Texas Supreme Court Justice indicted for arson

[PDittie]

Actually he was indicted for evidence tampering; his wife was indicted for arson:

Texas Supreme Court Justice David Medina and his wife were indicted today by a Harris County grand jury in connection with a fire that gutted their Spring home last summer, the judge's attorney said.

Medina is charged with evidence tampering, attorney Terry Yates said. His wife, Francisca Medina, is charged with arson, Yates said.

But Harris County DA Chuck Rosenthal -- a man with considerable legal problems of his own -- has decided to dismiss the indictments:

Both charges are expected to be dismissed Friday morning for insufficient evidence, Francisca Medina's attorney Dick DeGuerin said. DeGuerin said prosecutor Vic Wisner called him, told him about the indictments and said he planned to dismiss the charges.

"Mr. Wisner, who is an honorable man, has told me also that there's not sufficient evidence to support it and then therefore, he's going to dismiss the indictments tommorrow morning," DeGuerin said.

Yates confirmed that Wisner also told him that the indictments would be dismissed. Neither Wisner nor District Attorney Chuck Rosenthal returned calls for comment. ...

Rosenthal said in October that David Medina was not a suspect in the arson.

... which this evening led to the GJ assistant foreman screaming 'coverup':

"If this was a truck driver from Pasadena, he would already have been tried and convicted"

Jeffrey Dorrell served as the assistant foreman of the Harris County Grand Jury that indicted Texas Supreme Court Justice David Medina and his wife earlier today.

In a just-completed interview with Quorum Report, a furious Dorrell accused District Attorney Chuck Rosenthal of a political cover-up for refusing to pursue the just-returned indictments.

Still lotsa corruption left over after Tom DeLay and Karl Rove hit the bricks.

[sonias]

1. Dismissed?

A grand jury decides there's enough evidence to indict and the DA decides to dismiss it? Why did they bring the case to the grand jury to begin with. It's hard enough getting a grand jury to indict and then to dismiss their work sounds pretty stupid. But considering Dick DeGuerin is in the thick of it, sounds like some back room dealing to me.

I totally agree with the assistant foreman on this one. Are Texas Supreme Court Justices above the law? If this were the average Texas citizen, they would be facing a criminal prosecution for sure.

:grr:

Sonia

[Baby Snooks]

2. Why?

Why did they bring the case to the grand jury to begin with? To make it look like they investigated it, took it to a grand jury and the grand jury no-billed it. But then the grand jury itself found sufficient evidence to indict. So they did. And that's when the fun began.

This is business as usual. All a charade. Leaving Rosenthal in office is like leaving Bush in office. Nothing but trouble will follow.

Some Democrats like him. The way some Democrats like Bush. I get a chill up my spine every time I think about Dianne Feinstein referring to Bush as a nice person. She probably thinks Charles Manson is a nice person also. A Pelosi is now just another lapdog.

This whole country has gone down the drain. Competely corrupted at this point. There is no rule of law. Only corruption. The only justice is the justice you can buy. Which sometimes means buying off a politician or a district attorney.

[sonias]

6. What about the insurance company?

What's their position in the case? This case of arson had to cost them some money I'm sure. Someone's insurance company had to pay.

Medina's house was uninsured but a nearby house was also destroyed.

AAS article 1/18/07
Texas Supreme Court justice indicted
Medina, wife charged in arson, kicking off political melee in Houston.

Medina and his wife have denied involvement in the June 28 fire, which destroyed their 5,000-square-foot house in the Houston suburb of Spring. A nearby house also was destroyed and another damaged in the blaze, which began about 10:30 p.m. in the Medinas' garage. Only Francisca Medina and one of their four children were home at the time, fire investigators have said.

The fire was ruled suspicious by the Harris County Fire Marshal's Office because a fire investigation dog detected an accelerant and because a mortgage company had filed for foreclosure on the house in June 2006, which investigators said raised a "red flag." The home also was uninsured because payments on the policy had lapsed.

I love Mediana's explanation for the accelerate - gasoline for the lawn mower in the garage. You know I'm sure the Fire Marshal's hear that one all the time and I bet they know the difference between accelerant in the garage and accelerant perhaps somewhere else in the house.

Sonia

[PDittie]

3. I'll quote Kuffner

because, as some of you may have surmised, I have to be a little careful about what I say about what I know about this one. First, back to Harvey:

"Rosenthal resisted these indictments with a vigor I have never seen or heard before. The DAs office called my office last week and said we should not meet, the case was not viable and we should not indict. Obviously, that came from the top."

