The Texas Attorney General ruled Aug. 28, 2026, that Brazoria County may withhold investigative information tied to the Rebecca “Becky” Beard case, but must release basic information.
More records in the decades-old Rebecca “Becky” Beard case will remain out of public view for now.
The Texas Attorney General issued a new ruling Aug. 28 allowing Brazoria County to withhold investigative information because authorities say it relates to an ongoing criminal case.
But the ruling comes with an important exception.
Brazoria County must release the basic information.
I have already requested it.
New ruling in the Rebecca Beard records investigation
Rebecca “Becky” Beard pictured with her daughter before Becky disappeared from Freeport, Texas, in March 1986.
Beard was 22 when she disappeared after leaving the Excalibur Club in Freeport in March 1986.
Her body has never been recovered.
Paul Taylor Jr. pleaded guilty in 1995 in connection with her death, but questions surrounding the case have continued for decades.
My investigation has included multiple public information requests seeking Brazoria County records connected to the case.
Those requests have now resulted in another Attorney General ruling.
Brazoria County says the criminal case is ongoing
The Aug. 28 decision provides an important detail about the current status of the investigation.
According to the Attorney General, Brazoria County said a law enforcement agency objected to releasing the information because it “relates to an ongoing criminal case.”
The county argued that releasing the records could interfere with that case.
The Attorney General agreed that the investigative information may be withheld under Section 552.108(a)(1) of the Texas Government Code.
However, the ruling also says the county must release basic information under Section 552.108(c).
Eight Brazoria County records requests included in ruling
The Attorney General combined eight Brazoria County reference numbers in the decision:
26-1859, 26-1865, 26-1874, 26-1933, 26-1947, 26-1950, 26-1991 and 26-2012.
The Attorney General assigned the matter request ID 26-033498.
The Aug. 28 decision is OR2026-038106.
What will Brazoria County release?
That is now the question.
The ruling does not mean Brazoria County must turn over the entire investigative file.
It does mean the county cannot withhold everything.
I have submitted a follow-up request seeking the basic information that the Attorney General says must be released.
Once those records arrive, I will review them and report what they reveal.
After 40 years, the Rebecca Beard case continues to generate new questions — and the state now confirms that authorities still consider the matter tied to an ongoing criminal case.
Read the Attorney General ruling
I have included the Aug. 28, 2026 Texas Attorney General ruling connected to these Brazoria County records requests below.
The ruling, OR2026-038106, says the county may withhold investigative information tied to the ongoing criminal case, but must release basic information.
For readers traveling to Brazoria County for court proceedings, research or other business, Hotels.com can help compare accommodations throughout the area and along the Texas Gulf Coast.
This post may contain affiliate links. I may earn a commission from qualifying bookings at no additional cost to you.
Public-records investigations often mean sorting through court filings, police reports, photographs and hundreds of pages of documents. Amazonhas portable scanners, external drives, document organizers and other tools that can help keep large research projects organized.
As an Amazon Associate, I earn from qualifying purchases.
Texas Department of Public Safety missing person bulletin for Rebecca “Becky” Beard, who disappeared in 1986.
Brazoria County seeks to withhold Rebecca Beard records
Brazoria County prosecutors are asking the Texas Attorney General for permission to withhold records connected to the renewed investigation into the 1986 disappearance and murder of Rebecca “Becky” Beard.
The August 25 filing also reveals new details about the investigation.
Prosecutors confirmed investigators examined information involving possible additional suspects in Beard’s murder. They also confirmed investigators recently presented their findings to a Brazoria County grand jury.
The grand jury took no action.
Records request targeted 2026 investigation
I submitted a Texas Public Information Act request on August 10 seeking records related to the 2026 investigation.
The request focused on information provided by Cherie Starr, also known as “Rio.”
I requested interviews, statements, reports, recordings, photographs, maps and investigative notes connected to Starr’s information.
I also sought records concerning any location Starr identified as a possible site for Beard’s remains or other evidence.
The request included records involving a possible search, excavation or dig.
I also requested communications between the Brazoria County District Attorney’s Office, Brazoria County Sheriff’s Office, Texas Rangers and other law enforcement agencies.
Importantly, the request did not seek secret grand jury testimony, deliberations, voting records or juror identities.
Brazoria County confirms responsive records exist
The District Attorney’s Office confirmed it holds records that respond to the request.
However, prosecutors want to withhold those records in their entirety.
