Transcription
How is it possible that a former teacher who pleads guilty to sexually assaulting a child gets no prison time? Yeah, she was just sentenced. This is wild to anyone seeing this headline. We're going to lay out what we know and we're going to bring on a former prosecutor and expert on these cases, Dan Shore. Welcome to Sidebar, presented by Law and Crime. I'm Jesse Weber.
What a headline this is. A former teacher pleads guilty to sexually assaulting a minor student and wasn't sentenced to prison. Your reaction right now might be, "Wait, what?" Yeah. So, we go to Texas. This is where former Brazilosport teacher, now 45-year-old Brandon Hargrove, pleaded guilty to a litany of felonies. Six counts of sexual assault of a child, four counts of indecency with a child by contact, and two counts of indecent exposure. This was all for conduct dating back to 2007, by the way, when Hargrove was about 27 years old.
Now, Hargrove has been a teacher for quite some time. Hargrove taught English. In fact, she is a former teacher of the year. Brazzlesport ISD posted on Facebook back in 2023 a pic of Hargrove and students that said, "These students are starting the data collection phase of their research projects as part of the AP Capstone program." Brazzleswood High School teacher Brandon Hargrove said about AP Capstone, "By the end of the two-year program, students will be able to conduct their own research, analyze the data, and defend their research just as they would in a dissertation for a master or doctoral degree."
But now, entirely different picture. Now we have these horrific acts. We have this female victim who is believed to have been 15 to 17 years old when this abuse occurred. Seems this victim only came forward in September of 2023, accusing Hargrove of assaulting her for two years, again, almost two decades ago, when she was a minor. And that is what led to Hargrove's indictment and arrest. There was a $240,000 bond that had been set in this case, by the way. And it's being reported that that is when the school district claims they first learned about this investigation.
In January of 2024, it was announced that she would be fired from her position after first being put on leave for a period of time after her indictment. And district officials said in a statement, "BISD remains dedicated to upholding the highest standards of professionalism and integrity among our staff, and we take the safety and well-being of our students very seriously. We understand that this news may raise concerns. If any parent, student, or former student has concerns or questions, please do not hesitate to contact." And they list out a number of different contacts and say, "We appreciate your understanding and support during this challenging time."
And while there is right now kind of scant reporting about the details of the abuse, there is a little bit about what we can glean about what happened from the indictment. So, for example, it says Brandon Hargrove on or about the 4th day of December 2007 did then and there intentionally or knowingly cause the mouth of, and it's redacted, child younger than 17 years of age to contact the sexual organ of the defendant. That is one sexual assault charge. Another is about causing the sexual organ of the minor to contact the mouth of the defendant. There are other charges that get more graphic regarding touching and exposing genitalia, things of that nature. Very, very disturbing.
But now what happens? She pleads guilty. Hargrove pleads guilty, but there's no prison time. None. Here's the deal. She receives 10 years of probation with deferred adjudication for sexual assault. 10 years probation without deferred adjudication for indecent exposure charges. And we'll talk about what deferred adjudication means. And yes, she has to also register as a sex offender for life, but first of all, no trial, and she pleads guilty, and no prison.
Clute PD Chief James Fitch said, "From the get-go, we really felt there was a good chance this would go to trial. So, we were a little surprised with the plea agreement. There was a lot of leg work by the detectives tracking down some of these people that went to school 17 years ago with our victim and people she made initial outcries to. The DA's office did include the victim. They talked to the victim before this plea agreement was accepted. And from what I understand, the victim spoke in court this morning. If it comes to that point years later and you want to come forward, don't hesitate because it's been so long. This is a perfect case where our victim had those hesitations 17 years ago, but now in law enforcement, we're going to take it just as it happened yesterday and seek that justice for our victims."
What a case, I know. But this is definitely one we wanted to bring to you. And the reason that we can do that is because of the amazing support that we get from our sponsor Morgan and Morgan. This is America's largest injury law firm. This is a firm with over a thousand attorneys. You know why they're so big? Because they win a lot. They have recovered over $25 billion for more than 500,000 clients. Think about that. In the past few months, a client in Florida received $12 million after the insurance company offered just $350,000. Out in Pennsylvania, a client was awarded $26 million. That is 40 times the insured $650,000 offer. Another client in Pennsylvania received $29 million. That's after being offered only $500,000. And even if you think your case isn't worth millions of dollars, why not start a claim and fight for what you deserve? Morgan and Morgan, they make it so simple. You can start a claim from your phone in just eight clicks. So if you're injured, you can easily start a claim at forthepeople.com/lcsidebar by clicking the link below or scanning the QR code on screen.
