We do issue a warning to anyone viewing the following video: be advised that Burns defends Col. Hodges’ pursuit of his 84-hour suspension handed down to Jefferson:
2/25/26: Matthews educates viewers on the criteria for probable cause to effectuate an arrest and discusses with Burns the lack of meaningful transparency to the public regarding the arrest of Jefferson on February 6, 2025.
As mentioned near the very end of the video, the WAFB Writ of Mandamus hearing entailing its lawsuit against LSP to obtain a video regarding LSP Trooper Mathew Clair in which questions of potential excessive force have been raised is scheduled for 9:00 a.m. tomorrow morning (February 26, 2026). We look forward to attending the hearing and reporting upon its outcome.
Louisiana State Police (LSP) Lt. James Jefferson III embraces his attorney, Jill Craft, after his Motion for Summary Disposition was granted by the Louisiana State Police Commission (LSPC) on Thursday, February 12, 2026.
It should be noted that this March 26, 2025 WAFB feature essentially served as a prelude 20 days before Moore’s just-linked announcement. From that feature:
Based off of reviews of evidence and reports, District Attorney Hillar Moore told the I-TEAM Wednesday the charges are likely to be dismissed against James Jefferson.
Jefferson was arrested for one count of domestic abuse battery with child endangerment last month. Officers who responded say they observed fresh scratches on Jefferson’s hand. But now, we’ve learned prosecutors are reviewing the case and there are serious questions about whether there was even probable cause to arrest Jefferson.
The arresting officer who put Jefferson in handcuffs was placed on administrative leave following Jefferson’s arrest. Baton Rouge Police said the officer was placed on leave on February 27th. He was moved to desk duty on March 11, which restricts him from driving a unit or working extra duty.
Sources told the WAFB I-TEAM there were problems with the arrest that night, and upon further review of other cases involving the same officer, there was a problem involving evidence in a different case. Sources said that’s what led to the officer being put on leave and then desk duty.
At an LSPC meeting of Thursday, February 12, 2026, LSP Col. Robert Hodges explained why he and his Disciplinary Review Committee imposed a 48-hour suspension on Jefferson notwithstanding DA Hillar Moore’s declining to pursue criminal charges:
2/12/26 LSP Col. Robert Hodges explains why he imposed a 48-hour suspension against Jefferson notwithstanding DA Moore’s decision to drop criminal charges.
The LSPC spent a total of 85 minutes (not including another 30-40 in Executive Session) hearing oral arguments by Jill Craft, Jefferson’s attorney, on her contention that no hearing for Jefferson was necessary and why his 48-hour suspension should be summarily dismissed. We will be providing a link for the entirety of the oral arguments for that summary disposition; however, let us provide a sort of quick and fast overview of Jefferson’s contentions vs. LSP Col. Robert Hodges’ contentions:
=== Both sides agreed that the internal investigation of Jefferson, which by LSPC rules must wrap up within 60 days, concluded on April 9, 2025. Craft, arguing on behalf of Jefferson, asserted that the investigation began on February 6, 2025, which meant that it lasted 62 days, two (2) days longer than permitted by LSPC Rules. Hodges, on the other hand, was very adamant that the investigation did not commence until February 13, 2025 (even reading into the record a communication from LSP Chief of Staff Frank Besson that the investigation “commenced on February 13, 2025”) and therefore concluded in 55 days, five (5) days before the deadline.
=== While LSP admitted to a “procedural error” in not providing Jefferson with a Loudermill letter until May 15, 2025 (weeks after Jefferson’s suspension had been established by Hodges and the suspension even served), Hodges and LSP attorneys argued that the “error” was correctable by refunding Jefferson his pay for the suspension served, and proceeding with a redo of the whole matter. Craft asserted that LSP failed miserably to “fix” any “error” and that correspondence to her in mid to late July of 2025 in no way constituted a Loudermill letter. LSP admitted that no second Loudermill letter was sent after May 15, 2025 and admitted that Jefferson should have been afforded an opportunity to respond, in writing, to present “his side of the story” prior to any discipline being handed down to Jefferson. Nevertheless, Jefferson, after a Disciplinary Review Committee meeting on or around August 6, 2025, received another formal 48-hour suspension, which he served for a second time. The initial suspension, served during the week of April 20, 2025 through April 24, 2025, dates chosen by Jefferson as an accommodation while his children were on Spring break, had been refunded to him by LSP.
That’s the summation, but we do want to present a video of the oral arguments in their entireties and draw specific attention to Hodges’ portion of the hearing, which transpires from the 29:00 – 1:08:15 mark. Here is that video:
2/12/26: James Jefferson III’s oral arguments regarding his Motion for Summary Disposition with particular focus on LSP Col. Robert Hodges testimony transpiring from the 29:00 – 1:08:15 mark.
The only commentary we’re going to make about Hodges’ testimony is twofold:
#1) Craft easily frustrates him on numerous occasions even though she appeared to be exerting no effort at all on her part to do so, and
#2) Hodges, in our opinion at least (but viewers can watch the video and draw their own conclusions), seems to be very emphatic that a “hearing next month” entailing Jefferson would transpire, which could happen only if the LSPC denied Jefferson’s Motion for Summary Disposition.
