Jury convicts Leonard Paul Thompson of murder; judge sentences him to 35 years

A Jefferson County jury in the 252nd District Court convicted Leonard Paul Thompson of murder and the judge sentenced him to 35 years in the Texas Department of Criminal Justice, court records show.

The conviction stemmed from the September 2023 death of Peggy Ann Pier. Prosecutors introduced DNA evidence taken from under the victim’s fingernails and testimony from officers and witnesses; defense attorneys focused on gaps in the investigation and disputed handling of discovery, including a cell‑phone extraction and portions of body‑camera footage that were not preserved for jury review.

The question of what investigators reviewed and turned over to the defense arose repeatedly at trial. Detective Hancock testified about call logs extracted from the defendant’s phone and confirmed entries showing calls to a contact labeled “Peggy,” including an incoming call recorded at about 10:12 p.m. on Sept. 12, 2023. Defense counsel Marcus Wilkerson told the court he had only recently been given certain files — including a cell‑phone extraction and bank‑surveillance video — and said he initially believed the phone extraction “wasn’t anything of evidentiary value.”

Wilkerson pressed the court for more time to investigate the calls or to consider postponing trial after the late disclosure. The judge declined to declare a mistrial and denied the defense’s request for a spoliation instruction, saying there was no evidence the state or the Beaumont Police Department had intentionally destroyed evidence. The judge allowed the trial to proceed after the defense conferred with the defendant, who briefly testified that he directed his attorney to continue the trial rather than postpone.

Prosecutor Nichols emphasized the DNA evidence in closing, telling jurors the DNA expert’s statistical measure for the defendant’s DNA beneath the victim’s fingernails was extraordinarily high, repeated in court as “76.6 octillion.” Defense counsel urged jurors to hold the state to its burden beyond a reasonable doubt and highlighted the phone‑call entries and what he described as an incomplete review of video evidence, saying “the state has not met their burden.”

Several witnesses testified for the defense about the victim’s household and interactions in the Raintree Apartments complex. Randy Pierce, the victim’s son, characterized the handling of his mother’s belongings after her death as wrongful and emotionally charged. He testified that he received some items from a person identified in the trial as Charlotte Hudson but said other items were missing; during testimony he told the court, “Y’all robbed my mother.”

Detective Hancock testified that his review of security and body‑worn camera footage focused on recording the victim’s entry to and the defendant’s exit from the building. When asked whether the footage would have shown others entering or leaving the apartment, Hancock said that if such movement occurred he would have recorded it and that he reviewed the material he deemed relevant. The judge rejected a defense argument that the apparent absence of some preserved footage rose to the level of spoliation requiring a jury instruction.

After deliberation the jury returned a unanimous guilty verdict. The jury also assessed punishment: it sentenced Thompson to 35 years’ imprisonment with no fine. The judge entered the sentence on the record and advised the defendant of credit for time served and of his appellate rights. The defendant was remanded to the Jefferson County Sheriff’s custody for transfer to the state corrections system.

The case record includes an indictment (Cause No. 203 DCCR 2145) and the court read statutory jury instructions on murder and on parole eligibility before deliberations. The court instructed jurors that, under Texas law, parole eligibility generally arises after serving one‑half of the imposed sentence or 30 years, whichever is less, but that eligibility does not guarantee release.

The court’s docket shows the defense rested after calling several witnesses at guilt/innocence and proceeded to a punishment phase at which a family member testified on the defendant’s behalf about his health and role in the family. The judge granted no post‑verdict polling requests and imposed the sentence the jury recommended.