Petty Nastiness in WilCo

Williamson Co. Sheriff James Wilson (left) stands accused of misconduct relating to a feud with his predecessor, Jim Wilson. (Photo By Patty Ruland)

Did Williamson Co. Sheriff James Wilson demote two lieutenants because they publicly supported his political rival, former Sheriff Jim Wilson, in the county's contentious 2004 sheriff's race? Were the demotions retaliation for their making allegations of illegal activities by one of the sheriff's right-handmen? Or, were the officers simply demoted for poor performance?

After more than a year of legal wrangling, a federal judge earlier this summer set the date for a federal jury to decide whether Wilson demoted former Williamson Co. Sheriff's Office officers Barry Simmons and Ralph Fisher from supervisory positions to patrol deputies in retaliation for their having reported wrongdoing within the department and/or for exercising their right of free speech by supporting Wilson's political rival. "The freedom to support and vote for the candidate of your choice is a fundamental right that belongs to every American. No one, not even the sheriff of Williamson County, should be able to take that away," states Derek Howard, attorney for the plaintiffs.

Six plaintiffs, including Simmons and Fisher, originally filed suit against Wilson and Williamson Co. in March 2005; after a round of mediation, four plaintiffs settled, leaving Simmons and Fisher, who will head to federal District Judge Lee Yeakel's courtroom in February for trial – where jurors will more than likely be offered a front-row seat to a Williamson Co. political parade of shame.

The Simmons-Fisher saga began back in December 2003, with the resignation of former WilCo Sheriff John Maspero, who left office under a cloud of allegations of public intoxication and official misconduct – including a charge that he bit a dancer on the thigh while drunk and pretending to be a dog at the Penthouse Men's Club. In the wake of Maspero's departure, Williamson Co. commissioners appointed former Co. Constable Jim Wilson (no relation to James Wilson) to serve out Maspero's term. As Wilson was preparing to take over, several officers – including Simmons and Fisher – came forward to report alleged misconduct by a handful of WCSO employees – many of them tight with the disgraced Maspero – including then Capt. Shawn Newsom, who had been accused of sexual harassment, the unauthorized use of a tractor, and theft of WCSO property. (A grand jury ultimately declined to indict Newsom on all charges.) When Wilson formally took office in January 2004, he fired about 22 employees, including Newsom. His decision to clean house triggered an internal uproar, prompted Newsom and several others to file suit for wrongful termination, and quickly served as fodder in the GOP primary race for sheriff, where Wilson was opposed by four candidates, including James Wilson. Wilson had retired in 1996 from his post as director of the Texas Department of Public Safety, shortly after the Legislature censured him for spending $915,000 (seized in criminal investigations) on land for a DPS firing range in Florence.

The contentious sheriff's race also sparked the creation of an anti-Jim Wilson Web site, NotJimWilson.org, on which numerous posters – many using aliases, such as "Dirty" or "Bullet" or "Lucy-fer" to cover their identities – railed against the appointed sheriff, as well as a number of officers, including Simmons and Fisher, who had first reported the alleged wrongdoings by Newsom and others. The Web site persisted after James Wilson was elected, says attorney Robert Schmidt – one of the lawyers representing Simmons and Fisher – apparently to "rub in the victory." Many postings were purely personal digs, including one calling Simmons "Crispy Critter" for his childhood burn scars. Many others gloated over supposedly surefire dismissals: One posting, by "Bullet," pictured the cover of the book, The Complete Job-Search Handbook, with the caption, "Jim, you and the boys might want to get a copy of this to read." Schmidt cites a posting signed by Newsom himself that read, "We cannot forget the problems at the sheriff's office are few and can all be fixed with the stroke of a pen. The Calvary [sic] has crested the hill and back up will soon be there." Schmidt argues that "This statement on a clearly political Web site indicates clear retaliatory intent by Shawn Newsom against our clients."

When the primary furor ended, James Wilson beat out the appointed sheriff to win the GOP nomination for sheriff, and then the election in November; in January 2005, James Wilson was officially sworn in as the county's new sheriff.

But the Simmons and Fisher lawsuit alleges that once Wilson's victory had been virtually assured in the primary, the real hijinks began. The two officers, then lieutenants over patrol and criminal investigations respectively, contend that they were quickly – and none too subtly – targeted for punishment, not only for supporting the wrong Wilson, but also for alerting the interim sheriff (and later, Williamson Co. District Attorney John Bradley and assistant DA Jana McCowan) to the pending allegations against Newsom. Indeed, one of Wilson's first actions after assuming his new job was to hire back a handful of the officers Jim Wilson had terminated – including Newsom. Robert Chapman also climbed back on board, resuming his job as assistant chief. According to the lawsuit, Newsom and Chapman had spent months compiling a "termination list" and drafting multiple versions of a new WCSO organizational chart for Wilson, using Maspero's former hierarchy as a starting point. "I … sent copies of [the chart] to James Wilson. That's who it was for," Chapman testified. Newsom even hand-delivered one of reportedly 16 versions to Wilson in a sealed envelope in a county park, but Wilson testified he never opened it and ordered the chart destroyed to "prevent rumors." (As a matter of fact, as the depositions show, all versions of the chart but the last were either shredded or deleted from computer files.)

Ultimately, for Simmons and Fisher, the chart became reality: The two upper-level supervisors were demoted three full steps, down to patrol-level officers. According to Simmons, Chapman made it clear that the demotion was retaliatory; during a Jan. 3, 2004 meeting, Chapman allegedly told Simmons he could support anyone he wanted, but "stuff rolls downhill" and that, as such, "All we have to offer you is a patrol position." "The intent to retaliate was crystal-clear," Howard states.

Interestingly, in a sworn deposition, Chapman doesn't deny the conversation, but maintains that the remarks were not political. "That was pretty much a little bit out of context," Chapman testified, adding that Fisher's demotion was part of "a final plan" decided "a couple of weeks before we took office." Simmons and Fisher have since left the WCSO and are now working for Bobby Gutierrez, Williamson Co.'s Precinct 3 constable.

With all the infighting and alleged backstabbing, it's a wonder there was any time left for real law enforcement activities. However, Wilson has categorically denied any retaliatory motives or plans. "I did not spend countless hours of my time, some of my own money … to help [Newsom and Chapman] get revenge. I've got … no dog in their fight," Wilson testified in deposition. "The sheriff's and the county's position," says Wilson's attorney, Mike Davis, is that "neither Fisher nor Simmons were reassigned for supporting Jim Wilson."

Either way, Schmidt says the law is clear: Wilson is still liable for any illegal employment actions. In support of his clients' position, Schmidt points to several recent decisions from the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, which conclude that a "decision-maker" who merely "rubber-stamped" the decision of a subordinate employee can still be held responsible for a retaliatory employment action. In other words, says Schmidt, Wilson's self-professed ignorance "does not insulate him."

The defense has just filed a second motion to have the case dismissed before trial, and the plaintiffs are in the process of responding to that motion. Yeakel denied the first motion on all counts. "When the dust settles, this latest move by Williamson County will be seen for what it is: a big pile of mumbo-jumbo legal maneuverings that unnecessarily wasted taxpayers' money," says Howard.