Refusing to prosecute criminal sheriffs
Dismissing charges against okcpd sgt. joseph gibson for brutally beating an elderly cancer patient nearly to death.
Campaign mistruths regarding transparency and accountability.
failing to mandate statewide #bradylist compliance.
The slogan on his 2020 campaign website reads: "As Attorney General, Gentner Drummond will take on a new mission: defend our rights, uphold the Rule of Law, and serve the People of Oklahoma, not the political elite."
What do you get when you mix performative constitutionalism with authoritarian bootlicking?
Gentner Drummond: a man who quotes the Constitution just enough to sound smart, and ignores it just enough to stay dangerous.
In January 2023, Drummond was sworn in as Oklahoma’s 19th attorney general. born October 1, 1963, in Stillwater, Oklahoma. a long time rancher, banker, and businessman. Drummond founded the Tulsa-based firm, “Drummond Law” in 1999. In January 2025, Drummond announced his run for governor of Oklahoma in the 2026 election.
The man talks a big game about law and order—hell, he practically bathes in it — but he plays both sides of the moral fence. He’s made comments about religious groups that reek of political pandering and First Amendment violations. Suggesting certain faiths are “less deserving” of public recognition? That’s not legal analysis, that’s fascism dressed up in a flag pin. If you’re the state’s top cop, you don’t get to pick and choose which part of the Constitution to respect like it’s a damn buffet.
Whistleblower Journalist Relocates His Family Due to Drummond's Failure to Protect him after Sheriff Clardy of McCurtain County was caught discussing plans to kill him and reminiscing about the days of lynching black people. Drummond claimed no criminal activity occurred, despite the Sheriff's actions being in violation of Oklahoma's threats of violence statute.
Drummond agreed to a deferred prosecution agreement with Seminole County Sheriff Shannon Smith after a forensic audit found $187,340 went missing from a a kiosk where family and friends of county inmates could deposit cash under his supervision.
Additionally the audit discovered problems with a nonprofit managed by the Sheriff's Office [deputy fund] where $88,867 of the $95,870 the nonprofit had collected had no paper trail or documentation to support how the money was spent. Loans related to the nonprofit account were issued to the Sheriff, Undersheriff, and a Deputy.
In December 2024, after OKCPD internal affairs and the county District Attorney both found the officer's force to be excessive and criminal; Gentner Drummond intervened in a case involving Oklahoma City Police Sergeant Joseph Gibson, who had been charged with aggravated assault and battery after forcefully slamming 71-year-old Lich Vu to the ground during a traffic-related dispute.
Mr. Vu suffered heinous injuries, including a broken neck, broken eye socket, and a brain bleed.
Drummond dismissed the charges, stating that he would not allow officers to face criminal prosecution for "actions consistent with their training".
This decision was met with criticism from various community members and leaders, and contrary to Oklahoma's statute concerning excessive force.
Drummond is now a defendant in a 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Action, Vu et al v. Gibson et al [5:2025cv00426] where it is alleged that his policy-making decision to dismiss criminal charges against Joseph Gibson effectively authorized the use of excessive force.
On January 3, 2025, the U.S. Department of Justice released their report after years long investigations into Oklahoma City policing practices towards people who are mentally ill. The report found that Oklahoma is violating federal law by unnecessarily committing people with mental illness and drug abuse disorders to psychiatric hospitals.
Drummond criticized the report, dismissing the issues as simply an attempt by the Biden Administration to "bully" Oklahoma into compliance.
This is FALSE because the Trump administration back in 2017 halted the DOJ's ability to conduct such investigations. Oklahoma police utilized unlawful patterns and practice prior to 2021, but investigations could be conducted only after USAG Garland ended the restrictions on consent decrees. Trump's first administration had done away with such investigations, despite being a key component to civil rights enforcement.
As Trump entered office again in 2025, he immediately [January 23, 2025] ordered the Justice Department’s civil rights division to “not execute or finalize any settlements or consent decrees approved prior to January 20, 2025, 12:00pm.”, before moving to fire at least 12 officials for their "significant role in prosecuting" him.
Drummond's complacency with such findings just further shows what we already learned from the Sgt Gibson case... Drummond cares nothing about protecting our rights or the rule of law, he only cares about how he is viewed by the the political "elite".
Gentner Drummond not only hired an ethically bankrupt attorney, Jimmy Harmon, to lead his Criminal Division, he also put him in charge of the third Glossip trial, despite his public promises to provide Mr. Glossip a "fair trial". Harmon has been arrested multiple times, along with Gayland Gieger, Harmon participated in "pimping" female prosecutors to a former judge in exchange for favorable rulings, and there is evidence of him committing tax fraud, and likely failed to disclose such impeachment evidence when TESTIFYING as a witness in a tax fraud case against a political rival.
