Should a DPS trooper who uses his position to get sexual favors from females he stops, be given 6 mos. misd. probation and a $100 fine, so he can get "counseling"? And should the DA tell a newspaper reporter to leave the courtroom during the plea in order to protect the trooper's privacy and dignity?

What do you think?

Here's the story:

www.thevictoriaadvocate.com/front/story/1157038p-1378623c.html

I hesitate to comment directly on this because every case is different. Our Kleberg office had a similar case some years back, and the officer was put on felony probation for some years, but that case also included some tampering with evidence related to the incidents and I believe the plea was to that charge.

I don't see how a prosecutor can kick anybody out of a courtroom for a public matter.

Maybe I should be rethinking what I've been taught. My understanding was that it was the judge who had charge and control of the courtroom, including the ability to kick someone out of the courtroom or close the proceedings to the public. If this means I can kick people out of the courtroom to preserve "dignity," my job as a trial lawyer will become much, much easier. Boy, the things they don't teach you in law school!

Don't see how a Trooper can offer someone a "reduction in their probation sentence".

Sounds to me like the DA is trying to protect himself. A simple rule of thumb that I use is "If I'm afraid to have my decision on the front page of the paper, then it is probably the wrong decision." We need to remember who we work for.

I think it's strange that the trooper didin't have an attorney. I've never had a case involving a cop where the cop chose to go pro se.