Brad Croft San Antonio: The Truth the DOJ Doesn’t Want You to Know

Posted on
Brad Croft San Antonio with Wes Keeling Brady listed before trial alongside Universal K9 trainers
Photo from a Universal K9 training event showing Brad Croft with Wes Keeling and others. A FOIA later confirmed Keeling was Brady listed before trial, yet the government used him as a key witness.

Latest Update — September 11, 2025

FOIA records and sworn statements from Chiefs of Police confirm
Wes Keeling was Brady-listed before trial. Further filings are pending.

This page is updated regularly.

Introduction

Search “Brad Croft San Antonio” today and you’ll see headlines from the Department of Justice and local media. What those headlines don’t tell you is the full truth — the evidence that was hidden, the Brady material that was suppressed, and the misconduct that continues to this day.

This post sets the record straight — not just about what happened, but about what is happening right now in federal court.

Who Is Brad Croft?

Brad Croft founded Universal K9, a San Antonio-based program that saved shelter dogs and turned them into police K9s. Hundreds of departments across the United States received highly trained dogs, many at no cost.

Universal K9’s motto: “Street Dogs to Police Dogs”.

This mission was about second chances — for the dogs, for the officers who needed them, and for the communities they served.

The DOJ’s Narrative vs. Reality

In April 2021, the DOJ announced Croft’s conviction for wire fraud and identity theft. Media outlets like KSAT repeated the press release without question.

But the truth looks very different when you examine the documents and sworn testimony:

  • Texas Veterans Commission (TVC) records show applications had to be mailed, not emailed — undermining the wire fraud theory.
  • Wes Keeling, a “BRADY LISTED” Midlothian officer and government witness, testified falsely. Metadata proves a letter sent to Croft for his approval to train veterans that listed Keeling as the instructor for those courses was sent from his PD email to Croft, and an affidavit from the Chief of Police confirmed Croft’s version of events.
  • Bodycam footage shows FBI agents admitting Universal K9 “inherited a dog program,” contradicting claims made in court.

Evidence the Public Was Never Told

Here are just a few examples of suppressed or ignored evidence now on record:

  • 2015 Email Metadata – Expert-verified, proving Keeling’s role.
  • Affidavit of Chief Carl Smith (Midlothian PD) – Confirming Keeling’s testimony was false.
  • May 2017 TVC Letter – Showing the VA relied on bad information to revoke approval.
  • FBI/SAPD Bodycam – Agents admitting the truth about Universal K9’s program.

All of this evidence is part of current Rule 60(b) filings in federal court.

Conflicts and Corruption Exposed

The deeper you look, the more troubling it gets:

These conflicts weren’t disclosed to the jury — or to Croft.

What’s Happening Now

This isn’t just history — it’s unfolding right now:

  • Multiple Rule 60(b) motions are pending in the Western District of Texas, supported by affidavits and unrebutted evidence.
  • Mandamus petition is before the Fifth Circuit, demanding Croft’s release based on constitutional violations.
  • Civil rights suits are live in federal court against Surovics, McHugh, Olivares, Brooks, Keeling, and the Texas Veterans Commission.
  • Bar complaints and malpractice claims are being filed against attorneys who betrayed their duties.

The government has repeatedly failed to respond to Croft’s filings, leaving key motions unopposed.

Why This Matters for San Antonio

This case is bigger than one man. It’s about systemic misconduct in San Antonio’s justice system:

  • Suppressed Brady/Giglio material.
  • Conflicted attorneys acting against their client.
  • A federal judge ignoring evidence of perjury.

San Antonio deserves to know the truth — not just the DOJ’s version.

The Fight for Justice Continues

Brad Croft is still fighting. Every filing, every affidavit, every piece of metadata moves the truth forward.

The story of “Brad Croft San Antonio” isn’t one of fraud — it’s one of resilience, corruption exposed, and a fight for justice that is far from over.