He continued, "Rosenthal went to the press (at the end of October) ... where he tried to sweep it under the rug. This really pisses me off. I am offended at his actions."

Dorrell said, "Our term ended on November 2 but our investigation of this issue had not been completed. We were held over for three months. This was the only case on our docket. Twelve citizens have put in countless hours on this issue. It is very irritating for someone who was not in the room with us decide not to prosecute.

"If this was a truck driver from Pasadena, he would have already been tried and convicted. Instead, there was a concerted effort by his office to protect this sitting elected Republican from the normal process of justice "

"It is an offense to justice", Dorrell said.

Now Charlie:

Remember, Rosenthal had no problems taking C.O. Bradford (who is the Democratic nominee for DA this cycle) to court on flimsy evidence, and while he went out of his way to not prosecute onetime local GOP kingpin Steven Hotze on a drunk driving charge. He has an established history of questionable judgment, and it would seem that it's no better today.

Please note that I am not claiming that Justice Medina is guilty of anything. He very much gets and deserves the presumption of innocence that we all enjoy. My layman's view of the news stories, which I had not followed very closely before now, is that the state's case would be very circumstantial. It's quite possible that despite Mr. Dorrell's protests, Rosenthal is making the correct call to not pursue these charges. If Rosenthal's judgment were remotely trustworthy, there wouldn't be that much to say about this story. But his judgment is anything but trustworthy, and so I and I'm sure many other people are deeply suspicious of Rosenthal's actions here. That's corrosive to the justice system in general, and very unfair to the Medinas, who is owed a real chance to clear his name.

I don't know what's going to happen. Even with Rosenthal's issues, it would be a bad precedent for public opinion to put pressure on a DA to prosecute someone when that DA thinks the evidence is lacking. All that I can really conclude is that Rosenthal is well past his expiration date, and would be doing everybody a huge favor if he'd just get the hell out. That's the kind of public opinion pressure I can get behind.

Kuffner's being even-handed, but I will note for the record there might be another axe to grind: that GJ asst. foreman is a very soft Republican, having resigned as a precinct chair to vote for Chris Bell in 2006.

Why he still remains a Republican after all the offense he has taken at their hands, I cannot fathom.

One last thing that goes back to the original complaint of evidence tampering against a sitting Supreme Court judge: the house in Spring -- the one that burned, the one Medina'as wife is accused of torching -- wasn't insured, and Medina didn't know it.

Got that, all you homeowners out there?

I presume this would be evidence supporting Justice Medina's presumption of innocence. :sarcasm:

edit: fixed link

[AnneD]

4. This wholr thing

stinks to high heaven. It stinks so much that the Repubs in the Grand Jury are questioning the (R)DA's integrity

[sonias]

5. As they should

Equal justice for all - isn't the rule of law one of the R's main tenets?

The principle that no one is above the law. I seem to remember them harping about that incessantly during the Bill Clinton years.


Sonia

[Baby Snooks]

8. So why was it presented?

"Even with Rosenthal's issues, it would be a bad precedent for public opinion to put pressure on a DA to prosecute someone when that DA thinks the evidence is lacking."

If the evidence was lacking, why did he present it to a grand jury to begin with? He doesn't care about "public opinion" any more than the rest of the Republicans do. Could it be that the evidence wasn't lacking and he was afraid if he didn't present it, one of the arson investigators might do what the grand jurors did anyway and go to the media? Something I bet not too many have thought about.

The bottom line is the Republicans are going to protect the agenda which means they will protect each other no matter what.

I am amazed by the number of people who actually believe Ed Emmett will ask for the county attorney to file to remove Chuck Rosenthal. He has no intention of doing so. But it makes for a good sound bite for the benefit of the flag-wavers who can continue to wave their little flags and continue to claim that the Republicans are the sole salvation of this country. After having destroyed it.

[sonias]

7. Judge may hold hearing on grand jurors' complaints

Medina's lawyer just kicked it up a notch.

Houston Chronicle 1/18/08
Judge may hold hearing on grand jurors' complaints

By BRIAN ROGERS
Copyright 2007 Houston Chronicle


A judge is expected to rule this afternoon on whether to hold a hearing to address complaints against two grand jurors who spoke out against District Attorney Chuck Rosenthal and his office for dismissing charges against Texas Supreme Court Justice David Medina and his wife.