Obviously, I have questions. Obviously, I have a lot of thoughts on this. Let me bring on Dan Shore, former criminal prosecutor, municipal inspector. Also has a new book, by the way. I want everybody to tell it. But Dan has a specialization in these kinds of cases. We always love to have him on. Uh, Dan, what is the book that you have because I think it's also kind of related to what we're talking about.
>> Yeah, so my my novel that came out two weeks ago is called Open Bar. It's about sexual misconduct in educational institutions and how young people who are underage or are often taken advantage of. It's a political thriller. It relates to a lot of these themes. So, people can look up that book wherever books are sold or they could follow me on Substack if they'd like more information.
>> Now, in your story, and I I haven't read it as of yet. I wonder if the perpetrator of a crime would receive no prison time because that's what we're talking about here. How is it possible she could not get prison time after what she plead guilty to? Because just to be clear, according to ABC13, 10 second-degree felonies, right, punishments of of 2 to 20 years in prison, two third-degree felonies punishable by 2 to 10 years. I'm not understanding this.
>> Sure. So, I think what happened here is first of all, the alleged events, and they're beyond alleged because the defendant has pled guilty, took place in 2007. So, we're talking about 17 years since they happened. And the victim here in this case has said that she was supporting this plea agreement. So, I think that's why there was no jail time. In the way I've I'm a former sex crimes prosecutor. I don't think someone 17 years after an incident like this is going to agree, a defendant is going to agree in a plea bargain to go to prison. So, if the law enforcement system wants her to go to prison, they're going to have to go to trial, get a conviction to get her to go to prison. And in this case, it seems like the victim, for understandable reasons, did not want to go through a trial 17 years later and relive this traumatic experience from when she was a teenager.
>> But you heard from uh the Clute uh police department chief, James Fitch, who said, you know, from the get-go, we really felt there was a good chance this would go to trial. So, we were a little surprised with the plea agreement. I mean, it's not impossible to prosecute somebody for sex crimes, even maybe two decades old. Um, what are the difficulties, though? What do you think their challenges are? What is it? The is it the idea of when uh this victim came forward? Is it just prosecuting a case that's that old and maybe some evidence becomes stale? Talk to us about it.
>> I think in this case, the biggest factor from the media reports is that the victim in this case supported this plea agreement and was not necessarily interested in testifying at trial to try to get a prison sentence. And I think most prosecution offices for a case that's 17 years old, if the victim doesn't want to have to testify, they are not going to go forward to trial and they're going to offer a plea agreement like this, especially if there's no evidence the person has reaffended in the past 17 years. Now, the allegations here, sexual abuse of a teenager, including oral sex, penetration of the victim's vagina, that certainly merits prison time, but I think that the way the justice system works, again, a defendant's not going to agree to a plea of prison time 17 years later. You're going to have to go to trial and get a conviction. And I think a lot of victims in situations like this that I've seen, and I've prosecuted cases, and I've investigated cases where the alleged misconduct took place years ago, they don't necessarily want to relive that. If someone was was sexually abused as a teenager and now it's 17 years later and they've to some extent gotten past this and gotten past the trauma and maybe gotten therapy, they might not want to testify again and and have a protracted trial. And you, Jesse, you know how how tough the the cross-examination can be and how long the process can be. So, I think those are the factors here. I think it's less about the evidence involved because it sounds like the complainant, the victim was insistent that this did happen. and the defendant has now plead guilty and admitted every count of the indictment. So, I think it's more about the process and whether the victim wanted to go through that and whether or not you could get a plea beyond probation, which I don't think you could 17 years later, unfortunately.
>> And I'm not speaking for the victim, but if you have a situation where that person is not um what's the right word? Not it's not even that they wouldn't be cooperative, but they wouldn't be uh possibly the strongest witness to come forward given these circumstances when the case relies so much on their testimony. You can understand that. And look, I think at the end of the day, if the idea is to expose Hargrove, for her to be held accountable, for her to be punished, for her to no longer work in the educational industry, that may be enough. That may be the consequences that you're looking for. I am confused if a couple of things though with this punishment. Um, what is deferred adjudication and why do you see deferred adjudication with respect to some of the charges but not the others?
>> Well, I think part of that is she's going to be on sex offender probation. She's going to have to register as a sex offender. So part of that is you're not sentenced to any incarceratory sentence, but if you violate those terms, you could be sentenced to prison time. And I think that's always hanging over this defendant's head now. So I think that is part of the plea that's significant in terms of why it was implemented for part of the sentencing, part of the counts and not others. I'm not sure about that, but sometimes it would be duplicative and unnecessary to have the same language for every sentence since a lot of times when these pleas happen or even if someone's sentenced after a trial, there's not consecutive sentencing. It's often concurrent, especially when it's 17 years later. So, I think that just having that deferred adjudication hanging over her head for some counts is enough and it would be duplicative to do it for others, but I don't know all the reasoning of the prosecutors here.
