On June 17, 2025, a news article was published detailing serious allegations against Gainesville, Texas District Judge Janelle Haverkamp, formerly the District Attorney of Cooke County. Haverkamp has been accused of withholding critical evidence and engaging in other forms of misconduct. Despite documented proof of these violations, no disciplinary action has been taken, and it remains unclear whether any consequences will follow.
According to the article released by WFAA, Judge Haverkamp has presided over more than a hundred cases, many of which are now under scrutiny. Tensions within the Cooke County courthouse have escalated, with feuds among colleagues reportedly impacting judicial decisions.
Gainesville, Texas—Cooke County’s judicial seat—is the central venue for all district court matters in the area. For over 30 years, Haverkamp has played a major role in thousands of legal decisions. Now, growing concerns are being raised about the integrity of many of those rulings.
One recent case, Newberry v. The State, has brought these issues back into the spotlight. During the proceedings, Mark Lassiter, Newberry’s attorney, was reprimanded by the presiding judge (serving in place of Haverkamp), who told him to “come down four notches” and accused him of being overly passionate in court. The judge appeared dismissive and frustrated by Lassiter’s advocacy.
Alarming reports also described racial segregation in the courtroom, where attendees were allegedly instructed to sit in designated areas based on race. More than a dozen law enforcement officers were present, further intensifying tensions.
Although Judge Haverkamp was a key witness in the trial and barred from accessing her chambers during testimony to maintain fairness, she was allowed to remain in another courtroom space. Witnesses observed her acting with hostility, glaring into the courtroom, and at one point shouting, “THEY WERE ALL THUGS,” while pointing at members of the local community who were in attendance.
Under oath, Haverkamp entered the courtroom carrying what appeared to be a large stack of files. When questioned, she claimed they were simply her notes. However, she refused to fully disclose the contents, even after being ordered to do so multiple times. Among the visible documents were witness statements and other materials that had not been submitted during the original trial of Newberry v. The State. When asked why these were never turned over to the court, Haverkamp replied that she “didn’t think it was important.”
At present, no formal decision has been made regarding disciplinary action. Haverkamp’s attorney has released a public statement, which can be found in the full article on WFAA’s website