Call to Action

Stay updated here at UniversalK9Inc.com as the filings, exhibits, and evidence continue to roll out. Share this post so the truth about Brad Croft San Antonio can no longer be buried under DOJ headlines.

Frequently Asked Questions

Who is Brad Croft in San Antonio?

Brad Croft is the founder of Universal K9 in San Antonio, a program that trained shelter dogs for police work. The full truth and filings are explained on the Brad Croft San Antonio hub page.

What is the truth behind the DOJ narrative?

DOJ’s star witness Wes Keeling, owner of Sector K9, denied under oath that he taught Universal K9’s VA-approved handler courses. Affidavits from Chief Carl Smith of Midlothian PD and Chief Garland Wolf of Red Oak PD prove otherwise, exposing perjury the DOJ relied on.

What is happening in the courts right now?

Multiple Rule 60(b) motions, a mandamus petition in the Fifth Circuit, and civil rights suits are pending. These filings document Brady, Giglio, and Napue violations tied to the case.

Why does this case matter to San Antonio?

The case shows systemic misconduct in San Antonio’s justice system: suppressed Brady material, conflicted attorneys, and government reliance on false testimony. Chiefs of Police affidavits and FOIA records now contradict the DOJ’s narrative.

Where can I see the documents and exhibits?

Filings, affidavits, and FOIA records are collected on the Brad Croft San Antonio hub page at UniversalK9Inc.com.

THE FLY ON THE WALL: DOJ CAN’T SWAT AWAY

Posted on

They thought they could lie, seal the records, and walk away.

They thought no one would notice the contradictions.

They didn’t count on a fly on the wall.

On July 20, 2025, I sent a formal misconduct notice to U.S. Attorney Jamie Esparza, the DOJ Office of Professional Responsibility (OPR), the Executive Office for U.S. Attorneys (EOUSA), and the Associated Press.

This wasn’t a complaint — it was a fully documented exposure of prosecutorial misconduct, false testimony, Brady/Giglio/Napue violations, and a Department of Justice willing to win at any cost.

Richard Cook — the government’s “veteran face” of Universal K9 — claimed under oath that he wasn’t involved. Yet the evidence shows:

  • He signed expulsion letters
  • Filed VA forms
  • Handled student records
  • Managed vendor and banking communications
  • Directed VA-related tasks using the Universal K9 email address

Wes Keeling — the police officer turned DOJ witness — denied ever being an instructor or receiving payment. But the facts say otherwise:

  • $12,000 cashier’s check in his name
  • Emails coordinating student enrollment and uniforms
  • Bodycam footage showing federal agents joking that they “just inherited a dog program”

And the DOJ? They had all of it — and presented both men anyway.

The record is now flooded with evidence the DOJ tried to bury:

  • Brady violations
  • Giglio suppression
  • Napue false testimony
  • Fraud on the court
  • Conflict of interest involving defense counsel and former FBI agents

These violations are now under review, and I’m preparing to file a mandamus petition with the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals.

This email was the warning.

What DOJ tried to ignore will shortly be in the hands of appellate judges, journalists, and soon — civil court.

Discovery is coming.

So are subpoenas.

And what you’ve seen so far?

That’s just the surface.

They can swat at headlines.

They can try to downplay the fallout.

But the contradictions are on the record. The press is watching. And the fly’s already on the wall.

Lights are on.

Read the central report: Brad Croft San Antonio — The Truth the DOJ Doesn’t Want You to Know

BREAKING: DOJ Letter, Perjury, and Federal Misconduct Exposed in Brad Croft San Antonio Case

Posted on

 

San Antonio, TX – June 23, 2025

A powerful new court filing by Bradley Lane Croft reveals what legal experts are calling one of the most egregious breakdowns of constitutional integrity in recent federal memory. In a series of exhibits now filed with the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Texas, Croft exposes a pattern of prosecutorial misconduct, attorney perjury, and systemic fraud that will result in the vacatur of his seven-year federal conviction.

