Fort Bend County Judge Found Guilty in Money Laundering Case

Fort Bend County Judge KP George Found Guilty on Money Laundering Charges

A Fort Bend County jury has found County Judge KP George guilty on two counts of money laundering. He faces a potential sentence of two to ten years in prison. George has chosen to have the judge determine his punishment.

The punishment phase is scheduled to begin June 16 under an agreement between prosecutors and the defense. George is currently free on a $20,000 bond—$10,000 for each charge—and was required to surrender his U.S. passport. He left the Fort Bend County Jail around 8 p.m. Friday after the verdict.

Under Texas law, George will be removed from office upon conviction. District attorneys informed reporters that official removal will not take effect until after sentencing. Fort Bend County commissioners may then divide his duties or appoint a temporary replacement. Precinct 4 Commissioner Dexter McCoy stated that all commissioners will meet Thursday “to determine next steps for the leadership of our county.”

George did not testify during the trial. Closing arguments concluded Thursday. Before deliberations began, the judge reviewed the charge with the jury and explained the legal definitions of money laundering along with the standards they were required to apply. Jurors were told they could consider a lesser state jail felony charge or return a guilty verdict on the third-degree felony counts. George had entered a not-guilty plea.

Prosecutors argued that George repeatedly misrepresented campaign funds and used them for personal benefit. Assistant District Attorney Katherine Peterson told the jury that George “kept lying” in multiple campaign finance reports. The state highlighted alleged transfers of campaign money into personal accounts, personal expenses such as auto payments, and financial activity involving out-of-state accounts linked to Delaware and communications associated with Massachusetts.

Prosecutors further claimed George opened a personal savings account after a 2019 fundraiser in anticipation of receiving campaign contributions. Citing testimony from a Texas Ethics Commission representative, they stressed that candidates must accurately report all financial activity. The state maintained that the evidence showed George took more money than he was entitled to and used campaign funds for personal expenses over several years, rejecting any suggestion that the case was politically motivated.

The defense countered that the prosecution’s case rested on flawed assumptions and incomplete records. Defense attorneys argued the matter involved government overreach rather than criminal conduct. They told jurors the state failed to prove George’s intent to commit fraud—an essential element for conviction—and that there was no evidence he used illicit funds.

Defense lawyers noted that candidates may lawfully lend money to their campaigns and later repay themselves under Texas Ethics Commission rules. They challenged how certain transactions, particularly credit card spending, were categorized, arguing that without detailed records it was difficult to distinguish personal from campaign expenses. They also pointed out that funds were transferred into accounts under George’s own name, which they said demonstrated an attempt to reveal rather than conceal the money. The defense maintained the investigation “left out critical information” and ultimately failed to establish a crime.

Court documents filed by prosecutors alleged that George lied under oath about the amount of money in his campaign account, moved funds from the campaign account to personal accounts, and participated in a scheme to deceive contributors. The state claimed he accepted thousands of dollars in campaign contributions that he then used to enrich himself.

The guilty verdict places George on a path toward removal from office and potential prison time. The case underscores the importance of accurate campaign finance reporting and the consequences when officials are found to have misused political funds. Sentencing will determine the final outcome.