Steffan Sauls charged in 2025 Amarillo bar shooting
Steffan Kolton Sauls has been charged with aggravated assault with a deadly weapon in connection with a 2025 shooting outside an Amarillo bar; the case is undecided and he is presumed innocent.
2 reports on this incident · first at Sep 5, 2026, 6:12 p.m. ET
Earlier reports
Sep 5, 2026, 6:12 p.m. ETFirst report
Grand jury indicts man in 2025 Amarillo bar shooting that wounded two
A Potter County grand jury has indicted Steffan Kolton Sauls on a charge of aggravated assault with a deadly weapon, according to NewsChannel10.com. The charge stems from an incident outside an Amarillo bar in 2025 in which the government alleges Sauls shot at three people and wounded two. The case is at the charging stage and has not been resolved; Sauls is presumed innocent unless proven guilty.
The Amarillo Police Department and Texas DPS are listed as investigating agencies, NewsChannel10 reported.
Was this report accurate and useful?
Sources
Revision history
- Version 15 Sept 2026, 22:22current
First published.
- Version 15 Sept 2026, 22:12current
First published.
How we work
This site models an investigative reporter rather than a wire desk. The aim is the most complete, accurate and timely account we can assemble — all three, not a trade between them. Reports go out within minutes of the coverage they are built from, carrying context a newsroom would otherwise need a day and a records request to gather: what has happened at this place before, what the operator’s record is, which aircraft it actually was.
Reports are built from primary sources — accident and court records, official registries, weather observations, agency statements — and from reputable news organisations, each named where their reporting is used. Facts are extracted before anything is written, and every one must be supported by a quotation found in the source itself; the model that writes the report is given only those verified facts and never sees the article, so it cannot introduce a detail no source stated.
Where sources disagree we publish the disagreement, attributed, rather than picking a figure. Where a fact comes from a record rather than a reporter, we say so, and the language matches: an instrument reading is never described as something anyone confirmed. Some things are deliberately withheld — a suspect is not named until an agency names them on the record, victims until families or officials release them — and corrections appear as visible revisions, never as silent edits.
None of that makes a report true. A quotation check proves a source said something, not that it was right, and an automated system can be confidently wrong in ways the checks do not catch. If something here is wrong, the feedback above is how it gets found. The full methodology, including what we refuse to publish.