‘Zero’ Chance of Plea Bargain in Tearman Spencer Case

Attorney William F. Sulton and Tearman Spencer. Photo taken Oct. 5, 2024 by Graham Kilmer.

Former City Attorney Tearman Spencer will have his day in court to defend himself against felony misconduct charges.

In fact, Judge Jorge Fragoso is giving Spencer five of them.

Fragoso, during a status conference Thursday, scheduled a full week jury trial for the week of Oct. 27.

Spencer’s attorney William F. Sulton said after the hearing that there is “zero” chance his client accepts a plea bargain agreement.

Fragoso also ruled against Heitman’s attempt to impose a protective order on the evidence in the case. “I don’t believe that’s necessary with regard to this case,” said the judge after the parties emerged from his chamber following an off the record conversation that lasted almost a half hour.

The then city-attorney, as an October complaint filed by assistant district attorney Nicolas J. Heitman alleges, used his office to personal benefit. He is alleged to have used attorneys that reported to him to craft a legal opinion to avoid permitting fees from the Department of Neighborhood Services (DNS), his client, for a property he rented at 3030 N. Martin Luther King Jr. Dr. to store his personal collection of vehicles. When he instructed a deputy in 2023 to prepare a memo that he didn’t need an occupancy permit, he is alleged to have withheld that such a determination was for his personal benefit and would save him thousands of dollars in permitting costs. He is then alleged to have provided the memo not to DNS, but to his landlord to use in meeting with DNS.

Thursday’s status conference also dealt with Heitman’s request to explicitly prevent the release of any evidence from the case to outside parties. He said it contains personally identifiable information, such as Social Security numbers.

“I think that type of information should not be disclosed by the parties,” said Heitman. “I also think the recorded interviews and other things could be used to harass and intimidate witnesses, not in the criminal sense judge, but for the purposes of embarrassment.” Heitman had specifically requested to bar release to the media.

Sulton had contested the request at two consecutive hearings.

After the hearing, Sulton said he did believe some of the interviews reflected poorly for for the witnesses, but that he had no intention of releasing them.

“It’s an attack on my professionalism that somehow I would release information about potential witnesses in the case to embarrass them or make them feel bad,” said the attorney. “I don’t have that reputation. I haven’t ever done that… I don’t do that. I haven’t ever seen it. I haven’t ever done it.”

Sulton said he thought the District Attorney’s office raising the issue was a sign of the “character and quality of the actual evidence.”

“This is in our view a case about publicity and that’s what they’re trying to do is blacken Mr. Spencer’s good name and reputation and that’s what it’s about,” said Sulton. “I mean nobody, no reasonable person, could possibly believe that this is a case where probation is even on the table, right?”

The maximum penalty for the Class I felony charge is a $10,000 fine and imprisonment of not more than three and a half years. Spencer also faces a misdemeanor charge for obstructing an officer stemming from a July 2024 voluntary interview. The misdemeanor charge carries a maximum penalty of a $10,000 fine and nine months imprisonment.

After a single, tumultuous term as the city’s lawyer, Spencer lost his April 2024 bid for reelection.

Heitman declined to comment on the case after the hearing.

A status conference is scheduled for July 18.