(snip)
Yates filed a motion asking state District Judge Jim Wallace to schedule a hearing to determine whether the two disclosed information deemed secret about grand jury proceedings.

If held in contempt, the two could face 30 day in jail and a $500 fine.

Yate's action came minutes after Assistant District Attorney Vic Wisner dismissed the Medina indictments.

Sonia

[Beststash]

9. I think you might be able to cut a plea bargain at

the "House of Pies" on Richmond - the hangout for River Oaks Conservatives.

Peace

[Gothmog]

10. This stinks

Rosenthal is on his way out but is too tied to the party to do the right thing. This is going to get even nastier.

[sonias]

11. Today's update

(Actually yesterday's paper)

Houston Chronicle story 1/20/08
Jan. 20, 2008, 11:35PM
Grand jurors jab at lawyer
(snip)
In a scathing letter sent to the Houston Chronicle Sunday, Ryan blasted Yates for calling him and Dorrell "runaway jurors" after they publicly criticized the district attorney's office.

Such comments, Ryan's letter states, "impugn the integrity of twelve citizens of Harris County who have given up considerable amounts of their time to insure justice is done."

Yates said Sunday he did not question the integrity of all the grand jurors, but believes Ryan and Dorrell illegally discussed in the media grand jury proceedings that by law are secret.

(snip)
Ryan and Dorrell said they broke no laws and were careful not to mention anything discussed in secrecy.

Houston Chronicle LTTE 1/20/08 from Robert Ryan grand jury foreman, Houston
Grand jurors were right

I waited the appropriate 48 hours before communicating my displeasure with Terry Yates and his outlandish statements at his "press conference" on Friday.

As a former assistant district attorney, he well knows that grand juries hear cases brought on their own motion, from a competent citizen or from the district attorney. His client's case was received from the latter. He also knows that for a true bill to be handed up there must be a minimum of nine votes in the affirmative, not two "runaway jurors." Comments like his serve only to impugn the integrity of 12 citizens of Harris County who have given up considerable amounts of their time to ensure justice is done. These are not 12 hicks from Mayberry, U.S.A., who just rode into town on the turnip wagon.

This case was brought to our grand jury last fall, well in advance of District Attorney Chuck Rosenthal's problems. We were asked to "hold over" to continue the case. Yates' allegations of a vendetta are reprehensible, and I am personally offended. His action of filing a motion for sanctions against Dorrell and me is laughable, as our comments clearly steer clear of violating our oath of secrecy of the proceedings. We are represented by counsel whom Yates knows and well respects.

Well Yates is of course spinning the story for the media. He's getting paid to do that for Medina. But kudos to Ryan and Dorell for not rolling over for Yates.
:applause:

Sonia

[PDittie]

12. Don't miss the comments at the story links, either

Hours and hours of fun.

[sonias]

13. Hours and hours - no kidding

That's just too much discussion.

You have your wings and then you have your wing-nuts and then you have your wing-nuts with extra special hate sauce.


Sonia

[Baby Snooks]

14. So why did Chuck Rosenthal present the case to the grand jury?

The former Houston fire chief, Eddie Corral, just asked that question in an interview on Channel 2 in Houston. Obviously Chuck Rosenthal intended to coerce the grand jury into returning a "no-bill" which would allow him to say his office investigated the matter and a grand jury found no evidence of wrongdoing. And of course at that point if the grand jury had protested, they would have had to violate the law to set the matter straight.

Why have the Democratic representatives for Harris County not demanded a Justice Department investigation of a man who truly is the most corrupt district attorney in the country?

Where is Gene Green and Sheila Jackson Lee? Their constituents have been victimized constantly by Chuck Rosenthal and his racist "discretion" as Jolanda Jones finally addressed. Which should have been addressed a long time ago.

You have to wonder if Ted Poe isn't tempted to call for the investigation himself. He was a victim of Chuck Rosenthal as well when he was considering challenging Chuck Rosenthal when Johnny Holmes announced he would retire. Ted Poe of course had committed adultery. And we had to have a "moral" district attorney. Well, we certainly got one, didn't we? A holier-than-thou district attorney who committed adultery with the same woman through two marriages over a 20 year period. A district attorney who believes the Bible is the absolute word of God and therefore absolute law that is superior to civil law. And so in his office, chattel law and the Curse of Ham determine whether a crime was committed and the level of charges and the level of punishment. Under Color of Law, the Justice Department only needs to prove a pattern of unequal charges and unequal punishment. And only a fool would believe that pattern is not to be found in the Harris County District Attorney's Office.

