By Investigative Reporter Tammy Rose

A new Texas Attorney General ruling raises another question in the nearly 40-year search for answers in the disappearance of Rebecca “Becky” Beard.

I requested body camera video from the Brazoria County Sheriff’s Office connected to the Beard case.

Brazoria County asked the Texas Attorney General’s Office for permission to withhold the recording.

On September 25, 2026, the Attorney General issued its decision.

The county can withhold the body camera recording.

But the reason given in the ruling is what caught my attention.

County says incident was “not criminal in nature”

According to the Attorney General’s ruling, the Brazoria County Sheriff’s Office told the state that the incident captured on the body camera “was not criminal in nature.”

The county also represented that the body camera recording “will not be used as evidence in a criminal prosecution.”

Based on those representations, the Attorney General determined the recording must be withheld under Texas Government Code Section 552.101 in conjunction with Article 2B.0112(c) of the Texas Code of Criminal Procedure.

Texas law generally exempts body-camera recordings from the Public Information Act unless an exception applies. One of those exceptions involves information that is or could be used as evidence in a criminal prosecution.

Why the explanation raises questions

This is where I have questions.

Becky Beard disappeared from Freeport in March 1986.

Paul Taylor Jr. later pleaded guilty in connection with her death, but Becky’s remains have never been recovered.

Her family has continued searching for answers and for Becky.

The body camera video I requested is connected to those continuing efforts.

So the wording in this ruling stands out.

Brazoria County represented to the Attorney General that the incident recorded on the body camera was not criminal in nature and that the recording would not be used as evidence in a criminal prosecution.

That raises an obvious question:

If the recording is connected to efforts surrounding a decades-old homicide case, why is the incident being characterized as noncriminal?

The ruling itself does not answer that question.

It also does not independently determine whether the underlying Beard case is open or closed. It addresses whether this particular body-camera recording must be released under the Public Information Act.

Attorney General relied on county’s representations

There is another important distinction.

The Attorney General did not independently conclude from the ruling that nothing criminal occurred.

Instead, the decision specifically says it was “based upon these representations and our review” that the information must be withheld.

In other words, Brazoria County made representations about the nature and potential use of the recording, and the Attorney General applied the law to those facts.

The Attorney General’s Open Records Division also explains that these letter rulings apply only to the specific documents and circumstances involved. They are not precedent for other records requests.

The September 25 ruling makes that limitation explicit, stating that it applies only to the particular information and facts presented in this request.

The search for Becky continues

This ruling means I will not receive the body camera video through this particular Public Information Act request.

But it also adds another question to a case already filled with them.

Why was this incident described as noncriminal?

What exactly was the purpose of the law enforcement contact captured on the recording?

And how does that description fit with the continuing efforts to locate Becky Beard?

Those are questions I will continue asking.

Becky disappeared nearly 40 years ago.

Her family is still looking for her.

And I am continuing to investigate what happened to Becky Beard and the decades of decisions that followed.

My new book is now available

My new book, When Two Worlds Collide During WWII, follows two families on opposite sides of World War II and the remarkable events that eventually brought their lives together in Wisconsin.

The story is based on my own family history, with real people, family photographs and stories passed down through generations.

Disclosure: As an Amazon Associate, I earn from qualifying purchases.

By Investigative Reporter Tammy Rose

A Galveston County judge made several key rulings Monday before jury selection in the James Elmore Jr. trial.

Elmore faces a manslaughter charge in the death of Laura Miller.

Miller disappeared in 1984. Searchers found her remains in 1986 near Calder Road in League City.

The area later became known as the Texas Killing Fields.

Elmore has pleaded not guilty.

Before the jury was even seated, key evidence revealed where the James Elmore Jr. trial may be headed. Watch the full video below.

Judge allows evidence involving Audrey Cook

One major ruling involved Audrey Cook.

Searchers found Cook’s remains near Miller’s remains during the same search.

Prosecutors told the judge they want jurors to hear evidence about Cook’s remains and autopsy findings.