At the center of the filing is a November 19, 2018 letter authored by Assistant U.S. Attorney Gregory Surovics. The letter, addressed directly to Croft’s defense attorney Thomas McHugh, warns of a conflict of interest involving Fred Olivarez—Croft’s own defense investigator—who previously served as an FBI agent involved in a prior investigation of Croft. Despite this direct written notice, the conflict was never disclosed to the court. No hearing was held. No waiver was obtained.

Years later, Thomas McHugh submitted a sworn affidavit denying he had ever been made aware of a conflict. That sworn statement directly contradicts the DOJ’s own letter addressed to him.

  • Officer Wes Keeling, who under oath denied giving permission to use his name and denied involvement in the veteran training program—despite evidence showing he had in fact authorized his name and participated in the program. Prosecutors continued to rely on Keeling’s testimony even though he had been Brady listed by both the Midlothian Police Department and the Ellis County District Attorney’s Office prior to Croft’s trial.
  • The Texas Veterans Commission (TVC) revoked Universal K9’s program approval without due process, in apparent coordination with false allegations pushed by VA OIG investigators. These actions were not only based on demonstrably false premises but directly contributed to the narrative used by prosecutors to justify charges against Croft; under questionable circumstances, with Croft alleging that Scott’s full identity and investigative history were never properly disclosed.

The motion, filed under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 60(b)(6), asserts that these actions amounted to fraud on the court and a fundamental violation of Croft’s Sixth Amendment right to conflict-free counsel. The filing is supported by forensic evidence, metadata, sworn affidavits, and official government correspondence.

Croft’s court filings include both the letter and McHugh’s affidavit as exhibits. This isn’t the only evidence raising questions about the integrity of the prosecution:

  • Fred Olivarez, a former FBI agent, was embedded in Croft’s defense team despite having direct prior involvement in the case. His email to Croft dated November 26, 2018, includes the conflict letter he received.
  • William Brooks, co-counsel with McHugh, remained silent about the known conflict and took no steps to disclose it. Brooks also authored a subpoena for Officer Wes Keeling that was never served or followed up on—despite the fact that it would have uncovered a treasure trove of Brady material critical to Croft’s defense.

In subsequent proceedings, Fred Olivarez submitted false statements in his response to the State Bar of Texas, falsely claiming the subpoena had been served in an attempt to protect Thomas McHugh from disciplinary exposure. This falsehood was directly addressed and refuted by Croft’s civil attorney, Paul Torres, who formally corrected the record in a written reply to the bar complaint.

Croft’s legal campaign has been led by a determined father-daughter team, working tirelessly since his release from prison to uncover the truth. Their filings also name the individuals involved and include supporting bar complaints and licensing grievances.

“They embedded an FBI agent into my defense team, got caught, and then lied about it under oath,” Croft said. “They thought I’d stay quiet, but I’ve built this case brick by brick. My daughter and I weren’t just defending me—we were defending the Constitution.”

Croft is now demanding full relief: vacatur of his conviction, an evidentiary hearing, and disciplinary action against those involved.

With overwhelming evidence now part of the public record—including sworn affidavits, DOJ letters, and undisputed metadata—the responsibility now rests with Senior U.S. District Judge David Ezra. His ruling will determine whether the federal judiciary will address a fully documented case of fraud on the court and constitutional breakdown—or allow it to persist unchecked. All eyes are now on the Western District of Texas to see whether justice is enforced or evaded.

KEY NAMES INDEXED FOR PUBLIC ACCOUNTABILITY

  • Thomas McHugh – attorney San Antonio conflict perjury
  • Fred Olivarez – FBI agent defense conflict of interest
  • William Brooks – Texas defense attorney misconduct
  • Gregory Surovics – AUSA DOJ Brady violation
  • Wes Keeling – veteran program false testimony
  • Sean Scott – DOJ witness identity withheld
  • Bradley Lane Croft – wrongful conviction Rule 60(b)

All documents referenced in this article are available upon request and are part of the public record.

Media Contact:
info@universalk9inc.com
Bradley Lane Croft
San Antonio, TX
(210) 560-1308