Sunday, August 11, 2019

Temple Trial Takeaways

As you doubtlessly know by now, the punishment phase of The State of Texas vs. David Temple ended in a mistrial on Friday after jurors failed to reach an agreement on an appropriate punishment for the man they easily convicted of murder.

I've heard from multiple credible sources that the split between the jurors was 10-2, with ten of the jurors demanding Life in prison for the man they convicted of killing his 8-month-pregnant wife, Belinda, by placing a shotgun to the back of her head and pulling the trigger.  The remaining two jurors were holding out for something far less and neither side seemed willing to budge from their position despite almost two days of deliberations.

A jury that convicts but then deadlocks over punishment is not unheard of, but it is fairly uncommon.  Since Temple was convicted of a 1999 murder, the law of 1999 applies to the case.  Back then a person could receive probation for murder, so Temple could technically receive it, as well.  Due to this, there is apparently an argument to be made that Temple could be placed on bond while awaiting his punishment.

If 178th District Court Judge Kelli Johnson elects to give Temple a bond, she will doubtlessly consider the brutality of the case, how many jurors wanted Life for Temple, and the fact that when released from jail in 2016, Temple vowed "for the people that lied and cheated who put me there to be held accountable."  Texas Attorney General Prosecutors Lisa Tanner and Bill Turner will likely point out that these combined factors make Temple a high flight risk with a revenge agenda who has nothing to lose.

Although the hung jury on punishment prevented bringing the 20-year saga of David Temple to a complete close, the fact that he was convicted again will more than suffice for the time being.

It has been a long and winding road that gave David Temple a second chance at getting away with murder, one that most murderers don't get.

Temple was originally convicted and sentenced to Life in 2007 in a trial that pitted Harris County Assistant District Attorney Kelly Siegler against prominent defense attorney Dick DeGuerin.  Despite the fact that the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals affirmed the case, DeGuerin lobbied the District Attorney's Office under then-D.A. (and Siegler's political rival) Pat Lykos to perform an off-the-books investigation into an alternate suspect.

In July of 2012, Pat Lykos was a "lame duck" D.A., having lost her bid for re-election to Mike Anderson in the Republican Primary.  DeGuerin asked then-1st Assistant Jim Leitner to "review" the Temple case before the Lykos Circus left town at the end of December.  Inexplicably, Leitner complied, as I detailed in this post.

Leitner had been informed that newly-minted defense attorney and former Harris County Homicide Lieutenant John Denholm had been sucking up to working for DeGuerin on developing an "alternate suspect" to the murder of Belinda Temple.  Despite the fact that the Court of Criminal Appeals had recently affirmed Temple's conviction, Leitner was more than happy to do DeGuerin's bidding and assigned Denholm's buddy (and current HCDA investigator) Steve Clappart to work on the case.

By September 2012, the dream team of Clappart and Denholm had drafted a Capital Murder warrant for the arrest of a "suspect" named Cody Ray Ellis based on evidence so absurd that I won't even address it in this post.  You can check out the legal document that these two nimwits tried to get signed by clicking here.   (NOTE:  Don't forget to scroll down to the transcript where Leitner testified that he would have signed that warrant.)

Here's a fun fact, in case you didn't pick up on it already:  During the retrial, Stan Schneider didn't even advance Ellis as his "alternate suspect," instead focusing on another teenager from the neighborhood, Riley Joe Sanders.  The juries in both the 2007 and 2019 trials quickly rejected all alternate suspects in favor of Temple.



In the meantime, DeGuerin (now joined by Stanley Schneider) filed an "Out of Time Motion for New Trial or Alternative Application for Writ of Habeas Corpus Based on Actual Innocence, Newly Discovered Evidence, and the Willful Suppression of Exculpatory Evidence." (Stanley apparently gets paid by the word.)  It is worth noting that during all of this, the Lykos Administration never bothered communicating what was going on to the family of Belinda Lucas Temple, which is something I noted here.


Wanting to avoid the appearance of impropriety, Lykos appointed local defense attorney Brad Beers to be a "special prosecutor" on the Temple matter.  There was a small conflict of interest on that, however, seeing as how Beers had previously represented Clappart twice (once in a lawsuit and once on a disciplinary infraction within the Office).