In its August 25 letter to the Texas Attorney General, the DA’s Office cited the law-enforcement exception under Section 552.108 of the Texas Government Code.
Prosecutors argue that Beard’s murder investigation remains open because her body has never been recovered.
They contend releasing the requested records could interfere with that continuing investigation.
Filing reveals investigation of possible additional suspects
The filing provides an important glimpse into what happened during the renewed investigation.
Prosecutors wrote that their office had recently investigated “other possible actors/defendants” in Beard’s murder.
According to the filing, investigators presented those findings to a Brazoria County grand jury.
The DA’s Office said the grand jury took no action because investigators did not develop other credible suspects.
That disclosure provides new information about the scope of the 2026 investigation.
It shows investigators did more than simply review an old case file. They examined whether other people may have played a role in Beard’s murder and brought those findings before a grand jury.
Paul Taylor was convicted, but Becky remains missing
John Paul Taylor Jr. pleaded guilty in 1995 to murdering Beard.
Beard was 22 when she disappeared in March 1986.
Her body has never been recovered.
The DA’s filing cites that fact as one reason the murder investigation remains open. Prosecutors argue law enforcement must remain able to investigate credible new leads if they emerge.
Prosecutors also claim attorney work-product protection
The District Attorney’s Office makes another argument for withholding the records.
Prosecutors say the requested investigative notes and materials contain attorney work product.
According to the filing, a DA investigator prepared the records while working at the direction of an appointed special prosecutor.
The DA argues the documents contain investigative strategy, mental impressions and legal reasoning connected to potential criminal litigation.
For those reasons, prosecutors asked the Attorney General to allow them to withhold all of the responsive records.
The Attorney General will decide
The August 25 filing is not a final ruling on my records request.
It is Brazoria County’s argument for why the records should remain confidential.
The Texas Attorney General’s Office will now review the arguments and determine whether state law allows Brazoria County to withhold the requested material.
The decision could allow the county to withhold the records, require the release of some information, or require additional responsive material to be released.
I will continue following the records dispute and the investigation into what happened to Rebecca Beard.
The public records request and Brazoria County District Attorney’s Office filing to the Texas Attorney General are attached below.
If you are traveling to Brazoria County to follow developments in the Rebecca Beard case, you can compare hotel options through Hotels.com. Look for rooms near Angleton, Lake Jackson, Freeport or the surrounding area, depending on your plans.
I may earn a commission from qualifyingHotels.com bookings made through my link, at no additional cost to you.
Court records, interviews and long hours on the road can mean a lot of waiting. A portable phone charger, reusable water bottle and lightweight bag can make the day easier. You can find travel gear and everyday reporting essentials on Amazon.
As an Amazon Associate, I may earn from qualifying purchases at no additional cost to you.
James Elmore Jr. appears in court during a pretrial hearing ahead of his Aug. 31 manslaughter trial.
James Elmore Jr. Trial Set for Aug. 31 as Judge Signals No Continuance
By Investigative Reporter Tammy Rose
James Elmore Jr. remains on track for an Aug. 31 trial in Galveston County.
Elmore pleaded not guilty as his case moves toward a jury. He faces several criminal cases connected to the deaths linked to the area known as the Texas Killing Fields.
Texas EquuSearch founder Tim Miller was also present in the courtroom.
Texas EquuSearch founder Tim Miller sits in the courtroom during James Elmore Jr.’s pretrial hearing ahead of the Aug. 31 trial.
During a pretrial discussion, the judge made one point especially clear. The court intends to try the case as scheduled.
“Unless there’s some medical emergency … no continuance.”
The judge told attorneys to make sure everyone understands that the case has a firm trial setting.
James Elmore Jr. Manslaughter Case Will Go First
Watch the full James Elmore Jr. pretrial hearing above, including discussion of the Aug. 31 trial date, jury selection, discovery and the other pending cases.
Elmore currently has five pending cases, according to statements made in court.
The prosecution told the judge that it plans to try the manslaughter case first on Aug. 31.
The state said it no longer plans to first try newer cases involving allegations of possession of child pornography.
The court also discussed Elmore’s other pending cases.
Prosecutors said the tampering cases could become relevant during the manslaughter trial. They argued that some of that evidence may provide context involving the victim.
If a jury finds Elmore guilty of manslaughter, prosecutors could also introduce evidence from the other pending cases during the punishment phase.
The judge explained that process in court.