>> What is usually a violation that would, you know, trigger that sentence to come back?
>> Sure. So, a lot it it really can be very strict. So, with sex offender probation, there's restrictions on what you could do for work, where you can go, being near a school, being near any activity where children are involved. you have to report regularly to a probation officer. There's often other requirements that the probation officer sees as relevant. So, a good sex offender probation office is going to keep really close tabs on someone who pleads guilty. And if you violate any of that, probation officers can be really harsh and sometimes justifiably so with someone who violates the terms of sex offender probation. So, if you're on sex offender probation and you have a prison term hanging over your head, there's a really, really strong incentive to tow the line and do everything your probation officer asks of you because you're facing a sentence of state prison when you don't have to be proven beyond a reasonable doubt at that point because you've already pled guilty to committing the offense. It's more about did you violate the terms of your probation. So, it's very easy for someone to be found to have violated their probation and I think that's something that is significant. It's not like a prison sentence that I think most people would want to see at this time, but it is a significant uh problem for the defendant to have to face that for the rest of her life.
>> You said there might not be an evidentiary issue uh in this case. There might not have been an issue with actually securing conviction prosecuting. There was something interesting in the indictment that I'm not entirely sure I follow here. There was reporting that this abuse had happened over a period of time. There was reporting that it happened over two years. When you go to the indictment, as far as I could see, it seemed like each charge was about an act that was happening on or about December 4th, 2007. That date and that date alone. I'm not really sure what the discrepancy is there, how that date stood out. Um, maybe there was evidence that this happened on that particular date, which does go into question what a trial would have looked like. But why did you see it only with respect to that date and not let's say you know a certain period of time? Why was it very specific?
>> Yeah, I noticed that also and we don't know for sure but I could tell you as a former sex crimes prosecutor why that might have happened. Often if you have a case like this, especially if you think it's going to lead to a plea bargain, you can get an indictment on maybe what is the clearest date of offense and put that in an indictment so you have an indictable case and then you could work towards arranging that plea bargain. You could always later do a superseding indictment with other cases. So if a victim says, "Well, I very clearly remember what happened on December 4th, 2007. There were other things happening, but I don't remember specific dates." Or maybe there's some corroboration that we don't know about a text message, a witness from that date, and the prosecutors thought this was the strongest part of the case. Let's get an indictment on that. Then let's negotiate, see if we're going to work out a plea. And if not, then we could always do a superseding indictment, which adds charges. So that's something that happens a lot. I can't say for sure that happened here, but certainly I see that happen a lot where let's get the indictment on the strongest case and see what happens then and we could always supersede it later.
>> Are were you surprised that you had a victim coming forward so many years later? What do I mean by that? So Clute Police Chief James Fitch said after a two-year investigation and adding that witnesses played a key role in this, this is according to ABC13. But in 2023, he said, "Unfortunately, this happens more and more these days. Since that time, we have other laws in effect. The improper relationship between educator and student was not in effect back then." But your kids go to school and you trust the teachers and then these types of things happen. And I thought that was interesting in this idea of why coming forward uh so many years later and why it might not have been able to be prosecuted or might have been maybe there was a not that it wouldn't have been would have been prosecuted but again what we're talking about the difference between so many years ago and now are you surprised you have a victim coming forward?
>> I'm not these days because there's such a dramatic shift in the culture and in laws but even more so in the culture of our country in terms of people who are sexually abused especially by older people to come forward now in the last few years. This really changed when the Me Too movement started in 2018. But there's also been just a different consciousness. I mean just look at Jesse, what you do every day. you highlight these cases and your audience is informed about the fact that these are serious cases and they need to be taken seriously and that didn't exist in 2007 where people could see in the public space in media on Law and Crime that oh this happened to me I can report this I see other people reporting that so we have a different just cultural norm about being able to step forward in a way that just didn't exist in 2007.
>> What are parents supposed to do? How are parents supposed to protect their kids from educators? I mean, you're right. I cover this like almost every week and here you're talking about something that happened in 2007, right? So, it's not like it just happened. We're just seeing this happen in the last 5 years or something. No, it's been going on. It's been going on for a very long time. There's always incidents of it. But if I were to type in, if I were to Google, you know, sexual assault or sexual abuse in educator, a teacher, I'm going to get a bunch of stories. How on earth do parents protect their children?
