Television personality Kelly Siegler is under fire this month for what critics are saying is a history of unethical conduct as a prosecutor, including the hiding of evidence in capital punishment cases. After a career as a Harris County prosecutor, Siegler became the star in a reality series on TNT called Cold Justice, now in its third season. Siegler’s allegedly checkered history as a prosecutor is reminiscent of the controversy surrounding Nancy Grace, who was denounced an an unethical prosecutor who violated the rights of accused persons but has been retained by CNN as a show host and legal commentator.
This month, a state court ordered a new trial for a man convicted in 2007 due to unethical conduct of Siegler in withholding exculpatory evidence that would have made a difference in David Temple’s trial. Judge Larry Gist noted that “Of enormous significance was the prosecutor’s testimony at the habeas hearing that apparently favorable evidence did not need to be disclosed if the state did not believe it was true.” Thus, Siegler asserted that she would only reveal evidence if she was convinced that it was not just exculpatory but true — a very dangerous standard that would allow the withholding of a wide array of evidence.
Gist detailed an astonishing 36 instances of unethical conduct by Siegler.
Siegler is also accused of the same unethical conduct in the case of Howard Guidry when she twice convicted him. In many of these instances, it is hard to imagine a plausible excuse by Siegler. For example, Siegler never revealed to Guidry’s lawyers that crime scene investigators found fingerprints that were not Guidry’s on the victim’s car door and front fender. That is precisely where the police thought the shooter would have stood. Not only did the fingerprints belong to a suspect in the case but the man actually resembled Guidry.
A federal appeals court has ruled in the Guidry case police coerced an incriminating statement and Siegler was found to have “admitted unlawful confessions into evidence and used hearsay evidence.”
Siegler had 68 murder trials and now attorneys are examining all of those cases.
Siegler has already been required to appear as a witness and insisted that all of key evidence was made available to the defense. She insisted to the media that “I am always aggressive, but as far as withholding evidence, exculpatory information, Brady evidence, that did not happen.”
Source: ABA Journal
Every prosecutor I have met is incredibly pro-prosecution…… makes sense I guess
I practiced for over 30 years and to find a honest prosecutor was almost impossible. And the women were the worst.
I want to believe that there are are good prosecutors who seek only justice, not only convictions. But I suspect that would make me as naive as those who hang on to the myths they call religion. It might make me feel good, but it has no factual basis.
CORRECTED:
Warspite,
Your analysis does not hold up under scrutiny. Much of the unethical prosecutorial misconduct that Judge Kozinski has been concerned by occurred in federal district courts in California. The United States Attorneys and Assistant United States Attorneys practicing in these courts are graduates of the most elite law schools in the country. The law school doesn’t make an ethical person become unethical.
Warspite,
Your analysis does not hold up under scrutiny. Much of the unethical prosecutorial misconduct that Judge Kozinski has been concerned by occurred in federal district courts in California. These courts are staffed by graduates of the most elite law schools in the country. The law school doesn’t make an ethical person become unethical.
Warspite, misconduct like this has nothing to do with the law school attended. The basic rules are learned at any law school. The issue is attorneys learning how those laws apply once they are in practice. How to do the job of an advocate while maintaining high ethical standards is learned through experience and the guidance of more experienced attorneys, though some people are far less likely to stray from the ethical path than others. Even if you have a personal inclination to run close to the ethical line, the attorneys supervising your work either call you on the carpet for inappropriate conduct or they look the other way. In a prosecutor’s office, the message generally comes from the top–either the office comes down on questionable conduct internally regardless of case outcome, or they ignore it. Siegler’s idea that evidence isn’t exculpatory unless the state believes its true is the kind of an idea that can infect a prosecutor’s office unless the supervising attorneys are vigilant. Once it takes hold, new attorneys in the office who are naturally inclined to be ethical either become infected or leave.
I never heard of the Duggars and never heard of this woman.
Ditto. I have no knowledge of either the Duggars or this other show/person.
However, if true then her actions have purposely harmed the defendants and deprived them of their due process of justice. In addition she has personally profited by the suffering she has inflicted on others.
She should be MORE than severely treated……a nice long time in jail would be warranted.
I was wondering how long she was going to get away with all the false imprisonment that she had done while as a Prosecutor. There are six known cases where the DNA did not match the accused. Four of them were not even a matched blood type. The other evidence [planted] and coached witnesses’ testimony are also ways she won convictions. Maybe it is time to audit all of her cases.
Like the detective in New York after 33 years and on his death bed he wanted to clear his Catholic soul by confessing he planted evidence in order to close cases. Mean while the real criminals kept on doing there thing. One serial killer claim 14 victims that 6 men were in prison for.