All of this ultimately led to a hearing in 2015 that David Temple wasn't entitled to and that very few others have been the beneficiary of.  During that hearing, Stan Schnieder and then-licensed attorney Casie Gotro got to revisit the entirety of the Temple case.  That rendition of Team Temple rejected at least five judges to hear the extra-judicial hearing before settling on Judge Larry Gist.

As we all know, the multi-week hearing ultimately resulted in findings from Gist that Kelly Siegler had been untimely in turning over evidence to Dick DeGuerin during the 2007 trial, and recommended that Temple receive a new trial.  My opinion then and my opinion now is that Judge Gist wasn't paying attention to much of the evidence that he was hearing.  He certainly wasn't paying attention when he signed off on an order where Gotro and Schneider had slipped in an extra finding.

I know that I'm biased, because Kelly Siegler is one of my best friends, but I will go to my grave feeling that the District Attorney's response to Gist's finding, coupled with Houston Press journalist Craig Malisow's article Unreasonable Doubt: Did Kelly Siegler Really Railroad an Innocent Man Eight Years Ago held far more accurate accounts of the Temple hearing than Gist's findings.

Regardless of how I feel, or how Kelly Siegler's detractors feel, David Temple ultimately got his case reversed.  Due to Kelly's fame as one of the best prosecutors in the State of Texas, the Houston Chronicle writers were ecstatic.  Lisa Falkenberg wrote a really touching article on how Clappart and Denholm were heroic and brave for taking a stand in pursuing the "real killer," despite losing friends.

SPOILER ALERT:  Denholm and Clappart lost friends because everyone knew that they (and their warrant) were full of shit, Lisa.  They were full of shit then and they are full of shit now.  Just FYI.

Brother Denholm even had the audacity to file a grievance against me with the State Bar (with attached affidavits from Gotro and Schneider) for daring to blog about Temple (and try to ruin Temple's fight for freedom).  It got rejected summarily.  I'm still a practicing lawyer, and that's all I'll say about that topic.

And then came the Reign of Ogg.

Kim Ogg took Office on January 1, 2017, and in her inauguration speech, she thanked Dick DeGuerin profusely for all he had done for her and her career.  Within a week, she vowed to be the One Woman Review Team who decided whether or not the District Attorney's Office would retry David Temple.  She appointed Steve Clappart to be her CHIEF investigator, and hired John Denholm to a Division Chief position.  Despite these clear conflicts of interest with Team Temple, Ogg steadfastly refused to recuse herself from the case.

Again, the Houston Chronicle was giddy with the prospect of the Temple Case being dismissed, because, you know, Kelly Siegler cheated!




While in the midst of Ogg's One Woman Review of Temple, DeGuerin even threw her a fundraiser! It was co-hosted by Paul Looney, who had also been a member of Team Temple at one point.


Coincidentally, Team Temple attorney Stan Schneider said that he was "completely comfortable" in whatever Ogg decided.  Gee, I wonder why.  

Ultimately, Kim Ogg relented under public pressure and recused the Harris County District Attorney's Office from The State of Texas vs. David Temple.

And the result? Justice. He was convicted again of Murder last week.

The circus that surrounded his case merely resulted in him getting a two and a half year break from prison that he clearly did not deserve.  Somewhere in the midst of all of this, the prosecutorial team of Lisa Tanner and Bill Turner were able to turn the focus back to the evidence of the case and back to Belinda Lucas Temple and her unborn daughter, Erin.

The postponement of the punishment phase to March will hopefully serve as merely an extremely lengthy epilogue for David Temple.  The real story concluded with the guilty verdict and Temple going back into custody.

Justice prevailed last week.  

61 comments:

  1. Well done Murray. Clappart and Denholm are two disgusting individuals who sold their souls to the devil. The fact that either have leadership positions correlates the disastrous leadership of that office.

    ReplyDelete
  2. As an HCSO Homicide Unit supervisor, I'm disgusted to be associated with Denholm and his lying a$$ buddy Clappart. What a sh$& show of criminal justice they are.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Excellent summary of a political lynching which had absolutely nothing to do with justice. All of this was solely intended to smear the reputation of a possible political opponent. Amazing what people will do for power, money, revenge and ego.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I'm not so surprised. Those in Team Temple consciously chose to put the Lucas family through ANOTHER nightmare with this whole business!!! No morals...no ethics...no sense!

      Delete
    2. Guilty or not, certainly if you refer to David and his parents as “Team Temple” you’d be ok with them exploring every avenue to keep him out of prison for life.

      And even Murray mentions that Dick D really thought he was wrongfully convicted.

