Pubdate: 26 Mar 1999 Source: Houston Chronicle (TX) Copyright: 1999 Houston Chronicle Contact: http://www.chron.com/ Forum: http://www.chron.com/content/hcitalk/index.html Author: Steve Brewer Section: Front Page of Metro Section (33A) SOLE INDICTMENT OF WILLIS CONFOUNDED MANY Grand jury may have disliked officer's demeanor Of the six Houston policemen involved in the botched drug raid that led to the death of Pedro Oregon Navarro, James Willis was the only one indicted. That seems to confound prosecutors, Oregon family attorneys, protesters and even Willis' attorney. "That's something that's perplexed everybody," said Brian Benken, who represented Willis. It even perplexed Ryan Baxter, whose tip to police led to the aborted drug raid that led to Oregon's shooting. Earlier this week, during Willis' misdemeanor criminal trespass trial, he testified that Willis was nice to him the night of his arrest and he didn't think the officer had done anything wrong. "I don't know why he was brought up on charges, to tell the truth," Baxter told jurors, to the chagrin of prosecutors. Willis, acquitted of the charge Thursday, already had been fired, as had the five other officers involved in the July 12 raid. But he has been the only one to face any charges so far. Sources familiar with the grand jury probe and the investigation of the Oregon shooting -- requesting anonymity -- told the Chronicle that Willis was charged by angry grand jurors because he came across as "a jerk" while testifying before them. One source said some grand jurors just didn't like Willis, thought he was arrogant and were angry that he would not concede that he and the other officers might have done something improper. Members of that grand jury either couldn't be reached for comment or declined to say anything about the case. Harris County District Attorney John B. Holmes Jr. said he cannot comment on grand jury deliberations or testimony and neither can prosecutor Ed Porter, who handled Willis' case. But, Holmes speculated, Willis' behavior or demeanor in front of grand juror s could have made the difference. "I don't know and I'm just speculating, but I think Willis was absolutely convinced that what they did was in accordance with the law and my guess is that angered the grand jury," Holmes said. Porter said he didn't know why they indicted Willis alone, or why they decided to charge him with criminal trespass. Prosecutors had prepared paperwork on all the officers, ranging from murder to official oppression. But grand jurors apparently picked criminal trespass on their own and singled out Willis. No clear reason was shown during the trial. Evidence showed he wasn't the only one in the apartment. He didn't plan the raid, was not the ranking officer and wasn't the first in the door of the apartment where Oregon was killed. "I think it's a question of perception as to what occurred," Porter said after Thursday's verdict. "They obviously had the benefit of additional testimony that this jury did not have the benefit of." Peter Lewis, an attorney with a doctorate in criminology who teaches at South Texas College of Law, said it is unusual for a grand jury to take such an action. Singling out one person in a case with several potential defendants is strange enough, said Lewis, a former prosecutor and defense attorney, but charging him because of a personal perception is a "fluke." "That almost never happens that they pick one guy because of his demeanor .. but you got to take the good with the bad and I don't think it happens that often." Lewis said the panel could have just as easily indicted all six officers for trespassing, but grand jurors can be unpredictable, though they're generally considered rubber stamps for prosecutors. - --- MAP posted-by: Mike Gogulski