Ogg? More Like Ugh, Amirite?

Without all of the clothes rending and teeth gnashing about how David Temple murdered his wife (I am familiar with the evidence, and I doubt that he did), I agree with Murray Newman (as often I do) that Kim Ogg should ask that an attorney pro tem be appointed to decide how to proceed in the David Temple case,1 now that the Court of Criminal Appeals has reversed Temple’s conviction.

Temple wants to be exonerated; I sympathize, but I’m not sure how he gets from here — with charges pending — to there. If the State dismisses his case, he has not been exonerated. If he goes to trial and wins, he has not been exonerated (because “not proven beyond a reasonable doubt” is not “some other dude did it”). If he isn’t convicted again he can’t file another 11.07 writ.

Maybe Stan Schneider has some vehicle in mind for compelling Judge Johnson to have a hearing on actual innocence and compel the State to participate, but an 11.07 writ is the only way that I know of for his client to be found actually innocent (his actual-innocence claim was rejected by the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals, which doesn’t mean that he isn’t actually innocent just as an acquittal doesn’t mean that he is). If the State moves to dismiss the case, Temple can object, but Judge Johnson can dismiss the case over his objection.

I doubt that Mr. Temple would be willing to be convicted just to have another shot at total exoneration, and I doubt that he would choose a trial over a dismissal, but the decision whether he should be retried should be made by a prosecutor with no dog in the fight — without the ego stake that the Holmes / Rosenthal / Anderson DA’s Office had, and without the appearance of a conflict of interest that the Ogg DA’s Office has.

Devon Anderson had serious problems with conflicts of interest. Several times she should have asked for the appointment of prosecutors pro tem because of the appearance of impropriety.

I suppose Kim Ogg is not immune from the implicit corruption that she, I, and all of us have been swimming in for our entire careers. But still, I expected better.


  1. Murray suggests the AG’s Office; this is a great idea if you want the job done incompetently. 

About Mark Bennett

Mark Bennett got his letter of marque from the Supreme Court of Texas in May 1995. He is famous for having no sense of humor when it comes to totalitarianism.
This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

12 Responses to Ogg? More Like Ugh, Amirite?

  1. OMG, I’m so going to take this moment of agreement and run with it.

    However, I would like to know your thoughts on Ogg announcing that she would be the head of a 5-person Temple review team that also includes Donna Cameron, Andrew Smith, Steve Clappart, and John Denholm.

  2. Robb Fickman says:

    There is too much material for Kim Ogg to review this all by herself. I am hopeful that she will utilize a team of objective and experienced personnel.

    Has Kelly Siegler ever been disciplined by the State Bar for her misconduct? Or is this just another prosecutor who cheats, gets caught and nothing happens except for maybe they get a television show?
    Robb

  3. Mark,
    Let me tell you why I disagree. All the corruption surrounding Devon Anderson is grounded and centered on how she got to power to begin with, which is the very corrupt Judge Susan Brown. Judge Brown is the embodiment of corruption in Harris County and as you know the Chief Administrative Judge of the Criminal District Courts, and the person who appoints. Whether you look at the corrupt and discredited 185th grand jury, Ryan Chandler, Justin Keiter’s father’s special prosecutor, all show Brown’s corruption. Then you look at her appointment of Jim Mount to be the special prosecutor involving the DA investigator who stole the comic books you begin to have a theme. The Susan Brown theme is not incompetence, it is corruption. Susan Brown did her best to cover the corruption of Devon Anderson but the stink was mighty and great. There is only so much she could do. Allowing Susan Brown to appoint anyone to the Temple case will result in the constant and well developed theme of corruption. Kim Ogg would not only be derelict in her duty by allowing such a corrupt person to make such a decision but she would acquiesce to the very corruption that is Susan Brown, Devon Anderson, Craig Goodheart, Kelly Siegler, …..

    Jim Mount you do realize David Mitcham was Rachel’s lawyer?

    • Mark Bennett says:

      Why would Judge Brown (instead of Judge Johnson) be responsible for appointing an attorney pro tem on the Temple case if Ogg requested one?

      • Because Susan Brown is the Chief Administrative Judge of the criminal courts and appoints the pro-tems. This is how we got Jim Mount and Stephen St. martin appointed in the 185th. I might add, Susan Brown is the very reason Murray Newman wants Kim to recuse herself. I was there when Patricia Pollard, Murray Newman, and Luci Davidson came laughing out of Susan Brown’s chambers in a hearing involving the 185th grand jury. These people are corrupt and gone. Susan Brown is the top of the list the next election cycle. Either the Republicans remove her are we take her out at the ballot box. It is not the trial court Judge who appoints attorney pro-tem. It is Susan Brown.

      • Mark Bennett says:

        CCP 2.07 says, ” Whenever an attorney for the state is disqualified to act in any case or proceeding, is absent from the county or district, or is otherwise unable to perform the duties of his office, or in any instance where there is no attorney for the state, the judge of the court in which he represents the state may appoint any competent attorney to perform the duties of the office during the absence or disqualification of the attorney for the state.”

        Mount and St. Martin may have been appointed in the 185th because Susan Brown is the judge of the 185th.

  4. Don Hooper says:

    So true Mark but inexplicably we have had several cases transferred to Susan Brown and or making pro-tem decisions outside of normal practice.

  5. Don,

    It’s been over five years since the 185th Grand Jury investigated and subsequently cleared Rachel, yet you somehow are tying the murder of pregnant woman to your long-irrelevant journey for revenge. Your impotent rage towards Judge Brown somehow wasn’t enough to sink her reelection in 2014, and to this day we all still laugh about you in the back of courtrooms in the CJC — far many more than just Judge Brown’s.

    I highly doubt that you fully comprehend how many people laugh at your “knowledge of the law” coupled with your atrocious spelling and grammar. I’m sure that Rachel really appreciates you pointing out that David Mitcham was her lawyer. I can’t imagine why she wouldn’t want to put her pleading the 5th incident behind her completely. Wasn’t David your lawyer, as well, at a different point? I mean, I’m well familiar with your attraction to carrying a badge and a club, but at the end of the day, your only true experience with the legal system was as a Defendant.

    Your legal knowledge is about as legitimate as your “energy trader business” and your “powerful Republican influence.” I would suggest that you return to Big Jolly’s page where you still have two or three reader who seem to find you intellectually stimulating, but then again, people on Mark’s blog shouldn’t be deprived of your meaningless ramblings, I suppose.

    I would tell you that people are laughing at you, not with you, but you would never believe me.

    So, party on, Don.

    • Murray, I am pretty sure Devon Anderson and the fifty other folks no longer working at the DA’s office are not laughing. Give them my best. This is where you decide whether or not I am laughing.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *