A Q&A with Randy Reynolds

Ward County District Attorney Randall Reynolds faces a possible removal hearing after two petitions were filed in the 143rd District seeking his ouster.

Ward County Attorney Kevin Acker filed a petition in his county hours after Reynolds took the same action against Acker. The other petition against Reynolds was filed in Reeves County.

Reynolds would only respond to questions in writing. Below are his full responses.

State- and county-level officials have frequently criticized Reynolds for his slow prosecution of sexual misconduct complaints involving the West Texas State School. However, Reynolds declined any comment on the pending case, citing Rule 3.07 of the Texas Rules of Professional Conduct.

Question: You have been denounced for your role in the statewide Texas Youth Commission scandal for the delayed prosecution of West Texas State School sexual assault claims. Why and how do you think that happened?

Answer: Obviously, the problems with the Texas Youth Commission are significant and statewide, ranging from Edinburg to Marlin to Brownwood to Pyote and other TYC facilities. My supposed “delayed prosecution” provides an excuse for certain state politicians who are desperate to place the blame on someone other than themselves. I would love to discuss my actions during the period of “delayed prosecution,” but to do so would prejudice the ongoing criminal investigation and violate Rule 3.07, Texas Rules of Professional Conduct.

Q: With regard to the removal petitions filed, Acker said your petition was retaliation and it looks that way on the surface. Is it? If not, how so?

A: Mr. Acker is entitled to his opinion. He promised me unlawful benefits if I would resign and threatened unlawful action against me if I refused to resign. His actions constituted the Class A misdemeanor crime of Official Oppression under Section 39.03 of the Texas Penal Code. It was for that reason that I filed the removal petition.

Q: In your removal petition against Acker, you claim his incompetence and intimidation on his part. What was the incompetence? How were you intimidated?

A: The removal petition against Acker alleges official misconduct by his commission of the crime of Official Oppression. Read his letter to me. I think anyone would be intimidated by his threats regarding what would happen to my retirement if I didn’t resign.

Q: Are the politics of this conflict between you and Acker driven by animosity between Reeves and Ward counties? Why or why not?

A: I am not aware of any conflict between Ward and Reeves counties other than hometown pride in our respective high school athletic teams. In my opinion and based upon everything I have been told, the conflict exists because the Ward County Attorney wants my job.

Q: You’ve been charged as incompetent by Acker and even criticized publicly by Gov. Rick Perry. What is your response to the accusations?

A: Acker and Gov. Perry are entitled to their opinions. The TYC problem goes all the way to the governing board appointed by Gov. Perry. I’m not surprised that he would attempt to blame anyone in sight (other than his office) for the mess created by his appointed board.

Q: According to local government code, a county attorney cannot try a removal hearing if he faces similar charges. Did you file the petition against Acker as an attempt to prevent him from trying a possible removal hearing against you?

A: I filed the removal petition for the reasons stated in the petition. I really don’t care who is responsible for trying the removal suit against me. I’m just anxious to get the process started in the courthouse rather than continuing to try this case in the media.

Q: Where do you stand a better chance of success against a removal hearing, in your hometown of Pecos or in Ward County? Why?

A: I think my chances for success are excellent in either county. Obviously, Pecos is my hometown, and I am better known here than in Monahans.

Q: Do you think Acker is after your job as district attorney? Why or why not?

A: Absolutely. I have been told so by many different people from different walks of life. I look forward to the opportunity of campaigning against him next year.

Q: What was your relationship with Acker like before this political battle?

A: Strained.

Q: Is the scope of your job as a part-time district attorney too large? Why or why not?

A: No. If the time required for my duties as district attorney increases, I compensate by cutting back on my private practice.

Q: How do you balance your public and private business?

A: My duties as district attorney always come first. To the extent that time allows, I maintain a private law practice.

Q: How has this affected or damaged your relationship with law enforcement?

A: I am sure that all of the negative publicity about me has damaged my relationship with law enforcement. It is important to remember, however, that the job of a district attorney is not to convict, but to seek justice. Anytime a district attorney makes a prosecutorial decision that is contrary to the desires of law enforcement, the officers become dissatisfied with the district attorney. Show me a district attorney that everyone in law enforcement likes, and I’ll show you a district attorney that isn’t doing his job.

Q: How has the community reacted to you since the scandal became a media focal point?

A: I have received several telephone calls of encouragement, written cards of encouragement and many personal contacts regarding support for me, from both Pecos and Monahans as well as Midland, Odessa and Austin. I have received nothing but positive reactions whether I am at the courthouse, Rotary meetings, church or the store.

Q: Do you plan to seek re-election in 2008? Why or why not?

A: Yes. I love my job and think that I am doing a good job as district attorney.

Q: What do you say about claims of other sexual abuse at the state school that you failed to prosecute, specifically a youth attacked with a broomstick?

A: I did not “fail to prosecute” the “broomstick” case. That case was presented to a Ward County grand jury, which returned a No Bill.