JUDGE SAYS EX-PROSECUTOR KELLY SIEGLER WITHHELD EVIDENCE IN DAVID TEMPLE CASE

By Craig Malisow | Houston Press | July 8, 2015

A visiting judge has accused former Harris County prosecutor Kelly Siegler of withholding evidence in the murder case against David Mark Temple, who was convicted of killing his wife in 2007, and has recommended that Temple be granted a new trial.

Judge Larry Gist's findings, which were issued Wednesday after nearly three months of witness testimony in a habeas hearing, are not binding; it's now up to the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals to decide whether the former Katy football star and high school coach was denied a fair trial in a high-profile case pitting two outsized egos — Siegler and defense attorney Dick DeGuerin — against each other. (The CCA previously denied Temple's appeal).

"Both were famous and neither could stand losing to each other," Gist wrote in his 19-page recommendation, issued Wednesday.
[...]
Houston attorney Paul Looney, who worked on Temple's case before DeGuerin took over, told the Houston Press that Siegler's ultimate goal was to use the case as leverage to get her own TV reality series — an idea she had unsuccessfully pitched once before.

"This was her opportunity to enhance her resume to the point where she would get her TV show," Looney said. "It worked, she got the show ("Cold Justice" on TNT). But boy, at what a price. At the price of David Temple's life, at the price of an entire family's reputation, and at the price of her own integrity."

But Looney alleged that Siegler not only violated professional ethical standards, but that she committed a felony by obstructing justice.

More at link: http://www.houstonpress.com/news/judge-says-ex-prosecutor-kelly-siegler-withheld-evidence-in-david-temple-case-7573860

STATE SAYS JUDGE'S FINDINGS IN DAVID TEMPLE CASE STRAY FROM THE FACTS

By Craig Malisow | Houston Press | September 10, 2015

Harris County prosecutors have filed an objection that calls into question a judge's findings of suppressed evidence and witness tampering in the 2007 conviction of high school football coach David Temple for the brutal shotgun slaying of his pregnant wife Belinda in 1999.
[...]
Filed Tuesday, the State's response to Gist's findings is the latest volley in the contentious criminal proceedings that started virtually from the moment on January 11, 1999, that Temple called police to say that he discovered his wife's body in the couple's master bathroom closet. Much of her skull had been blown away by what investigators say was a shotgun pressed to the back of her head while she was on her knees. She was seven and a half months pregnant. The baby's name was Erin.
[...]
When Gist's recommendation was filed with the Harris County District Clerk, it contained 36 findings of fact. Nearly two months later, when it was filed in Austin, for review by the Court of Criminal Appeals, it contained 37 findings.

Schneider told the Press that the additional finding was just a remnant from a list of suggested findings that he and Gotro added when putting together an amended copy of Gist's findings that contained citations to help with the Court's review. After Gist notified both sides that he would not agree to additional findings, Schneider and Gotro deleted them — or at least they thought they did; they accidentally left one in, according to Schneider. That was submitted to Gist for his signature before Schneider and Gotro caught the error.

The State caught the error right away and notified Gist, who then wrote the Court of Criminal Appeals' clerk Sept. 8, stating that the document "was tendered to me as being identical to my original findings with the addition of citations. That representation was not correct." He also stated, "I never made finding No. 37 and do not make such a finding now."

We sought elaboration from Gist, who told us via his secretary that his letter to the clerk speaks for itself. Of course, the letter doesn't state who "tendered" the document. It doesn't state how Gist himself missed the extra finding. It doesn't state anything explanatory.

More at link: http://www.houstonpress.com/news/state-says-judges-findings-in-david-temple-case-stray-from-the-facts-7746971

I watched the Doco... never HEARD of the case before.

My opinion FWIW...

There is no way in HELL that the husband could be found "Guilty" based on the summary of the case and evidence presented in that Doco.

Remember the old "chestnuts" (British/Us Justice):
Innocent until proven Guilty and Guilt has to be PROVED BEYOND REASONABLE DOUBT.

Also remember:
The defense DO NOT have to prove anything. They DO NOT have to even propose some theory of how it happened, let alone "who did it". They certainly DO NOT have to PROVE an alternative theory or prove some other suspect did it. They may offer alternative theories, which (if reasonable) negate the State contentions about their theory, and so by that DEMONSTRATE reasonable doubt in regards State's case. The Defense DO NOT have to speak at all. Of course they always do.. by way of refuting.

And so..... it is NOT sufficient for State to say there is "No evidence" to link another person to the crime. They have to do WAY more than that. That is the system we live under... a VERY tough burden on the State to PROVE guilt. (Beyond reasonable doubt). The State need EVIDENCE that actually links the Defendant to the crime. The much lauded "circumstantial case" has to actually be a case and not just guesses, gossip and rumor. That is "Lynch Mob" "Justice" best left to True Gossip Forums

_________________
Do not go gentle into that good night.
___________ Rage, rage against the dying of the light

Thanks for watching, Rumpole.

I saw the original doco years ago and I watched again last night on TV. At the end they gave a brief update of the case through July, 2015. I totally get what you are saying. His appeal was once denied. The court of appeals is who will make the decision re a new trial. Apparently, part of the new evidence and what was allegedly not offered by the DA has to do with the neighbor boy. DeGuerin is NOT going to give up on this one.

It's my personal opinion that the jury may have been in a state of the "Scott Peterson effect". I don't know a soul in the US that didn't follow that case. Peterson was convicted of killing his pregnant wife after an affair with a girlfriend. However there was MUCH more evidence in his case, the girlfriend testified against him, yadda-yadda. Peterson was convicted in 2004, the Temple trial was in 2007.

I followed the Scott Peterson case... a bit.

There was far more evidence there... but even that case does not sit well with me...I guess I am just not a "Circumstantial Evidence" kinda guy. I do NOT have faith in "Juries getting it right" because I have seen Jury member interviews after the fact, and they do make decisions in ways that Judge's instructions tell them not to. For instance, the emotion around how NICE the victim was and what a tragedy their death was, has no place when assessing the guilt of the defendant. Neither should the outward opinion of the defendant prove his/her guilt. Scott Peterson, Drew Peterson and this case (and several other cases I have followed) may well involve people the Jury don't like, but the State STILL has to present evidence to prove GUILT (beyond reasonable doubt).

_________________
Do not go gentle into that good night.
___________ Rage, rage against the dying of the light