      Also Ogg did recuse after all the whining.

      So what really is the problem?

      Delete
  4. Murray,

    Essentially Larry Gist ruled at the Habeas hearing that David Temple was denied a fair trial because ADA Kelly Siegler withheld material exculpatory evidence at trial #1.
    So, exactly what NEW material exculpatory evidence was offered up by DeGuerin's boy, Stan, at trial #2?
    The answer is obviously none. Temple was guilty at trial #2 just like he was at trial #1. There was no prosecutorial misconduct only political misconduct fabricated by Deguerin & Co.'s frail ego.
    Judge Gist ought to be ashamed.

    Kelly has FINALLY been vindicated, but at what cost?
    Riley Joe Sanders has FINALLY been vindicated, but at what cost?
    The Lucas family is still in limbo.
    A ruthless killer is about to be bonded out with nothing to lose.............who will he murder next and where will he flee?

    What a costly criminal conspiracy Temple's defense team has wrought on the citizens of Harris County, most of all to the Lucas family.

    Just Sayin'


    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Hoping the judge denies bond or sets it very high. Davis Temple should remain behind bars.

      Delete
  5. Great summary, I'm sure justice won't be delayed much longer. Kudos to Tanner & Turner!

    ReplyDelete
  6. No surprise about Denholm, I wouldn't piss on him if he was on fire!! He allowed my ex- husband to get away with assaulting me, just because he was one of his cronies in HCSO homicide at the time!!

    ReplyDelete
  7. Tanner and Turner did a great job, as did Siegler. Stan worked with what he had. HCDAO under Ogg showed, once again, how hollow their words about “evidence, not relationship “ based prosecution are. I wonder if Lisa will cover this result as breathlessly as she did the review? Something tells me no....

    ReplyDelete
  8. The Temples' pretense that David is their repentant Prodigal Son is sickening.
    Heather Temple, the Katy community, Harris County law enforcement, the Texas AG's office, and anyone who has objectively and accurately followed the execution-style murder of Belinda Temple and her unborn 8-month-old baby girl don't trust this turd and appreciate the depravity he is capable of.
    He is now more motivated than ever to continue his carnage and/or flee.
    No one actually expects Houston's OJ to show up for his punishment trial after being bonded out.
    If his ultimate wish is death by cop I hope it's a double-tap to the face.

    Too bad Karma's not enough to order DeGuerin, Schneider, Gotro, and Gist to be waterboarded.
    Talk about truth revealed and justice served!

    ReplyDelete
  9. I saw this case on either 48 hours of Dateline and remember when he got out of jail and a new trial was ordered. I thought wow they must have some amazing evidence. I knew of Siegler's reputation and was surprised she was being accused of with holding evidence because I knew her to be tough but fair.
    I then read they were thinking about not retrying him and I thought Boy they really have good evidence. I followed the trial and was waiting for the bomb shell to drop and nothing. Not one shred that did not point to Temple as the killer, it all pointed to him. I live in Ky and had no idea about what all was going on so thank you for this. A true travesty and how dare they put Belinda's family through this.

    ReplyDelete
  10. Hi Murray, in your personal opinion do you think Siegler made a huge mistake by not giving DeGuerin every piece of evidence no matter how trivial it may have seemed? It just seems she could've/would've been "Here you go Dick, it's not going to do you any good but this is everything we have.".

    ReplyDelete
  11. There once was a young badass from Katy;
    Played football, hunted ducks and chased the ladies.
    Boom, his football days are all done as are his ladies.
    Now he's just an old fat ass from the penitentiary.

    David Temple got his new day in court.
    Prosecutorial misconduct? What a ruse.
    Guilty then and now again. What a crock.
    Team Temple is no longer so amused.

    Losing Dumpster Fire Little Dick.
    Whoring Heather finally filing.
    Exposing Stanley as a feckless prick.
    David sure as Hell ain't smiling.

    Lykos the nasty nefarious malodorous Troll.
    Wee man jacked up Jimmy Leitner.
    Fundraised with DeGuerin to get this to roll.
    Nothing left now, save a fuelless Gas Lighter.

    Gotro's gone to Neverneverland.
    Kelly's gone to Hollywood.
    Lisa Faulkner's soulmate is sand.
    David Temple's gone to prisonhood.

    Consequences are a bitch.

    Twilight Zoned

    ReplyDelete
  12. Great articulate round up of all the facts as usual Murray. Well done.

