Complaint Review: Chrissy's Massage LLC - College Station TX

Christopher Brannan, a manager with the College Station Police Department and owner of Chrissy’s Massage Studios is the subject of an internal affairs complaint citing “intentionally deceptive criminal acts…that are in violation of Texas Penal Code 37.08 False Report to Peace Officer…and Texas Penal Code 31.04 Theft of Service” committed on behalf of the business that Mr. Brannan owns, Chrissy’s Massage, LLC.

The individual filing the complaint was a local advertising consultant and publisher whom Brannan had falsely accused of fabricating an advertising order. The advertising order was not fabricated, the complainant had extensive documentation to prove that fact. Brannan’s business, the complaint alerted CSPD, threatened the complainant with criminal action if delivery of past-due invoices and phone calls to his business from contractors tasked with collection did not cease.

When the complainant did not kowtow to the threats, the complaint says Brannan used his relationships in the department to initiate criminal enforcement actions against the complainant for a crime that had never been committed. Ultimately, the false charges Brannan filed against the complainant were dismissed “in the interest of justice.” The false arrest that the complainant endured was permanently expunged from his record.

According to the complaint, “These criminal acts were committed on behalf of the business that Mr. Brannan owns and operates with Christina “Chrissy” Brannan, his spouse, Chrissy’s Massage, LLC. Evidence indicates that the acts were likely performed at least in part on CSPD premises. CSPD file documents affirm that they were at least in part performed during regular CSPD business hours utilizing City of College Station information technology resources, i.e. Chris Brannan’s official city [email protected] email account. Given the location of some acts, a CSPD-owned computer or device was likely used in their commission.”

“Christopher Brannan’s false statements were made and affirmed with the effect of impeding the legitimate collection of payment for advertising services performed,” the complaint continues. The services performed were “pursuant to their ad order executed via email on April 19, 2016.”

The complaint contends that “because Brannan’s false statements to a Peace Officer aided in avoidance of this valid legal claim demanding payment for services ordered by and rendered to Chrissy’s Massage, LLC, the deceptive statements to his colleague, Detective Marty, were made to effect a willful violation of Texas Penal Code 31.04 Theft of Service.”

“While the firm Brannan owns failing to pay the bill is indeed a breach of contract and can certainly give rise to a civil suit,” the complaint explains, “under Texas Penal Code 31.04, that same action constitutes a criminal act: Texas Penal Code 31.04 – theft of services expressly provides that it is an act of criminal theft to: ‘intentionally or knowingly secure the performance of the service by agreeing to provide compensation and, after the service is rendered, fail to make full payment [within 10 days] after receiving notice demanding payment.’ Texas Penal Code §31.04(a)(4).”

The complaint was submitted with extensive documentation, including:

• a complete copy of the contract with Chrissy’s Massage

• ad proof emails with multiple revisions by Brannan’s company

• copy of the layout created and artwork licensed by complainant for use in the ad appearing in additional media in Bryan-College station in violation of complainants copyright

• a polygraph test affirming the complainant’s veracity

Though the false charges filed against the complainant were dismissed in light of the same evidence being made available to the Brazos County Attorney, College Station Police Department did not ask Brannan any questions at all prior to classifying the complaint’s disposition as “Exonerated.”

An additional complaint concerning Chris Brannan was sustained, or found true. That complaint pointed to a form in his file which falsely affirmed that he had no secondary employment or business ownership to disclose. Interestingly, in that case he was not found to have falsified the form (which was in his file and submitted with the complaint) but to have mistakenly neglected to fill out the form at all.