If jurors find Elmore not guilty, the remaining cases would still remain pending.
Attorneys Say Discovery Is Nearly Complete
James Elmore Jr. and attorneys appear before the judge during a pretrial hearing ahead of his Aug. 31 manslaughter trial.
Both sides told the judge that no major discovery issues remain.
Prosecutors said they still need to handle several smaller matters. Those include redactions to statements and identifying specific jail calls.
The state also has images stored on a hard drive.
Defense attorneys can review those materials at the prosecutor’s office.
Elmore’s attorney told the judge that he plans to review the material while preparing for trial.
The court also discussed a discovery compliance form. Defense counsel said he would have Elmore review and sign it.
Court Could Call More Than 200 Potential Jurors
Jury selection could become one of the biggest challenges in the James Elmore Jr. trial.
The case has received extensive media coverage.
The judge and attorneys discussed calling more than 200 prospective jurors because of the attention surrounding the case.
The court could use a larger courtroom to accommodate the panel.
Attorneys also discussed whether to use a written jury questionnaire.
A questionnaire could help identify people who already know details about the case. However, it could also delay jury selection by a day.
The judge raised another concern.
Questions asked in front of the entire panel could influence other potential jurors. The court may instead question some people individually.
The goal will be to find jurors who can decide the case based only on evidence presented in court.
Judge Expects Trial to Last About One Week
James Elmore Jr. appears with attorneys during a pretrial hearing as the court prepares for his Aug. 31 trial.
The attorneys told the judge they expect the manslaughter trial to last about one week.
The court discussed beginning jury selection on the afternoon of Aug. 31.
Opening statements and testimony could begin the following day.
If the court uses a jury questionnaire, the trial could run slightly longer.
The court also expects to select alternate jurors.
Other James Elmore Cases Could Follow Quickly
James Elmore Jr. booking photo. His trial is currently scheduled to begin Aug. 31, 2026, in Galveston County.
Prosecutors are already looking beyond the Aug. 31 trial.
The state told the judge it wants to return to court quickly for another Elmore case.
An October trial setting came up during the discussion.
The court discussed Oct. 5 as a possible next docket setting. Attorneys also mentioned Oct. 12 as another possibility.
Those dates could change depending on how long the manslaughter trial lasts and how quickly attorneys receive the court record.
Judge Warns Elmore Against Speaking
James Elmore Jr. stands with his attorney during a pretrial hearing as the court prepares for his Aug. 31 manslaughter trial.
The judge also addressed Elmore directly.
He told Elmore that he did not have to speak in court. The judge warned that anything Elmore said could become evidence against him.
Instead, the judge encouraged Elmore to communicate with his attorney about anything he wants addressed before trial.
The judge said the court would hear necessary motions, even if attorneys file them shortly before trial.
Aug. 31 Trial Remains Firm
For now, the most important development is simple.
James Elmore Jr. remains scheduled for trial Aug. 31.
The prosecution says it will begin with the manslaughter case.
The court expects a large jury pool because of the publicity surrounding the case.
And the judge made clear that he does not expect to grant another delay without a serious emergency.
Tim Miller’s presence in the courtroom also underscored the attention surrounding the case as it moves closer to trial.
Investigative Reporter Tammy Rose will continue following the James Elmore Jr. case and any developments before jury selection begins.
Travelers heading to Galveston County can compare hotel options near the courthouse and surrounding area.
If you are traveling to Galveston County to follow the James Elmore Jr. trial, you can compare hotel options through Hotels.com. Look for rooms near Galveston, League City or the surrounding area, depending on your travel plans and court schedule.
Long court days can mean a lot of waiting. I recommend bringing a portable phone charger, reusable water bottle and a lightweight bag for your essentials. You can find travel gear and courtroom-day basics on Amazon.
As an Amazon Associate, I may earn from qualifying purchases at no additional cost to you.
If you are traveling to Travis County for court, work or a Texas getaway, Hotels.com can help you compare hotels, prices and locations near Austin and surrounding areas.
I may earn a commission from qualifying Hotels.com bookings at no additional cost to you.
From portable chargers and travel gear to notebooks, camera accessories and other reporting essentials, I keep a running list of useful items on Amazon.
Karmelo Anthony’s post-trial case will move forward under a new judge after the judge who presided over his murder trial was recused.
Update: Judge removed from Karmelo Anthony case
Karmelo Anthony’s fight for a new trial took a major turn Wednesday after the judge who presided over his murder trial was removed from the post-trial proceedings.
