Andrew LaBreche’s Judicial Misconduct Chapters Emerge as DA Ted Bell Defends Decision Not to Charge Former Judge Pool. LaBreche is running against incumbent Judge Robert Martelle.
This newsletter is supported by readers like you.
By Annie Dance | Cops & Congress | News & Commentary
Warning: Discretion advised due to sexual language from a former judge.
RUTHERFORDTON, N.C. — District Court candidate Andrew LaBreche has released the first three chapters of a multi-part account detailing what he describes as the early signs of judicial misconduct involving former Chief District Court Judge Randy Pool—setting off renewed debate about how law enforcement and oversight agencies handled the case.
(See Introduction / Chapter 1 / Chapter 2 / Chapter 3)
The release comes as incumbent District Attorney Ted Bell, who is also on the ballot in 2026, continues to publicly defend his decision not to prosecute Pool. Bell’s lengthy statement—still posted on his campaign website—describes a sprawling investigation that began not with allegations against Pool, but with Pool’s own report that he was being extorted. (Also see it on my DocumentCloud.)
LaBreche: “The Moment the Ground Shifted”
LaBreche’s chapters recount what he says was the first unmistakable sign that something was wrong inside Judicial District 41. According to his account, Pool instructed clerk staff to obtain the private contact information of one of LaBreche’s female clients so the judge could call her directly—an action that violates clear judicial rules prohibiting ex parte contact with represented litigants.
In his narrative, what began as a single irregular request soon gave way to quiet disclosures from women describing inappropriate messages or interactions with the judge. LaBreche writes that the pattern came into focus only when a woman arrived at his office with documented evidence that Pool had contacted her privately about personal matters during an active criminal case.
He describes the moment as the unofficial start of an investigation carried “not because I wanted it to, but because once you see something like this, you can’t unsee it.”
The DA’s Timeline: From Extortion Complaint to Multi-Agency Review
While LaBreche’s account emphasizes internal courtroom red flags, Bell’s public explanation provides the investigative backdrop.
According to Bell, the case began in May 2019, when Pool reported that a woman he had met on Facebook, Jennifer Tierce, attempted to extort him after their consensual, sexually explicit online exchanges deteriorated. Tierce demanded thousands of dollars and sent intimate photos of Pool to his daughters when he refused.
The State Bureau of Investigation (SBI), the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI), the North Carolina Judicial Standards Commission, and the State Bar all became involved. Bell notes that Pool’s initial request—that a sheriff’s captain “go talk to Tierce”—was inappropriate but not illegal under state law. He stresses that North Carolina statutes require more than a false statement to constitute a crime: the lie must materially delay or obstruct an investigation. Investigators reported that Pool’s inaccuracies did not affect their work.
Why Bell Says He Couldn’t Charge Pool
Bell’s analysis breaks down each potential offense—false reporting, obstruction, cyberstalking, destruction of evidence—and explains why, in his view, none met the legal threshold for prosecution. He emphasizes that:
Pool’s statements did not alter investigative steps taken by the Sheriff’s Office or SBI.
Consensual sexual communications between adults, even in poor judgment, are not crimes.
Judicial ethics violations—while serious—are not criminal offenses under North Carolina law.
Investigators found no evidence that Pool’s conduct constituted cyberstalking, which requires repeated unwanted contact made to threaten, harass, or intimidate.
The FBI, SBI, Judicial Standards Commission, and State Bar each reviewed Pool’s actions. None recommended criminal charges.
Bell ultimately sought charges only against Tierce, who later pleaded guilty to extortion.
Bell has repeatedly framed the matter as a strict legal call, writing that a district attorney “cannot use that power to prosecute behavior or actions that do not violate the laws of our State, no matter how much he personally disagrees with the behavior.”
A Systemic Failure—or a Legal Limitation?
The competing narratives present two sharply different lenses into the Pool matter.
LaBreche argues the misconduct was embedded within a judicial system that shielded a powerful judge and left vulnerable litigants at risk. His chapters depict women privately sharing experiences in a courthouse where their personal safety and legal outcomes depended on the conduct of the presiding judge.
Bell, meanwhile, maintains that while Pool violated judicial ethics—confirmed by the North Carolina Supreme Court’s formal censure—those violations did not amount to crimes under state law.
A Court Community Still Looking for Answers
The Pool case remains a defining issue in Judicial District 41, touching the courts, law enforcement, and political landscape in Rutherford and McDowell counties. For many residents, the core question persists: How could years of misconduct result in professional sanctions but no criminal charges?
LaBreche says his ongoing series will continue to detail what he witnessed from inside the courthouse. Bell’s statement shows no indication that he intends to revise or retract his legal assessment.
LaBreche faces incumbent Robert Martelle on the Republican primary ballot. Bell will face challenger David Norris.
The story of the Pool investigation—its origins, oversight, and aftermath—is once again at the center of a judicial race, reshaping how voters view accountability in their local courts, because context and history matter.
—-
The complete list of candidates filed as of December 5 is available through my DocumentCloud. I’ll continue updating it as new filings come in.
There’s nothing you need to do differently at this time to access the podcast if you’re a subscriber. It’s in the player here on Substack and I may share clips to social media. Stay tuned, and feel free to share this link.