Houston, Texas is now looking into several of her cases: http://www.houstonpress.com/news/lawyers-in-death-row-case-accuse-kelly-siegler-of-withholding-evidence-7605340 is only one.
Some of the comments here seem to do not who is whom. They think the people listed are fictional characters or reality show cast with no kind of life before that.
Maybe they need to get out of the house or video game world more often.
There was a time that a new law was sought that if an attorney knowing protected a guilty party then that attorney would also get the same sentence as the client.
Like for example in 1992 Hillary Clinton got a rapist off and was joking about the case long before the case went to trial. Those tapes were evidence of her wrong doing, but she is running for POTUS.
I never heard of the Duggars and never heard of this woman. People need to stop watching “reality” TV. If you like nonfiction; HBO, Showtime, Netflix, etc. have superb documentaries.
Again, if and when she is found guilty, double the sentence. Those in power who commit crimes are more than doubly disgusting.
I’m sure they were all guilty of something.
Random prosecutions and imprisonment of innocents serves the Holy State by atomizing individuals. Fearing that they may be arrested at any time for anything, they walk in fear and keep their noses to the grindstone.
The Glorious Wisconsin arrests of conservatives *spit* for daring to run an election campaign is how Progressives must conduct themselves.
Even better, the current Holy Anti-Hetero Sex League rules targeting males on college campuses make it possible to destroy young men for rape, even if the male never even met the woman.
Wonderful!
Power is necessary.
Fear is the grease.
Men are expendable.
This prosecutor committed a crime herself. Withholding fingerprint evidence at the crime scene where the perp was operating in order to convict another man is the worst thing one can do. She needs to be charged with a crime. She needs to do as much time as the defendant got here. If someone knows how to contact her please send her today’s blog and the comments. Send a copy to her employer.
In Missouri there is a case where a judge would not admit into evidence the fact that fingerprints of another person were found on the window of the victim who was pulled out of her car (drivers side window) and taken down the road and strangled. The Mo Sup Ct upheld that conviction despite the withholding of evidence. The perp whose fingerprints were found later assaulted another woman and later killed himself with a shotgun (like the one used in the Missouri murder). The victim was the live-in wife to be of the defendant. The only evidence against him was victim’s dna on her finger. She had just been with defendant at their home before she went out drinking and got killed.
The defendant got life in prison and is an old guy rotting in prison. He is from Salem, MO. His first name is Doc. The trial court judge and the Mo Sup Ct would not follow the federal jurisprudence in Jackson v. Virginia in a circumstantial evidence case– the sufficiency of evidence doctrine. This is mandated by the 14th Amendment that they follow federal jurisprudence. But the Mo Sup. Ct is “UnReconstructed”. This is a rejection of the Reconstruction Era adoption of the three Amendments (13th, 14th and 15th). They do not fly a Confederate Flag over the Courthouse in the Missoura capital but they ought to.
Reblogged this on Alina's Blog.
I don’t think her law school had anything to do with it. Cotton Mather was a Harvard grad, IIRC. This is more a matter of personality.
Not sure that Harvard had a law school when Cotton Mather attended. And after having read him, Harvard has a lot to answer for.
I do watch her program “Cold Justice” and find that she does empathize with the victim or the victim’s family. However, she is only doing about 1/3 of the work. She has a couple of retired cops who do the interrogations. And she has a forensic person.
As is too often the case in prosecutors offices throughout this country, Ms.Siegler earned her law degree from a sub-standard law school. Her legal training came courtesy a questionable educational institution.
The school from which Ms. Siegler received her law degree is the last ranked of all the accredited law schools in Texas. Until a few years ago, South Texas was entirely unranked by U.S. News, while it now holds the LAST ranked position of ALL law schools in the U.S. Those law schools below it are those of such poor quality they are just tossed in as “unranked”. And consider that being ranked last is actually an accomplishment for this type of law school.
South Texas is not just a third-rate law school. It is a stand alone, private institution. It is not connected to or affiliated with any college or university. While perhaps not at the “Chiropractic” level of the unrankeds, it is the equivalent of a bottom-drawer Osteopathic school. Why should it be any surprise when these sort of poorly-trained, trade school lawyers create a swath of damage as they streak across their legal careers?
She condemned many of these defendants to injustice for the purpose of her own nefarious aggrandizement.
I’ve said it before. It is outrageous that in the amount of time it takes to finally sanction these prosecutors, judges and other actors in the CJ system–their professed hallowed grounds are strewn with their victims. There are many who must self resurrect and fight to receive a fair trial, often years later.
If you haven’t already, check out Judge Kozinski’s recent article, a damning “indictment” of the criminal justice system: https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/volokh-conspiracy/wp/2015/07/21/judge-kozinski-with-four-final-ideas-on-improving-the-criminal-justice-system/