Judge orders DPS to release Uvalde records

More than a year after a gunman killed 19 students and two teachers at Robb Elementary School in Uvalde, a judge has ordered the Texas Department of Public Safety to release information about the attack and the law enforcement response.

On June 29, Travis County District Court Judge Daniella DeSeta Lyttle ruled in favor of a national media coalition which sued DPS to release public records related to the tragedy, including information regarding the 91 DPS officers who responded to Robb Elementary and the agency’s subsequent investigation into the law enforcement response.

“This is a huge victory for the community of Uvalde and for transparency in the state of Texas,” said attorney Laura Prather of Haynes and Boone, who has represented Texas Press Association for years. Prather organized the national media coalition — of which TPA is a member — after the shooting as DPS and local law enforcement agencies denied dozens of requests for information. Law enforcement officials refused to release any information that could shed light on what happened at Robb Elementary, including records related to the school, the shooter and the law enforcement response.

The lack of disclosure led to conflicting narratives about what occurred. In the days immediately after the tragedy, Texas officials hailed the responding officers as heroes for their supposedly swift response. But it was later revealed that officers waited 77 minutes to confront the gunman, despite multiple calls from victims inside the classroom seeking emergency help.

Officials from DPS and local law enforcement agencies have blamed each other for the delayed response, but neither side has released unedited information to the public. Instead, officials have invoked the “law enforcement” exception in the Texas Public Information Act, claiming that disclosure would interfere with the investigation and potential prosecution of law enforcement officers who responded.

The media coalition sued DPS in Travis County for records related to the DPS officers who responded to the scene, and for records related to DPS’s subsequent investigation of the overall law enforcement response.

The coalition has also filed a separate suit against the Uvalde Police Department, Uvalde Sheriff and the Uvalde Consolidated Independent School District in Uvalde County. The Public Information Act requires plaintiffs to sue in the county where the governmental body is located.

In December, the coalition filed its motion for summary judgment in the DPS case, arguing that the release of records will not interfere with DPS’ investigation. Before the motion was heard, DPS stated publicly that it had concluded its investigation and delivered its report to the Uvalde district attorney.

Days before the March 8 hearing, the Uvalde district attorney intervened in the case, arguing that the release of DPS records could compromise her ability to prosecute officers who responded to the scene. The district attorney also claimed that she had spoken to all the victims’ families and that they were united in opposing disclosure of the public records. However, many of the families have said publicly they favor transparency, and their attorneys signed affidavits attesting to the families’ support for the release of these records.

At the hearing, Prather argued that DPS’s “draconian” withholding of public information was an affront to the Texas Public Information Act. “Calls for transparency and accountability have rung loud and clear. They’ve reverberated in public settings throughout the state,” she said. “The district attorney and DPS ... have strived to mandate silence over anyone and everyone who was a part of the response that day.”

DPS did not argue that disclosure would affect its investigation, but focused instead on whether summary judgment was appropriate. Representatives for the Uvalde district attorney also argued against disclosure but offered few specifics as to how the release of DPS records would affect a hypothetical future criminal case.

Prather responded by noting that release would not compromise any potential prosecution. “We have an investigation that is over,” Prather said. “We have suspects that have already been notified. We have witnesses that have already been interviewed. And we have immutable evidence in the form of audio and video.”

Judge DeSeta Lyttle initially took the case under advisement, but eventually ruled in favor of the media coalition and ordered DPS to begin making any mandatory redactions in preparation for the records’ eventual release, since The TPIA requires certain information to be redacted from any public records that are released. Judge DeSeta Lyttle gave DPS until Aug. 31 to produce a log of those redactions. In the meantime, DPS has not said whether it will appeal the ruling.

“Shining light on the truth, even when it’s difficult to face, is what the people of our state demand, and it’s what the Texas Public Information Act requires,” said Prather. “We are thrilled to see that the Uvalde community and all Texas citizens are one step closer to learning what happened the tragic day of this mass shooting more than a year ago.”