    ReplyDelete
  13. I seriously hope this becomes a campaign issue. Clappart was a disaster as an investigator with HCDAO. Look at his evaluations. And the fact that he thought it was OK to search the judges' offices after Harvey just reaffirms that fact. So Leitner turned to Clappart (because let's face it, Leitner is as much of an idiot as Clappart). And Denholm, he's the guy that yells at cops and tells them they left their balls in a box (even in today's me too environment). Plus he has always been a little intellectually challenged. And Napoleonic too. Ogg went all in on the theory because she will do ANYTHING to win. It was politically convenient at the time for her. She has no morals just like her dad. And let's save the Looney, Diepraam, Waller County DA kickback scheme for another day. I still can't believe nothing has been done about that. And the Amir story is out there festering too. HCDAO is a disaster. Like Chernobyl disaster. But Murray, you thought she would be a good DA and ignored everyone who told you otherwise. The consequences of her election have been a disaster for citizens, employees, police officers, and the court system.

    ReplyDelete
  14. Temple is a moron so I doubt he would do this, but he should seriously consider avoiding a retrial of the penalty phase.

    You never know what the prosecutors office is willing to accept but I assume they'd be willing to play ball where he could do a solid 25-30 years and be able to enjoy a few years with his son (and probably grandchildren by then).

    ReplyDelete
  15. You're possibly a little too close to Kelly, which is the reason you may not post this reply. Liking someone does not give them a pass on doing the right thing. You can't give proper discovery in the middle of trial, especially if the evidence is exculpatory. Kelly should be disbarred: and I suspect you know that as well.

    If the AG's office does not recommend less than what they should, Temple will be retired on punishment and get life.

    The moral - some appellate lawyers do not make good trial lawyers, and in the words of Judge Sam Robertson, “if it is even possibly exculpatory disclose it.”

    ReplyDelete


  16. “Anonymous said...
    I seriously hope this becomes a campaign issue. Clappart was a disaster as an investigator with HCDAO. Look at his evaluations. And the fact that he thought it was OK to search the judges' offices after Harvey just reaffirms that fact. So Leitner turned to Clappart (because let's face it, Leitner is as much of an idiot as Clappart). And Denholm, he's the guy that yells at cops and tells them they left their balls in a box (even in today's me too environment). Plus he has always been a little intellectually challenged. And Napoleonic too. Ogg went all in on the theory because she will do ANYTHING to win. It was politically convenient at the time for her. She has no morals just like her dad. And let's save the Looney, Diepraam, Waller County DA kickback scheme for another day. I still can't believe nothing has been done about that. And the Amir story is out there festering too. HCDAO is a disaster. Like Chernobyl disaster. But Murray, you thought she would be a good DA and ignored everyone who told you otherwise. The consequences of her election have been a disaster for citizens, employees, police officers, and the court system.”

    Gone are the likes of Devon Anderson and Chuck Rosenthal, and those who believe in winning at all costs. Kim’s only fault is that she is a democrat, and the only DA who has undertaken such a massive restructure of the DA’s office in more than 75 years. Ogg was right not hire many of the hold-overs. There is a similar turnover every time a new party takes the white house. Those disgruntled sounds you hear are coming from attorney’s and investigators who tied their future to a sinking ship. The consequences of her electon will be positive in the long run. This will be proven by her reelection in 2020.

    ReplyDelete
  17. Anon August 15, @12:47 pm,
    Yes, I am close with Kelly and I always state that as a caveat so nobody can accuse my agenda as being “hidden.” That being said, i’ve Yet to hear any specifics about what she allegedly hid that was supposed to be exculpatory. The findings on Temple by Gist ultimately were all headline and no story. The items that were alleged to have been “hidden” were things that had been addressed in trial or things that even Dick acknowledged having well before trial.

    The focus on Kelly’s conduct regarding discovery ultimately was criticized for its timeliness, not that it was never turned over. There were different rules back then and in my opinion, Kelly followed those rules. The rules of disclosure have evolved over the past ten years in a way that are very favorable to the defense bar, and that’s a good thing. But prior to Michael Morton, I can recall the Brazos County Attorney’s Office wouldn’t even let the defense attorney LOOK AT the offense report until after the officer had testified. The standards on how we judge things from the past always seem to be 20/20 in the present.