In filings from mid-July 2025, Glossip’s defense unveiled April 2023 email exchanges in which AG Drummond allegedly “said ‘We are in agreement’” to terms that would allow Glossip to plead guilty to accessory after the fact, receive a 45-year sentence with full credit for time served, and thus be eligible for immediate release. According to those filings, once Glossip’s conviction was overturned (which happened in February 2025), all conditions of the purported agreement were met, but the state refused to fulfill its side of the agreement. Drummond’s team has refused to recognize the agreement, arguing that no finalized plea deal was ever signed or formally executed. The court will resolve this contract dispute in August, determining whether Glossip is entitled to the terms he claims or must proceed to a new first‑degree murder trial.
On June 17, 2024, Richard Glossip appeared in Oklahoma County District Court for a bond hearing related to his THIRD retrial for a 1997 murder committed by Justin Sneed. During the hearing, the State of Oklahoma submitted transcripts from Glossip’s prior trial(s), now formally vacated due to prosecutorial misconduct and evidentiary concerns, as justification for denying him bond and keeping him in pretrial custody.
By introducing transcripts from Glossip’s vacated conviction(s) as evidence to justify pretrial detention, the State has tainted the new trial process with a constitutional violation at its inception.
This violates the due process and presumption of innocence rights guaranteed under the Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments.
The Supreme Court has consistently emphasized that a defendant must be presumed innocent until proven guilty in a trial free from the taint of prior unconstitutional proceedings. In Burgett v. Texas, 389 U.S. 109 (1967), the Court held that "The admission into evidence of a constitutionally invalid prior conviction is inherently prejudicial".
Applying this reasoning, the use of testimony from Glossip’s previously overturned conviction undermines the impartiality and fairness of the renewed proceedings. The use of such material at a critical stage like a bond hearing introduces prejudice and implicitly erodes the presumption of innocence, casting Glossip once again in the shadow of a conviction that the State itself now concedes was deeply flawed.
Additionally, Stack v. Boyle, 342 U.S. 1 (1951), held that bail must be set based on the individual's current circumstances and risk factors, not prior allegations or inadmissible evidence. Using tainted transcripts to deny Glossip pretrial release directly conflicts with this principle.
Drummond recently announce plans to move forward with a THIRD murder trial against Richard Glossip, who was wrongfully convicted once by Fern Smith, and a second time by Connie Smothermon.
Drummond now claims he will deliver a fair trial “based on hard facts, solid evidence and truthful testimony”
But even Drummond cannot reconstruct what is gone: EVIDENCE THE STATE DESTROYED.
Independent investigators – including a 2022 Reed Smith report – revealed that former Oklahoma County Assistant District Attorney Fern Smith, who led the first trial, authorized the destruction of a box of evidence in October 1999.
This box of destroyed evidence likely contained materials favorable to Glossip, such as, initial witness statements and exculpatory materials including the so-called “Sinclair Tapes.”
Without it, even with perfect prosecutorial conduct, the defense is deprived of evidence to that may fully rebut the State’s case.
By destroying potentially exculpatory evidence, Smith violated the state’s duty under Brady v. Maryland to preserve and disclose evidence favorable to the defense
This malfeasance directly undermines Glossip’s constitutional right to a fair trial.
The destruction of evidence is an irreversible violation. It leaves a permanent gap in the factual record, tainting any “fresh” trial... no matter how well managed.
Drummond's intention to retry Glossip without the death penalty reflects his own acknowledgment of the state's past failures. But claiming a fully fair proceeding is disingenuous while key evidence remains lost. The Brady violation remains unrectified.
True remedy would require conceding that a completely unbiased trial is now impossible... unless the ENTIRE record is transparently laid opened in its entirety for the jury to see the DECADES of prosecutorial misconduct.
Yet we already know, as Drummond has stated previously, he has "no intention on pursuing prosecutorial misconduct"... This statement alone screams loud and clear, Drummond supports nothing more than the APPEARANCE of a fair trial.
Gentner Drummond has the power and authority via the Attorney General's Office to mandate, and/or implement compliance with the National Brady List platform, by contributing data.
This would ensure fair trials occurred in the manner prescribed when the Supreme Court of the United States created the Brady doctrine, obligating the prosecutor of every case to investigate, gather, and disclose all information about any individual upon whose testimony they will rely.
with the with the nationwide, public-facing, platform of record: The Brady List;
Attorney Generals, as prosecutors, have ethical obligations and may be held individually accountable under the Rules of Professional Conduct [R.P.C.] for their conduct within the legal system. Violations of these Rules can result in disciplinary actions which may include sanctions, suspension, or disbarment.
By Phone: (405) 521-3921
By email: g.drummund@oag.ok.gov
By Mail: 313 NE 21st Street Oklahoma City, OK 73105