Washington Evening Journal
111 North Marion Avenue
Washington, IA 52353
319-653-2191
Lopez and supporters feel relief after Brady-Giglio ruling clears his name
AnnaMarie Kruse
Oct. 1, 2025 1:08 pm
Southeast Iowa Union offers audio versions of articles using Instaread. Some words may be mispronounced.
MT. PLEASANT — When word broke of Judge Thomas Reidel’s ruling removing Henry County Deputy Carlos Lopez from the Brady-Giglio list, the message traveled quickly through Henry County.
By the evening of Monday, Sept. 29, word had spread among friends, fellow officers and neighbors who had spent more than a year rallying around the deputy. Beth Lopez, speaking for herself and her husband, said the ruling brought a long-awaited sense of relief.
“This journey has been long and emotionally draining,” she said. “But today we feel nothing but gratitude that justice has finally prevailed.”
Lopez’s removal from the list — which marks law enforcement officers whose credibility or honesty has been questioned — closed a painful chapter for the family.
“We knew in our hearts that Carlos’s name did not belong on the Brady-Giglio list,” Beth said. “Yet the uncertainty weighed heavily on us, our family, supporters, and law enforcement across the state. We entered this knowing it would be a battle, though we never imagined the toll it would take.”
Support for the Lopez family was visible across Henry County. Residents of Henry County made donations and placed yard signs reading “We Support Our Henry County Sheriff’s Office” as they made their support readily apparent. A summer “Dine & Donate” event at the Mt. Pleasant VFW raised funds to help the family cover legal expenses. Many spoke up about their displeasure with the situation during public comments at Henry County Board of Supervisors meetings. Dozens of residents filled the courtroom during Lopez’s Aug. 26 hearing.
Beth said the outpouring of encouragement meant everything to their family.
While the ruling brought closure for Lopez and his family, tensions between the sheriff’s office and the county attorney’s office may take time to ease. Sheriff Rich McNamee shared in the relief, stating that he never doubted his deputy’s integrity.
“I think it’s outstanding,” McNamee said of Judge Reidel’s ruling. “He made a good decision and did what was appropriate.”
McNamee testified at Lopez’s hearing and publicly defended him from the very moment Lopez received notice of his placement on the Brady-Giglio list. He said his review of Lopez’s record revealed no misconduct — only a poorly worded complaint affidavit that had been misconstrued.
“When I testified, I said his wording wasn’t perfect or precise,” McNamee said. “But he did not lie. He wasn’t deceitful. He didn’t have candor issues. He just didn’t present himself very well grammatically.”
Judge Reidel echoed that conclusion in his written ruling, stating that “Plaintiff’s poor wordsmithing resulting in a scrivener’s error does not constitute deceitfulness or dishonesty. [The County Attorney]’s conclusion to the contrary is an abuse of his discretion.”
McNamee said he has questioned deputies before, when necessary, but that Lopez never caused him concern.
“Carlos has been in good standing with me all along,” McNamee said. “He’s an upstanding deputy — one of those guys who’s good at anything he tries.”
The sheriff said Lopez’s removal from the Brady-Giglio list means he can return to serving the public without the shadow of suspicion.
Lopez’s attorney, Charles Gribble, agreed that the ruling restores not just his client’s position, but his professional reputation.
“Being placed on a Brady-Giglio list is very stigmatizing to a police officer,” Gribble said. “It really strikes at the heart of what a police officer is — truthful and honest. Often it means they won’t be retained in their current position, and if they seek another job, they may not be hired.”
Gribble said the court’s ruling ensures that Lopez can fully perform his duties again.
“Now, Carlos can make arrests, do searches and testify in court without his testimony being compromised or challenged,” he said.
Beyond Lopez’s case, Gribble said the ruling is part of a wider debate about how Brady-Giglio laws should be applied in Iowa. He added that cases like Lopez’s also show why open communication between county attorneys and law enforcement leaders is essential.
“It would be better for a county attorney and a sheriff’s office to get together and work on a resolution without going immediately to a Brady-Giglio list,” Gribble said. “That step generally is, and certainly can be, career ending.”
Gribble said the Iowa Supreme Court is expected to examine the constitutionality of Iowa Code 80F.1 (23), the amendment that gives officers the right to appeal their placement on Brady-Giglio lists.
“We still have to wait and see how the Supreme Court rules,” Gribble said. “There are issues that still need to be resolved with respect to this particular provision, but it’s better that we have this law than we did not have it previously. It provides some protection for a police officer who was placed on that list.”
Gribble said he believes the statute will withstand that challenge.
“We clearly believe it’s constitutional,” he said. “County attorneys have argued that it interferes with their rights, but we don’t see that. In the cases we’ve had so far, that argument’s been heard and rejected.”
Meanwhile, the Iowa Freedom of Information Council has said it will continue its effort to make testimony and court records from Lopez’s and other Brady-Giglio related hearings public, arguing that transparency is essential when it comes to Brady-Giglio decisions that affect both law enforcement and public trust.
McNamee said he hopes the ruling will allow the county to move forward — but added that he remains frustrated with what he described as a lack of prosecutorial urgency.
“I have to be honest, I don’t have a lot of faith in our county attorney, especially after this debacle,” McNamee said. “I hope he can start looking at criminal complaints seriously, giving our victims satisfaction and taking care of our taxpayers that are victimized in Henry County.”
The sheriff said he believes a tougher approach from the county attorney’s office could help reduce crime.
“After all these years, I think Darin [Stater] has gotten more and more lenient, and our crime has gotten worse and worse because of it,” he said.
Henry County Attorney Darin Stater, who was first elected county attorney in 2006, offered a different perspective. In a written statement to The Union, he said he stands by his decision to place Lopez on the Brady-Giglio list but has followed the court’s order to remove him effective Sept. 30.
“Rules of professional conduct restrict a prosecutor’s ability to speak publicly about court rulings,” Stater said. “While I respectfully disagree with the ruling, I respect the Court’s order.”
His statement went beyond the ruling itself, addressing the broader friction that can arise between prosecutors and law enforcement.
“When people say, ‘Back the Blue,’ they tend to forget that prosecutors are a crucial component of that ‘Blue,’” he wrote. “Although we are on the same team, the very nature of our different jobs creates friction between a prosecutor and other elected officials and members of law enforcement on a daily basis.”
Stater said his office’s decisions are guided not by politics or personalities but by principle.
“The prosecutor generally serves the public and not any particular government agency, law enforcement officer or unit,” he wrote, citing the American Bar Association’s standards. “A prosecutor is an administrator of justice, a zealous advocate, and an officer of the court.”
“I have not and will not engage in any attempts to sway public opinion about my ethics or the ethics of anyone else by mudslinging,” Stater continued. “Nor will I be bullied by any elected officials or influenced by politics on any level.”
Stater has 30 days from the time of the ruling to file an appeal. As of the morning of Wednesday, Oct. 1, no appeal had been filed.
For Beth Lopez, the family’s focus has shifted from fighting to healing.
“To all who have supported us, stood by us, and believed in Carlos’s integrity,” she said, “we are forever grateful.”
Comments: AnnaMarie.Kruse@southeastiowaunion.com