    Kelly and Dick had a lot of animosity towards them. Hell, Dick even had a grievance filed against Kelly (pre-Temple) for practicing under the name of Siegler when her law degree had her maiden name on it. It was not a cordial working relationship. But I still believe that Kelly followed the rules that were in place at the time, even if those standards are not the rules now.

    ReplyDelete
  18. Anon August 15, @3:22 p.m.,

    I agree that Many of Kim’s policies were excellent and overdue, but her mass firings had more to do with internal-political paranoia than progressive prosecution ideals. She has been a huge disappointment to me, personally. I didn’t realize that her paranoia was so much worse than Lykos. She has proven herself to be a terrible manager of people and her personnel choices have been disastrous (firing Tom Berg? Really?)

    It is such a shame because she had all of the tools to be an amazing leader with great people and great policies. She blew it and she blew it big time. It is a travesty. Brian Middleton seems to be having no trouble in Fort Bend of having a progressive office where the prosecutors are actually happy and proud to come to work in the morning. It can be done.

    You are absolutely correct that she will probably win in 2020, but what could have been a shining example of great and progressive prosecution in a DA Office will have been replaced by a dead end job that runs good prosecutors to outlying jurisdictions.

    ReplyDelete
  19. Whether we agree with their reasoning, or nor, the Court of Criminal Appeals is the final arbiter of what is Brady, and what is not. The court stated: “There were at least five detectives who generated reports of their investigation of the murder, and there were approximately 1400 pages of offense reports in this case. Prior to trial, defense counsel requested copies of these reports, which he believed contained Brady evidence—including statements by R.J.S. and his friends, who were “rumored” to have some involvement in the murder, and evidence provided by witnesses that could have supported an alternate suspect theory. However, defense counsel was denied access to them.”… And, although defense counsel was able to raise at trial the defensive theory that there was an alternate perpetrator, that effort was limited and hampered by the State’s failure to turn over to the defense the police offense reports containing favorable evidence that would have allowed a more effective presentation of an alternate suspect. We find that the method of “disclosure” utilized by the prosecution did not satisfy the State’s duty under Brady. We hold, therefore, that Applicant is entitled to relief under Brady v. Maryland.”

    By saying that Kelly withheld Brady material, I’m not saying that Dick is not a jerk. In fact, jerk is too light of a term. But, the middle of trial is no time for discovery, especially for Brady material. The court also addressed this issue by stating. “The habeas judge found that the State’s late disclosure of favorable evidence prevented defense counsel from being able to timely investigate or effectively use such evidence at trial.”

    I too had high hopes for Kim. I would have kept some of the chiefs that she let go, but I understand why she let the division chief’s and above go. Too many of them, like Devon, were Chuck Rosenthal holdover - wannabees. It was past time to make a clean sweep. But there was no excuse for letting Berg go. Her ego is getting the better of her judgment. I’d say David will be the next to go, but I don’t think he will stand up to Kim.

    It’s interesting that after all the years of stability under Holmes, today you would almost have to have a mild mental illness to want to work in the DA’s office.

    ReplyDelete
  20. Anon 8:01 PM, the theory that Dick and company were irreparably harmed by the mid-trial disclosure of possible alternate suspects seems weak tea considering that 12 years later, the theory is still wildly speculative and unproven in fact. The standards of disclosure for 2007 were vastly different than those in later years too so the suggestion that Siegler was a villain in all this remains laughable, though I certainly support full and timely disclosure as much as the next guy. Murray was spot on in his assessment so we'll have to agree to disagree just as your belief in recommending wholesale political purges flies in the face of common sense, the years of lost experience will never be reclaimed, especially since "you would almost have to have a mild mental illness to want to work in the DA’s office".

    ReplyDelete
  21. Anon 9:01 p.m.,

    What is really the problem is that the David Temple case exemplifies the worst that the Criminal Justice System has to offer. It goes to show that people with money can get extraordinary treatment. It also goes to show that innocent citizens can find themselves as casualties of war at the hands of a defense team that plays No Holds Barred.

    Establishing Reasonable Doubt is one thing. Drafting a Capital Murder warrant on an unsuspecting citizen like Steve Clappart and John Denholm did is criminal in my opinion. The fact that Kim Ogg had to be cajoled into recusing the Office from a case where it clearly had connections who possessed extreme ulterior motives is horrifying.

