Fort Bend County Judge Found Guilty On Money Laundering Charges

A Texas jury has delivered a guilty verdict against a sitting local official, marking a significant development in a case centered on campaign finance practices and alleged financial misconduct.

A jury in Fort Bend County found KP George guilty on two counts of money laundering, exposing him to a potential prison sentence ranging from two to ten years. George has opted to have a judge determine his punishment, rather than a jury.

The sentencing phase is scheduled to begin on June 16, following an agreement between prosecutors and defense attorneys. George is currently free on a $20,000 bond—$10,000 for each count—and has surrendered his U.S. passport as part of the conditions of his release.

Under Texas law, a conviction triggers removal from office, though prosecutors noted in court that George will not be formally removed until sentencing is complete. In the meantime, Fort Bend County officials are preparing for possible leadership changes.

Precinct 4 Commissioner Dexter McCoy announced that county commissioners will meet to “determine next steps for the leadership of our county.”

Following the verdict, George was released from custody Friday evening after being processed at the Fort Bend County Jail.

The trial, which concluded with closing arguments on Thursday, centered on allegations that George misused campaign funds for personal benefit. Notably, George did not take the stand in his own defense.

Before deliberations, the presiding judge instructed jurors on the legal standards for money laundering, including the option to consider a lesser charge. George had pleaded not guilty to all charges.

During closing arguments, prosecutors argued that George engaged in a pattern of deception related to his campaign finances. Assistant District Attorney Katherine Peterson told jurors that George “kept lying” in official reports and used campaign funds for personal expenses.

Prosecutors pointed to several alleged actions, including transferring campaign money into personal accounts, making personal purchases such as auto payments, and engaging in financial transactions involving out-of-state accounts, including those linked to Delaware and Massachusetts.

They further argued that George anticipated campaign donations and opened a personal savings account following a 2019 fundraiser, suggesting intent to improperly benefit from those funds. Citing testimony from the Texas Ethics Commission, the state emphasized that candidates are required to accurately disclose all financial activity.

According to prosecutors, the evidence demonstrated that George used more campaign money than permitted and enriched himself over several years, rejecting defense claims that the case was politically motivated.

Defense attorneys, however, painted a very different picture—arguing the case was built on incomplete records and flawed assumptions. They contended that the prosecution failed to prove intent, a key requirement for a money laundering conviction, and insisted there was no clear evidence that George knowingly engaged in wrongdoing.

The defense also argued that candidates are legally allowed to loan money to their campaigns and later reimburse themselves under Texas Ethics Commission rules. They challenged how certain transactions—particularly credit card expenses—were categorized, saying the lack of detailed records made it difficult to distinguish between personal and campaign-related spending.

Additionally, defense lawyers emphasized that the funds in question were transferred into accounts under George’s own name, arguing this indicated transparency rather than concealment.

Jurors were told that the investigation “left out critical information” and ultimately failed to prove a crime.

Still, prosecutors maintained that George misrepresented financial information under oath and participated in a broader effort to mislead donors. Court filings allege he accepted thousands in campaign contributions under false pretenses and diverted those funds for personal use.

The case now moves to sentencing, where the court’s decision will not only determine George’s legal fate but also the future leadership of one of Texas’s fastest-growing counties.