>> Well, I think the most important thing is letting your children know that they could come to you with anything that makes them uncomfortable. Because a lot of children or a teenager in this case who might have engaged in some type of sexual activity with a teacher would feel mortified telling their parents about it, embarrassed, feel like their parents are going to get angry at them for as a teenager engaging in any sexual activity with anyone, let alone with a teacher. And I see that again and again in my cases where people who are underage feel isolated. Perpetrators take advantage of that isolation and they target people who they think are isolated. So I think it's really important for parents to tell their children, look, it if you come to me with anything that makes you uncomfortable or anything related to this type of abuse, I will never get angry at you. I will be supportive and you can feel safe coming to me cuz a lot of these teenagers who are being abused do not feel like they have the environment where they could talk to anyone at all and that leads them being victimized over a long period of time as allegedly happened here.
>> You mentioned something before about, you know, this might have been the only incident we have, which is interesting in terms of talking about sentencing. Uh, Clute Police Chief James uh Fitch said this. He said that investigators found no evidence of additional victims. Now, could that be that's exactly the truth, right? There's nobody else. This was just one victim in this case. Could it be that there are others out there who just chose not to come forward? That's a possibility. But accepting it that they found no evidence of additional victims. A, how do they know that, right? What does that mean they found no evidence? And B, if that's true, does that surprise you?
>> Right. Well, you raised a lot of good points there. I think what they're saying is that no one has come forward with other claims of abuse. That doesn't mean that someone else isn't in silence still dealing with the trauma of abuse from many years ago. Just like this victim. It occurred in 2007 and now we're in 2025. The indictment was in 2024, I believe. So, it takes a long time for people to come forward. There may be others who didn't come forward. Often, when cases receive media attention like this, that's when other people do come forward because they feel emboldened. They feel like their safety in numbers to report someone. A lot of victims, especially when they were young, have self-doubt, self-blame, and seeing other people come forward makes them feel, you know, I was wronged. So, what did they do to confirm that there were no other sex abuse incidents over the last 17 years? I can't imagine that they really talked to everyone who interacted with this defendant or did a real thorough investigation of every student that interacted with her, but there have been no reports and that is a factor that's taken into account. Does that mean nothing happened? No. But, you know, we have a justice system that for good reason people are innocent till proven guilty. They're assumed not to have committed misconduct unless there's evidence of that misconduct. And in this case, we don't have anything to show that there was other misconduct. And I think most courts, if there's and most prosecutor's offices, if there's a 17-year period of no complaints about someone, which doesn't mean nothing happened, but that's all you can go on, that's going to be a significant factor in determining sanctioning and sentencing.
>> And something I I had talked about earlier, just to put a fine point on this is about the school and the school district. There was an immediate action to put her on leave and then ultimately fire her. this seemed like this came as a shock to them. Is there anything they need to do internally? Is there anything they need to do to understand how this might have happened? Again, it might be different than a situation where there were multiple victims over a prolonged period of time. If you're dealing with the situation of one victim, what do they need to do? What should they do?
>> Sure. And this is something I deal with all the time. I do investigations for schools and they're often looking back a period of time to find out what should they have done. And one thing is to understand why wasn't anyone notified about this in 2007 or if someone was notified about this in the school, why wasn't anything done? Because when there's an ongoing pattern of sex abuse and the allegations here that as you said it went on for a long period of time beyond just the single date of the indictment, it's unlikely that no one knew anything. Even if that other person might have just been a fellow student, might have known something. Now, why wasn't it reported to people who were higher up in the school? That's a really important thing to understand. Not just so you can look back and see what was done wrong, but also to inform you now because if there was a culture and a climate where people in the school weren't able to bring these things forward and if that culture and climate is still present today, then this might happen again. So I think there's a lot of evaluation of why wasn't this known earlier and what's different now? If this happened today in our school, would people feel comfortable reporting it? Do we have the right policies and procedures? You know, I've seen cases and in my book I write about this where there's cases where it was reported to people and people just didn't do anything either because they didn't care enough or they were afraid of retaliation or a lot of people in in schools sometimes unfortunately feel I just want to keep my head down and go through the day and go home to my family and not get involved in anything controversial. So those are some factors that schools are dealing with and they need to do an internal investigation to find out why this wasn't reported earlier.
Dan, sure. This is a tough subject matter, but thank you so much for uh your expertise on it, and I encourage everybody to go check out your book as well. Thank you so much.
>> Thank you, Jesse. It's very important that you're highlighting these stories. So, thank you for having me on and talking about it.
>> All right, everybody. That's all we have for you right now here on Sidebar. Thank you so much for joining us. And as always, please subscribe on YouTube, Apple Podcast, Spotify, wherever you should get your podcasts. I'm Jesse Weber. I'll speak to you next time.
[Music]