    ReplyDelete
  22. Lol. WTF...is this shit even real? I made it to the "Stanley apparently gets paid by the word" part before having to stop. This entire whatever-the-fuh-you-want-to-call-it is painfully unethical. Temple, the prime suspect/ convicted murderer, got Dick DeGuerin, his fkng attorney, to convince a goon, Denholm, to start spitting garb but not without padding it with even more garb from a couple-few retards. Seriously, WTF, it's hearsay within hearsay within hearsay on repeat spawned by the attorney of [not an] THE interested party who [Deguerin] is, in effect, an interested party.

    Again, this jizzum wouldn't have supported a motion for summary judgment in a civil suit. WTF business does it have in a criminal case, even if 20 years after?

    "Yo, yo, yo...listen, just take a depo in my office but make sure to seem super-credible...and if not, that guy over there will bolster himself then talk abt another guy who he swears to believe as credible swear to how credible your depo seemed in an affidavit. We'll take it from there, fam."

    Anyone else feeling a little queasy? 🤢 It must be nice having money and/ or power and/ or connections. What a C[o]unt[r]y.

    -SE

    ReplyDelete
  23. Murray,

    Great reply. I guess that I mainly hope that you realize and agree that Dick D and Stan S were attempting to win for their client and keep him out of jail. Their actions aren't at the same level as the two you mention above from where I see it.

    As for the actual case, I realize it was two juries and my main coverage has been tv shows and your blog, but how on god's green earth did not one in 24 jurors find reasonable doubt on the timeline and think that there wasn't enough time to come home, subdue the dog, subdue the toddler, kill his wife, and get the kid to the mall or wherever they went?

    I think he's probably guilty, but I don't think this passes the Blackstone Principle.

    Finally, why do you think (either personally or professionally) that Kim finally gave into the cajoling? To save her job? Because consciously she thinks he did it? I figure if she dropped the case someone would have hired her as a favor if she lost re-election because of it so there has to be another reason, right?

    ReplyDelete
  24. I guess to me it's the whole principle of "better 10 guilty men go free than one innocent"....I don't remember the name of the teaching but certainly you would being a lawyer. The problem isn't what Clappart and Denholm did, overall. I mean obviously that was scummy, but defense attorneys playing fast and loose with rules is rare, right?

    In Kelly S's case, I don't know if it's common for her, but there are SO MANY cases of misconduct by cops and DAs that it really doesn't phase me anymore if someone like David Temple (even probably guilty) catches a break at the expense of the alternative, that he didn't do it and gets taken away from his son for life. Again, this doesn't excuse attempting to take down someone else while attempting to exonerate but short of that, defense lawyers are at a disadvantage every single time so they may as well be very zealous in advocacy, no?

    ReplyDelete
  25. Murray, the first part of your above statement reminded me of an argument made by Bob Burdette while he was an assistant DA. During a final argument he stated, "As long as lawyers are for hire justice is for sell." Needless to say the case was reversed. I agree everyone loses when you play No Holds Barred. That goes for the prosecutor as well as a defense attorney. And worse, I think we will continue to have cases reversed for failure to disclose exculpatory and mitigating evidence as long as Texas continues to use its ridicules discovery rules.

    Both sides should provide discovery just like the big boys do everyday in federal court. The federal system works just fine, and would be a vast improvement over the state system. Even the federal judges like it. As long as defense attorneys are allowed to hide evidence (Marshall Shelsy the extreme) and prosecutors are (practically speaking) required to disclose everything, cases will continue to be reversed - just like Mr. Temple's case.

    Money can at times get you a better lawyer, but that does not always mean you will win your case - especially today. Appointed attorneys are much better today than they were in the past. And in Mr. Temple’s case Kelly was every bit as good as Dick, some say even better. The appellate division and post conviction writ section of the DA’s office is second to none.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. With all due respect to the people still there, an appellate division without Alan Curry and a post conviction writ division without Roe Wilson and Lynn Hardaway bring Harris County down to the level of other appellate and writ divisions in prosecutor offices statewide.

      Delete
  26. That same sentiment was expressed when Bill Burg left the DA’s office, but then he was replaced by Larry Urquhart. They also said it when Larry left, but then he was replaced by Calvin Hartmann... You need to take a closer look at the people who replaced Curry, Wilson, and Hardaway. They’re excellent attorneys, not Rosenthal holdovers, and will do as good a job as those they replaced, if not better.

    You need to remember, the DA’s office works for the people, and the people wanted a change.