Visiting Judge Sid Harle granted the defense request to recuse Collin County Judge John Roach Jr. Anthony’s attorneys argued that Roach’s public comments following the conviction raised questions about whether he could remain impartial while considering the motion for a new trial. Harle ruled that the legal standard for recusal had been met.
Retired District Judge Michael Chitty has now been assigned to the case. He is expected to preside over Anthony’s motion for a new trial, which remains scheduled for Thursday morning despite briefly appearing as canceled on the court’s online calendar.
Anthony has not been granted a new trial. Wednesday’s ruling only determines which judge will decide that request.
Karmelo Anthony Seeks New Trial as Judge Recusal Hearing Approaches
By Investigative Reporter Tammy Rose
Karmelo Anthony is heading back to a Collin County courtroom just months after a jury convicted him of murder.
New court records show two major hearings scheduled for next week.
First, a judge will hear Anthony’s request to remove the judge who oversaw his murder trial.
Then, the court will take up Anthony’s request for a new trial.
The hearings come after a jury sentenced Anthony to 35 years in prison for the killing of 17-year-old Austin Metcalf.
Karmelo Anthony Recusal Hearing Set for August 19
Karmelo Anthony. Collin County court records show a hearing on his motion to recuse is set for August 19, 2026, at 9 a.m.
Collin County court records show a hearing on Anthony’s motion to recuse is set for August 19, 2026, at 9 a.m.
The hearing will take place in the 494th District Courtroom at the Collin County Courthouse.
Court records list Judge Harle as the presiding judge for the hearing.
Anthony’s murder case originally went before Judge John R. Roach Jr. in the 296th District Court.
The defense now wants Roach removed from the post-trial proceedings.
The court will consider that request before it addresses Anthony’s bid for a new trial.
Motion for New Trial Hearing Set for August 20
The next major hearing is scheduled for August 20, 2026, at 9 a.m.
That hearing will focus on Anthony’s motion for a new trial.
Court records currently list the judge and courtroom as pending.
The two hearings could play a major role in what happens next.
Anthony’s attorneys want the court to overturn his conviction and give him another trial.
Anthony Convicted in Austin Metcalf Killing
Austin Metcalf is remembered by family, friends and the community as the Karmelo Anthony murder case continues through the Collin County court system.
The case began after a confrontation at a high school track meet in Frisco on April 2, 2025.
Anthony was 17 at the time.
Prosecutors accused him of fatally stabbing Austin Metcalf, 17, during the confrontation.
Anthony admitted that he stabbed Metcalf but argued that he acted in self-defense.
The case later went before a Collin County jury.
On June 9, 2026, jurors found Anthony guilty of murder.
The jury then sentenced him to 35 years in prison.
Court Records Show Case Is Under Appeal
The Collin County court system now lists Anthony’s case status as “Appealed.”
The case number is 296-83565-2025.
The online docket contains more than 300 case events.
Recent entries include an August 10 subpoena and the two upcoming hearings.
The appeal and new-trial effort mean the legal fight is far from over.
Why the Recusal Hearing Matters
The August 19 hearing comes first for a reason.
Anthony’s attorneys want another judge to handle the next stage of the case.
A ruling on that request could determine who hears the motion for a new trial.
That makes the recusal hearing an important step before the court considers whether Anthony should receive another trial.
Media Access Planned for August 19 Hearing
Collin County expects significant media and public interest in the hearings.
The county says only nine credentialed media seats will be available inside the courtroom for the August 19 hearing.
However, officials also plan to provide an overflow room with a video feed from the courtroom.
The county expects to release additional information about the August 20 hearing after the recusal hearing ends.
What Happens Next in the Karmelo Anthony Case?
The next two dates will be important.
August 19: Hearing on the motion to recuse.
August 20: Hearing on the motion for a new trial.
If the defense succeeds in its effort for a new trial, the case could return to a courtroom before another jury.
If the court rejects the request, Anthony can continue challenging his conviction through the appeals process.
Investigative Reporter Tammy Rose will continue reviewing the court record as new filings and orders become available.
Source
Collin County District Court records and the Collin County Public Information Office.
Jodi Arias appears in court during proceedings in her Arizona murder case.
Jodi Arias court fight erupts over mystery evidence and looming deadline
By Investigative Reporter Tammy Rose
A new court fight in the Jodi Arias case centers on a looming deadline, health problems and an unidentified piece of evidence.