Regarding point #2) above, Hodges would be disappointed because the LSPC, led by Member Michael “Mickey” DuBos, Granted the Motion for Summary Disposition and awarded Jefferson $1,500 in attorney fees to Craft:
LSPC Grants Jefferson’s Motion for Summary Disposition and awards him $1,500 in attorney fees.
While the above presentation concludes this feature, we reserve the right to supplement (a favorite word of Billy Broussard) this feature in the future based on any findings from our public records request to Baton Rouge Police for the incident report and any body camera footage applicable for Lt. Jefferson’s arrest and/or our public records request of the LSPC for all material provided to the LSPC Commissioners for Jefferson’s Motion for Summary Disposition and/or our our public records request of LSP for the investigative file for Lt. Jefferson.
Phillip “Bert” Callais, lead Plaintiff in Callais v. Landry, the redistricting case pending before the United States Supreme Court entailing the map which reconfigured U. S. Congressional District 6 which prompted then-incumbent Congressman Garret Graves not to seek reelection and provided the pathway for eventual-candidate Cleo Fields to return to the U. S. Congress after about a 28-year hiatus.
Visitors to our blog may recall our October 14, 2025 feature in which former Grant Parish DA Ed Tarpley referenced Louisiana Gov. Jeff Landry and Attorney General Liz Murrill as “disgraces.” Tarpley’s basis for referencing Landry and Murrill as “disgraces” stems from his contention that they combined to, “author this unbelievable District. This gerrymandered District…..giving the seat (of former Congressman Graves) to one of the worst Democrats in the world, Cleo Fields.”
Understandably, Landry was not pleased with Tarpley’s commentary, so he had one of his on-staff attorneys, Brett Robinson, make a request for him to speak remotely to the audience (Tarpley had also addressed the audience remotely). Obviously, Landry’s request was granted, and he emphasized that Louisiana citizens need to respect the hard work of him and Murrill.
Recently, we had the opportunity to interview the lead Plaintiff (there are 11 other Plaintiffs) in the redistricting case, Phillip “Bert” Callais, and he provided his thoughts on Landry and the map Tarpley referenced in his lambasting of Gov. Landry:
Callais conveys his sentiments regarding Gov. Landry’s 10/14/25 statements countering former Grant Parish DA Ed Tarpley referencing Landry as a “disgrace.”
Callais is actually most passionate about “election integrity,” and he contacted Sound Off Louisiana to be afforded an opportunity to “sound off” about his very strong resolve to strengthen Louisiana’s voter integrity to include his strong advocacy for paper ballots:
Callais “sounds off” regarding his strong resolve for strengthening Louisiana’s “voter integrity” and calls upon citizens to actively participate in the process.
At several points in the interview above, Burns references this January 5, 2026 appearance of Secretary of State Nancy Landry and Burns’ recollection of her statements entailing paper ballots, etc. We have provided the direct link to Landry’s presentation so, as Burns states on the video, if he didn’t properly state Landry’s thoughts on anything (Burns was going on memory), blame him (Burns), and not Landry!
For anyone who may be confused on the matter, be aware that the existing maps for the U. S. Congress WILL be the maps used for the upcoming elections! Any ruling by the U. S. Supreme Court regarding redistricting will not affect the maps for the upcoming elections.
Finally, as everyone is surely aware, our endorsed candidate for the U. S. Senate race, State Sen. Blake Miguez, had to pivot after President Trump convinced Fifth Congressional District Congresswoman Julia Letlow to run against Bill Cassidy for his U. S. Senate seat. Miguez is now a candidate to replace Letlow, and he has our full and enthusiastic support in his quest to replace her.
Further, Burns, being in the Fifth District, will obviously be voting for him. In coming weeks, Burns may opt to produce a Sound Off Louisiana feature entailing one of Miguez’s opponents for whom Burns is extremely frustrated!
Recently, Louisiana Treasurer (and former U. S. Congressman) John Fleming, who has been and remains a candidate for that U. S. Senate seat, openly stated that Landry had done as reported by the AP above regarding Trump/Letlow, causing Landry to essentially lose all composure (he’s pretty good at that!) with Landry going so far as to say that Fleming, “may not be fit to hold office.” From the just-linked feature:
On Wednesday, while signing up to run for the U.S. Senate race, Fleming publicly said Landry had been working for over a year on a “scheme” to help win Trump’s endorsement of Letlow.
Gov. Jeff Landry on Thursday fired back at Louisiana Treasurer John Fleming, who is running in a competitive U.S. Senate race against incumbent Sen. Bill Cassidy and Rep. Julia Letlow, after Fleming accused Landry of orchestrating Trump’s endorsement of Letlow.
“Anyone who makes stuff up like that may not be fit for office,” Landry responded in a statement Thursday.
As we indicated above, that’s likely the last anyone will hear out of us on the U. S. Senate race, but rest assured, the television airwaves will be filled with ads by all three major contenders for that U. S. Senate race.
We want to thank Bert Callais for reaching out to Sound Off Louisiana and, as we indicated on the video above, he is welcome to return to provide updates or any other thoughts he may have at any time.