    ReplyDelete
  27. Anon 1:13 p.m.,

    The "people wanted a change?" No, the people straight-ticket voted against Donald Trump and they got a change. You can think the world of the Ogg Administration if you want to, but pretending that the people actually were paying attention gives the people way too much credit.

    ReplyDelete
  28. "The people wanted a change"... what a load of shit.

    ReplyDelete
  29. Funny how it wasn't shit when the republicans got voted in....

    ReplyDelete
  30. @ Anon 1:13 pm
    If you truly knew anything about the office makeup, you’d know that the people who replaced Curry, Wilson, and Hardaway all worked under Rosenthal and Anderson. I’m not saying they’re not good attorneys, I’m only saying they’re not at the level of their predecessors.

    ReplyDelete
  31. "Funny how it wasn't shit when the republicans got voted in...."

    Of course it was. It was a load of shit going both directions. Just don't try to say "the people wanted a change". What a joke. Straight ticket voting has been and always will be a disaster for the criminal justice system.

    ReplyDelete
  32. Murray,

    Consider this hypo:
    --police dispatch receives a call that a UFO was spotted hovering over the Temple house on or about the time Belinda is executed.
    --a green alien was then observed beaming down to the Temple's front yard
    --said alien was subsequently witnessed transforming a broomstick into a shotgun
    --the alien was seen smoking 27 rocks of crack as he hypnotized the Temple guard/attack dog
    --the alien then teleported himself into the Temple's master bedroom, executed Belinda, blew the glass windows out of the garage door as he exited their house, beamed himself back to the mother ship and took off with a sonic boom.
    --this UFO/alien citing was not deemed credible by any member of law enforcement after a thorough investigation
    --the UFO/alien encounter was not revealed in a timely manner by prosecutors due to the belief that no sane credible juror would consider it to be exculpatory

    Does this constitute a Brady violation?

    ReplyDelete
  33. Obvious troll is obvious.

    ReplyDelete
  34. Just saw on TV a reference to the amount that George Soros spent throughout the United States and it specifically stated that he spent, aka donated, a little over $1 million dollars to secure Ogg’s position as D.A. in Harris County, Texas.

    ReplyDelete
  35. Good day! I know this is kinda off topic nevertheless I'd figured I'd ask.
    Would you be interested in trading links or maybe guest authoring
    a blog post or vice-versa? My site addresses a lot of the
    same subjects as yours and I believe we could greatly
    benefit from each other. If you might be interested feel free to send me an email.
    I look forward to hearing from you! Awesome blog by the
    way!

    ReplyDelete
  36. My partner and I stumbled over here different web address and thought I might as well check things out.
    I like what I see so now i am following you. Look forward to going over your web page
    again.

    ReplyDelete
  37. I really like what you guys are usually up too. Such clever work
    and coverage! Keep up the fantastic works guys I've incorporated you guys to blogroll.

    ReplyDelete
  38. Can I simply just say what a comfort to find an individual
    who actually knows what they're discussing on the internet.

    You definitely understand how to bring a problem
    to light and make it important. A lot more people have to
    read this and understand this side of your story. I was surprised
    you aren't more popular since you certainly possess the gift.

    ReplyDelete
  39. Hi! I know this is kinda off topic but I was wondering which blog
    platform are you using for this website? I'm getting fed up of
    Wordpress because I've had issues with hackers and I'm
    looking at alternatives for another platform. I would be great if you could point me in the direction of a good platform.

    ReplyDelete
  40. Hi there, just wanted to tell you, I enjoyed this blog post.

    It was funny. Keep on posting!

    ReplyDelete
  41. Heya i'm for the first time here. I came across this board and I find It truly
    useful & it helped me out a lot. I hope to give something back and aid
    others like you helped me.

    ReplyDelete
  42. It's impressive that you are getting ideas from this
    piece of writing as well as from our dialogue made here.

    ReplyDelete
  43. Wow, awesome weblog structure! How lengthy
    have you ever been running a blog for? you made running a
    blog look easy. The overall glance of your web site is magnificent, as well as the content material!

    ReplyDelete
  44. Please let me know if you're looking for a article author for your
    blog. You have some really good posts and I feel I would be a good asset.
    If you ever want to take some of the load off, I'd
    really like to write some material for your blog in exchange for a
    link back to mine. Please send me an e-mail if interested.
    Kudos!

    ReplyDelete
  45. Murray, I would like to hear your comments about the Rizzo article in the Houston Chronicle today.