Arias faces a September 2, 2026 deadline to file her petition for post-conviction relief, or PCR petition.
Her attorney wants much more time.
Defense attorney Christopher Stavris asked the court to extend the Jodi Arias PCR deadline to January 29, 2027.
Prosecutors strongly oppose that request.
Now, newly reviewed court filings reveal another twist. Arias’ defense says it still awaits information about an item of evidence involving the State and/or Mesa Police Department.
The defense says it first asked about that evidence almost one year ago.
Jodi Arias PCR deadline sparks court battle
Stavris filed the extension request on June 16, 2026.
He told the court that several defense team members face significant health problems.
According to the filing, one key team member needs more than three months of surgical medical leave.
Another team member also needs surgical leave and can only work in a limited capacity.
The defense says two other team members face serious health problems that have slowed their work.
Another team member may need replacement because of ongoing medical issues.
Stavris argues those problems qualify as extraordinary circumstances under Arizona court rules.
He says his team cannot complete the necessary investigation before September 2.
Prosecutors say Arias has had enough time
Prosecutor Juan Martinez walks into court with a witness during Jodi Arias’s resentencing trial.
The Maricopa County Attorney’s Office pushed back.
Deputy County Attorney Jordan Smith argued that Arias has already had years to prepare her petition.
Arias filed her PCR notice on February 11, 2021.
Prosecutors say the September deadline gives her more than five and a half years from that filing.
The State called the deadline realistic.
Prosecutors also argued that Arias could file her petition and seek changes later if new evidence develops.
The State took an even stronger position in its filing.
Prosecutors argued that failure to meet the September 2 deadline should support dismissal of Arias’ PCR notice.
Defense reveals unresolved evidence issue
In a June 25, 2026 filing, Jodi Arias’s defense said it was still waiting for a status update on an item of evidence first raised nearly a year earlier.
The defense responded on June 25.
That filing contains one of the most interesting details in the latest court battle.
Stavris says Arias still waits for a status update involving an item of evidence.
The filing does not publicly identify the evidence.
The defense says it first asked about the item almost a year ago.
Stavris also says the State and Mesa Police Department have communicated about the evidence.
However, he says the defense still does not know its status.
The defense sent another status request several weeks before filing its reply.
According to Stavris, nobody had answered that request.
Defense says records from 2021 remain outstanding
The defense also raised another issue.
Stavris says Arias submitted a public records request through the Maricopa County Attorney’s Office in 2021.
The office partially fulfilled that request.
However, the defense says some records remain outstanding.
Arias’ team submitted a narrower request in February 2026.
The defense hoped that move would speed up the process.
Stavris says prosecutors told the defense that they continue to process the request.
Those outstanding records now form part of the defense argument for more time.
Arias attorney says PCR investigation remains active
Stavris argues that post-conviction work requires more than reviewing old court transcripts.
He says PCR claims often require new investigation outside the original trial record.
That work can involve attorneys, investigators and experts.
The defense also challenged the State’s description of the affected team members.
Prosecutors referred to them as investigators.
Stavris says several of them serve as experts in specialized fields.
He argues that those experts play a critical role in developing possible PCR claims.
The defense also says it continues to conduct discovery and investigate possible claims.
Defense offers closed hearing with judge
Stavris told the court he could provide more information if the judge wants it.
However, he asked to present those details during a sealed, ex parte hearing.
That type of hearing could allow the defense to discuss sensitive investigative information without publicly revealing its strategy.
The filing does not disclose what claims Arias may eventually raise in her PCR petition.
State asks for oral argument
In a June 26, 2026 filing, prosecutors asked Judge Aryeh Schwartz to schedule oral argument on Jodi Arias’s request for more time, with any argument set for July 23 or later.
The fight did not end with the defense reply.
On June 26, prosecutors asked the judge to hold oral arguments about the requested extension.
The State said it needs time to contact next of kin who may want to address the court.
Prosecutors cited victims’ rights to a prompt and final conclusion of the case.
The State asked the court to schedule any argument for July 23, 2026 or later.
The filing says the prosecutor assigned to the matter planned to return from vacation on July 23.
Will Jodi Arias get more time?
The filings reviewed for this story show both sides digging in.
The defense wants until January 29, 2027.
The State wants the September 2 deadline to remain in place.
The defense points to serious medical problems, unfinished investigative work, outstanding records and unresolved evidence.
