calls is frustrating, but there are products that may help protect your personal information and reduce unwanted calls.
Below are a few items I recommend. As an Amazon Associate, I earn from qualifying purchases at no additional cost to you. Your support helps fund my independent investigative reporting.
Former Harris County deputy Kent McGowen says one of the most unexpected chapters of his life began while serving a prison sentence in the Texas Department of Criminal Justice.
McGowen was convicted in the 1992 murder of Susan White and spent 19 years in prison before he was paroled. Since his release, he has spoken publicly about his case and his time in prison, including conversations he says he had with convicted serial killer Roy Alan Stuart.
According to McGowen, he spent nearly two years housed near convicted serial killer Roy Alan Stuart, where the two developed an unlikely relationship that led to conversations about alleged unsolved murders across Southeast Texas.
McGowen says he carefully documented those conversations, typed formal reports, and later turned the information over to multiple law enforcement agencies.
I have not independently verified Stuart’s alleged prison statements or whether they resulted in any solved criminal cases.
An Unlikely Prison Conversation
McGowen told me that most inmates avoided Stuart, describing him as someone who appeared exactly how many people would imagine a serial killer.
After noticing Stewart sitting alone, McGowen said he bought him a pint of ice cream and a soft drink from the prison commissary.
According to McGowen, that simple act led Stuart to begin discussing murders he claimed to have committed throughout Texas.
“Nobody would talk to Roy,” McGowen said. “After that, he just started talking.”
McGowen said one reason he began paying close attention was because Stuart showed him what McGowen recalls was a letter that Stuart claimed had been written by attorney Tom Selleck. According to McGowen, Stuart also claimed Selleck represented him at the time. Selleck currently serves as the Brazoria County Criminal District Attorney and previously worked as an assistant district attorney before entering private practice. I have not independently verified the letter, its authenticity, or Stuart’s claim regarding the alleged legal representation.
Claims Of Additional Victims
Historical newspaper clipping from The Victoria Advocate (May 1994) reporting Roy Alan Stuart’s arrest in Brazoria County. The article states Stuart had been investigated in multiple homicide and sexual assault cases. Included for historical context alongside Kent McGowen’s interview.
McGowen alleges Stuart described several killings that were never publicly connected to him.
Among the stories McGowen recalls were allegations involving:
A woman allegedly abducted from Houston during rodeo season.
A victim allegedly killed near a waterway in Brazoria County.
Bodies allegedly disposed of in or near the Brazos River.
Additional killings Stuart allegedly discussed involving Southeast Texas.
McGowen says Stuart showed no remorse while recounting the alleged crimes.
Documenting Every Conversation
Rather than relying on memory, McGowen says he immediately began documenting the conversations.
He kept handwritten notes while incarcerated before later typing formal reports describing what Stuart allegedly told him.
McGowen says he eventually forwarded those reports to multiple law enforcement agencies, including investigators in several Texas counties.
“I wanted to document everything while it was still fresh,” McGowen said.
Investigators Later Contacted Him
According to McGowen, investigators later reached out requesting copies of his notes.
He says an FBI agent also contacted him after learning about the reports and asked to review the journals because they reflected his contemporaneous observations while Stuart was allegedly making the statements.
McGowen says he continues to maintain copies of those writings today.
Questions Still Remain
Whether Stuart’s alleged prison statements can ever be verified remains unknown.
At this time, I have not found any publicly available records that independently confirm the additional alleged victims described by McGowen.
However, McGowen believes investigators considered the information important enough to request his documentation years after the conversations took place.
As part of my continuing coverage, I am preparing additional public records requests to determine what investigative steps, if any, followed McGowen’s submissions.
This remains an active reporting project. If you have firsthand knowledge related to Roy Alan Stuart or the investigations discussed in this article, contact me through ChopperRose.com
Related Coverage
Convicted Former Deputy Says He Was Framed — But Key Questions Remain(coming soon)