    ReplyDelete
  46. Have you ever considered about adding a little bit
    more than just your articles? I mean, what you say is
    important and everything. But think about if you added
    some great photos or videos to give your posts more, "pop"!
    Your content is excellent but with images and videos, this site could definitely be one of the most beneficial in its niche.
    Wonderful blog!

    ReplyDelete
  47. It is appropriate time to make some plans for the future and it is time to be happy.
    I have read this post and if I could I desire to suggest you some interesting things or tips.
    Perhaps you could write next articles referring to this article.
    I wish to read even more things about it!

    ReplyDelete
  48. A motivating discussion is worth comment. I believe
    that you should publish more on this subject,
    it may not be a taboo subject but typically folks don't discuss these topics.

    To the next! Kind regards!!

    ReplyDelete
  49. Murray,

    I find it almost impossible to believe you would be okay if a DA in a trial against you today acted the way Seigler did in that trial. It has absolutely nothing to do with the defendant's guilt or innocence. It has to do with Brady. Regardless of how strong a DA's feelings are about someone's guilt, they MUST turn over all of the evidence and information as they get it, regardless of whether the DA believes it's credible or not. Seigler didn't do that, at least not until the middle of trial. The defense bar would absolutely lose their minds if that happened today. Like I tell my clients all the time, everything that happened to you may not have been fair but you put yourself in a positiion for it to happen. Whether you agree with Temple getting a new trial or not, it would have never been a possibility had Seigler just done the right thing from the beginning. Had she turned everything over as she should have, he still would have been found guilty and Belinda Temple's family wouldn't have had to go through this. She was 100% wrong in how she behaved in that trial and she (and all of her supporters) should own that. Regardless of everything that happened in the years following the first trial, I think your anger is misplaced. This one is on her.

    ReplyDelete
  50. 7:56 a.m.,
    I will ask this question, yet again -- what is the exculpatory evidence that was hidden? I'm waiting for one of Kelly's attackers to name it. What was it? Where was it? What did Dick not know? Everyone likes shouting out that Kelly hid evidence, but nobody can seem to name what it was.

    Again, Kelly followed the rules of Discovery of 2007 when she was in trial in 2007. There are different standards now, largely because of the Michael Morton Act.

    ReplyDelete
  51. I tried a lot of cases as a DA before the Michael Morton Act (and before 2007) and I can't remember one trial where I hadn't given the defense attorney every piece of evidence (which included every statement, every OR, every everything) I had before trial started. I didn't need the law to tell me to do that and most (and I emphasize most, not all) DAs I worked with did the same. The argument that she didn't do it because she wasn't forced to by statute is crap. She should have done it! There's more to being a good DA than having mad trial skills. It's also about doing the right thing. The man faced life in prison (although that shouldn't matter when it comes to turning over evidence). It just drives home what was on the line. You're never going to convince me she acted honorably in that trial and I think a lot of people agree. Just because you can do something doesn't mean you should, esp when you're a DA who prides herself on standing up for justice. Regardless of her trial skills, she didn't represent DAs well in that trial.

    ReplyDelete
  52. Murray:

    The "exonerated" frauds, by both media and activists, often the same, are very common.

    The lack of fact checking/vetting is not accidental.

    Death Row, "Exonerations", Media & Intentional Fraud
    https://prodpinnc.blogspot.com/2019/06/death-row-exonerations-intentional-fraud.html

    ReplyDelete
  53. Anon October 2 @ 9:17 p.m.,

    I find it interesting that you gave the defense attorney every piece of evidence and every statement since that was against Office policy until the Lykos Administration.

    Either way, you can sit there and tell us how wonderful you were and how much you dislike Kelly Siegler to your heart's content, but that doesn't change the fact that a) she didn't break any of the rules of evidence; and b) the record disputes many of the findings that Gist made.

    It seems to me that you have your mind made up about Kelly, as do I. We do not agree.

    ReplyDelete
  54. I remain curious as to the verdict. Why did not one juror have reasonable doubt as to the timeline? He was able to get home, quickly kill his wife, and not bother the kid or dog....man.

    ReplyDelete
  55. Anon October 16,
    Probably because once you looked at the evidence rather than what you see on TV, he had more than enough time. If jurors come up to a conclusion different from the public's, it is usually because they heard ALL of the evidence -- not just what the defense team or the media WANTED heard.

    ReplyDelete