MAN BEATS CHARGES IN TULIA DRUG STING

Appeals Court Judge Not Convinced By Credibility Of Undercover Officer

Billy Wafer was one of 43 residents of the small Panhandle town of
Tulia who was busted in a controversial drug sting that ended in the
summer of 1999. It cost him his job, a home loan that was in progress
and it nearly cost him his freedom.

Now, the charges against him have evaporated.

"I'm a free man," Wafer sighed last week, shortly after an appeals
court in Amarillo issued an opinion that not only struck down his
indictment, but raised questions about the credibility of the
undercover officer who conducted the investigation.

Although the ruling in Wafer's case has no legal effect on the
convictions of the other 42 defendants caught in the sting, he said
he is hopeful that it will help get some of those cases reopened.

"By us proving that he (the undercover cop) perjured himself, that
may help the FBI investigation," Wafer said. "We're hoping that is
the effect it will have."

The 18-month investigation was conducted by Tom Coleman, who had
limited law enforcement experience before he was hired by the
Panhandle Narcotics Task Force to work with the Swisher County
Sheriff's Department.

Most of the 43 defendants pleaded guilty. A dozen stood trial and
were convicted, largely on the testimony of Coleman. No audio or
video surveillance devices were used to corroborate his statements.

And, because 40 of the 43 defendants were black, charges of racial
targeting were made against the task force. Lawsuits were filed by
the NAACP and the American Civil Liberties Union, and the U.S.
Department of Justice disclosed it would investigate the sting.

Although some other defendants alleged that Coleman fabricated some
of the evidence against them, Wafer's case was the most convincing
because he had a solid alibi.

Coleman said he talked to Wafer about 9 a.m. on the morning of Jan.
18, 1999, and asked him to deliver a quantity of cocaine at the local
livestock sale barn. He said a woman showed up with the drugs an hour
later.

Shortly after Wafer was arrested, the prosecutor filed a motion to
revoke Wafer's probation on a 1990 conviction of marijuana possession
in Plainview. A hearing on that motion was the first real challenge
to Coleman's credibility.

Wafer produced work records showing that he was at his job as a
warehouse foreman at Seed Resources in Tulia on Jan. 18. His boss
even appeared in court to support his story.

Judge Edward Self gave greater credence to the time cards and the
boss's testimony than to Coleman's story.

"Based upon the evidence that I've heard today, I'm not going to
revoke your probation," Self told Wafer. "All I'm saying is that the
court is not convinced by a preponderance of the evidence that the
allegations contained in the motion are true. I'm not convinced they
are true, so I'm not revoking."

However, the judge did not order the drug charges against Wafer
dismissed, meaning that the district attorney could prosecute -- even
though the judge found the evidence unconvincing.

Wafer's attorney, Brent Hamilton of Plainview, went to the court of
appeals in Amarillo.

When the court held oral arguments in early December, District
Attorney Terry McEachern declined to appear.

"Is anyone here representing Swisher County?" the judge asked.

When no one stepped forward, he allowed Hamilton to proceed. He
argued that the trial judge had made a "finding of fact" in refusing
to revoke Wafer's probation and, therefore, the state was barred from
prosecuting Wafer on the same facts.

The appellate court agreed.

"The decision to forgo revocation was related to Wafer's guilt or
innocence (regarding) the delivery of cocaine," the opinion said.
"The state failed to prove Wafer's guilt for the crime (but) attempts
to relitigate Wafer's guilt for it. We dismiss the indictment and
prosecution."

Hamilton said that while the ruling has no bearing on any other
cases, "it does say something about the other cases. Factually they
could be flawed as well."

Coleman, whose work in the sting earned him an Officer of the Year
award from the Texas Department of Public Safety, left the Panhandle
after the undercover operation and worked briefly in Chambers and
Liberty counties near Houston before returning to West Texas.

Among the allegations made against him by the defendants was that he
claimed he bought powder cocaine from them and turned in as evidence
cocaine he had obtained elsewhere. Even some of those who admitted
selling rock cocaine to him alleged that Coleman lied about the
location of the sale, placing it near a public park or school so they
could be prosecuted for a more serious crime.

Apparently, those are among the charges being investigated by the FBI.