Prosecutors point to the amount of time Arias has already had.
The biggest unanswered question now centers on the judge.
These filings do not include a final ruling on the extension request.
That ruling could determine whether Arias must file her long-awaited PCR petition within weeks or gets several more months to prepare it.
The mystery surrounding the unidentified evidence also adds a new question to one of Arizona’s most closely watched criminal cases.
No ruling yet on Jodi Arias PCR deadline request
As of August 17, 2026, the Maricopa County Clerk of the Superior Court says there is no minute entry or court order yet ruling on Jodi Arias’s request to extend her September 2, 2026 PCR filing deadline.
A court operations specialist told Investigative Reporter Tammy Rose that she had sent everything currently in the case and did not see a minute entry or order addressing the extension request.
That means the September 2 deadline remains the current filing date unless Judge Aryeh Schwartz issues a new order.
Read the court filings: Below are the June 2026 filings in State v. Jodi Arias, including the defense motion for more time, the State’s response, the defense reply and the State’s request for oral argument.
Mitchell Wasek faces felony charges in Travis County as his defense challenges evidence and seeks dismissal of the indictment.
Buc-ee’s Co-Founder’s Son Fights Felony Case as New Court Hearing Nears
By Investigative Reporter Tammy Rose
The criminal case against the son of a Buc-ee’s co-founder is heading back to court.
Mitchell Wasek now wants a judge to suppress evidence in his felony child pornography case. His defense also wants the indictment dismissed.
Court records reviewed by Investigative Reporter Tammy Rose show a pretrial hearing set for August 18, 2026, at 1:15 p.m. in Travis County’s 167th District Court.
The latest filings reveal a significant new legal fight.
Mitchell Wasek Case Update: Defense Challenges Evidence
Wasek faces a felony charge of possession of child pornography in Travis County.
The current court docket lists the offense as a second-degree felony.
His attorney filed a motion to suppress on April 14, 2026.
The docket describes the filing as a:
“Motion to suppress evidence obtained by theft and breach of computer security.”
The wording raises a major question.
What evidence does the defense want thrown out, and how was it obtained?
The court docket does not answer that question by itself.
The actual motion could provide those details.
Defense Also Wants Indictment Dismissed
Another filing could have an even bigger impact on the case.
On June 2, 2026, Wasek’s defense filed a motion asking the court to dismiss the indictment.
The stated reason:
An expired statute of limitations.
The judge has not dismissed the case based on the docket reviewed for this report.
The State also requested several subpoenas that same day.
One went to Detective Keith McManus.
Court records show that subpoena was executed on June 5.
Pretrial Hearing Set for August 18
The next scheduled hearing could determine what happens with those defense challenges.
The Travis County Odyssey Portal lists a:
Pretrial Hearing August 18, 2026 1:15 p.m. 167th District Court
The hearing could bring new arguments over the evidence and the defense request to dismiss the indictment.
It could also provide the clearest update yet on where the case stands.
Wasek Also Faces 21 Invasive Recording Counts
Mitchell Wasek faces felony charges in Travis County as his defense seeks to suppress evidence and dismiss the indictment.
The child pornography case came after an earlier investigation involving allegations of secret recordings.
The Travis County District Attorney’s Office announced in May 2024 that a grand jury returned six indictments against Wasek.
Those indictments contained 21 counts of invasive visual recording involving 13 alleged victims.
Prosecutors said the alleged recordings occurred over roughly two years in Travis County.
Those cases also remain listed in Travis County court records.
Wasek has not been convicted of the allegations discussed in this report. He remains presumed innocent unless proven guilty in court.
Why the Buc-ee’s Name Draws Attention
Arch Aplin remained in contact with investigators as questions continued about the Rebecca Beard case timeline.
Mitchell Wasek is the son of Buc-ee’s co-founder Don Wasek.
That connection has pushed the criminal case into headlines across Texas.
It also creates an unusual overlap with another story I have covered extensively.
Not because the criminal cases have anything to do with each other.
My reporting has also examined conflicting information in historical records about when Aplin last saw Becky and who investigators reported seeing at the Excalibur Club around the time of her disappearance.
Again, there is no known connection between Mitchell Wasek’s criminal case and Rebecca Beard’s murder case.
The common thread is that both stories involve members of the families behind one of Texas’ most recognizable brands.
Related Rebecca Beard Coverage
Exclusive: Arch Aplin Responds to Rebecca Beard Question