The state said Cook died from a gunshot wound. Investigators also recovered a bullet near her spine.

Prosecutors argued that the evidence could help corroborate statements they attribute to Elmore.

According to prosecutors, Elmore allegedly knew Cook had been shot while walking away.

The state said that information had not become public.

However, prosecutors told the judge they do not plan to argue that Elmore killed Cook.

Instead, they want to use the evidence to support their claim that Elmore had personal knowledge about Cook’s death.

Elmore’s attorney objected.

The defense argued that the evidence could unfairly prejudice jurors against Elmore.

The judge overruled the objection and allowed the evidence.

Karey Dodson testimony allowed

The judge also ruled on expected testimony from Karey Dodson.

Dodson lived with Tim and Laura Miller during the 1980s. She shared a room with Laura.

Dodson also knew Clyde Hedrick.

Prosecutors said Dodson could testify about interactions involving Hedrick and Elmore.

The state also wants Dodson to describe alleged threats connected to conversations about Laura Miller.

During Monday’s hearing, prosecutors referenced an alleged statement about having “killed before.”

The state argued that the testimony provides important context for the case.

Elmore’s attorney objected.

The defense argued that the testimony could unfairly prejudice jurors.

The judge overruled the objection.

The court will allow the state to present the testimony during its case.

Prosecutors also discussed allegations involving an attempted kidnapping.

The state said it does not plan to introduce that allegation during its case in chief. It could become relevant during the punishment phase if jurors convict Elmore.

Prosecutors disclose last-minute tip

Prosecutors also told the judge about a last-minute tip.

An individual contacted the prosecutor’s office Thursday and claimed to have incriminating information about Elmore.

The person came to court Monday and spoke with prosecutors.

The state then disclosed the information to Elmore’s attorney.

Prosecutors told the judge they did not plan to use the information.

They also said they did not expect to call the person as a witness.

Elmore chooses jury to decide possible punishment

Elmore also made an important decision before jury selection.

His attorney filed paperwork asking the jury to determine punishment if jurors convict him.

Manslaughter carries a possible prison sentence of two to 20 years.

The same jury would decide Elmore’s sentence after a guilty verdict.

The decision also allowed attorneys to question potential jurors about punishment during jury selection.

Texas Killing Fields discussed before jury selection

Attorneys also discussed how much information they could give potential jurors about the case.

Prosecutors raised concerns about people who may already know about the Texas Killing Fields.

The judge said attorneys could provide basic facts to determine whether potential jurors had already formed an opinion.

Those facts included the names of Laura Miller and her father, Tim Miller.

Tim Miller founded Texas EquuSearch after his daughter’s murder.

Six people in the jury pool said they had worked with or volunteered for Texas EquuSearch.

Attorneys questioned potential jurors about whether they could remain fair and impartial.

13 jurors seated after hours of questioning

Jury selection continued for several hours Monday.

The court started with a pool of about 184 potential jurors.

Attorneys ultimately selected 13 people.

Seven women and six men were seated.

The court later confirmed that a woman will serve as the alternate.

That leaves the 12-person jury with six women and six men.

Opening statements begin Tuesday

Opening statements will begin at 9 a.m. Tuesday, Sept. 1.

The judge indicated that each side could receive up to 15 minutes for opening statements.

The state will then begin calling witnesses.

The prosecution’s witness list includes retired League City Police Officer Steven Cox. Cox worked the crime scene when searchers found Laura Miller’s remains in 1986.

The state also plans to call a former Galveston County Medical Examiner’s Office intern and current Galveston County Medical Examiner Dr. Erin Barnhart.

Karey Dodson also appears on the witness list.

Hitchcock Police Detective Cory Williams is another expected witness. Williams works with the Calder Road Killing Field Task Force.

Tim Miller, Laura Miller’s father and the founder of Texas EquuSearch, also appears on the state’s witness list.

The defense did not submit a witness list and currently does not plan to call witnesses.

The trial could continue through the week.

ChopperRose.com will continue following the James Elmore Jr. trial as testimony gets underway.