But Ted Poe won't do it. The Republicans will stick together. They cannot afford another Republican official in Texas being indicted. Which of course is why Chuck Rosenthal presented this to the grand jury and then attempted to coerce them into returning a "no-bill" to clear David Medina and his wife.

But why won't the Democrats do it? Maybe they like the string-pulling as well?

[sonias]

15. I would like to see other Democrats calling for an investigation

Rosenthal has been notorious for asking and getting death penalty convictions

Houston Chronicle's 2001 Special Report
A deadly distinction

Since the U.S. Supreme Court declared executions legal again more than two decades ago, Texas has become the national leader in carrying them out. So far, the state has put 242 inmates to death. That is more than a third of the country's 693 executions.

Of the inmates from Texas, 61 were convicted in Houston courtrooms. If this were a state, it would rank third nationally, behind Texas and Virginia. But Harris County has more people awaiting execution, compared with only 30 in Virginia.

Meanwhile, a new Houston Chronicle opinion poll shows that Harris County residents are less supportive of the death penalty than their fellow Texans. In fact, the level of support here is much closer to that of the rest of the nation.

2/5/2001
Between life and death
Borderline capital cases raise questions of justice

"It benefits the government by enabling those who participate to claim the moral high ground in being tough on crime," Schaffer said. "If the death penalty is eliminated or cut back, what are they going to pad their résumés with? If you didn't have the death penalty, what is Chuck Rosenthal going to say in his ads? "I put a lot of people in prison?' That doesn't have the same ring to it."

Sonia

[sonias]

16. Update once again

It ain't over till it's over. Tips to Vince at Capitol Annex.

KHOU.com
Grand jury to meet again on Medina
Monday, January 21, 2008

By Courtney Zubowski / 11 News

The grand jury that indicted Justice David Medina and his wife in connection with a fire at their home plans to meet again – even after the DA decided not to prosecute the case.

Medina’s lawyer, Terry Yates, is rushing to court to keep that from happening.

"It’s obviously his grand jury that’s doing this for political purposes, when they know the DA is not going to pursue the indictment. They’re just doing this to be mean," Yates said.

Tuesday morning, Yates will ask Judge Jim Wallace – the same judge who appointed the jury and was asked by Yates to hold two jurors in contempt of court – to disband the entire grand jury.

:popcorn:

Sonia

[sonias]

17. Judge disbands grand jury behind Medina indictment

Houston Chronicle 1/22/08
Judge disbands grand jury behind Medina indictment

By BRIAN ROGERS and DALE LEZON

A judge criticized the Harris County District Attorney's Office today for not standing behind a grand jury's decision to indict a Texas Supreme Court Justice and his wife in connection the 2007 fire that destroyed the couple's Spring home.

"Why did they bring the case to the grand jury if they didn't want the grand jury to do its job?" state District Judge Jim Wallace asked. "At that point in time, you ought to stand by, and abide by, what the grand jury wishes to do."

The criticism came on the heels of Wallace's decision to disband the grand jury that indicted David Medina and his wife because of a procedural error by Harris County District Attorney Chuck Rosenthal's office, nullifying at least two months of work and maybe more, Wallace said.

He said the case should have been investigated further before dismissing the indictment.

Sonia

[Yanez Houston Jordan]

18. Rosenthal is an embarrassment to all of Texas. What can be done to rid Texas of this idiot?

[sonias]

19. Welcome to the DU TX forum Yanez Houston Jordan!

And I know you probably won't plug your blog, but I will. :hi:

Yanez Houston & Jordan for Texas Supreme Court
This blog will offer an in depth discussion of our great candidates for Texas Supreme Court, but as a preview of that longer discussion, here are some initial thoughts about our best candidates:
(snip)
Justice Linda Yanez
Sam Houston
Judge Jim Jordan

Three candidates running in the March 4th primary for the court.

Sonia

[Yanez Houston Jordan]

20. Thanks.

[sonias]

21. The continuing saga of Texas Supreme Court Justice Medina

Houston Chronicle 1/30/08
Signs of trouble in Medina finances
Records show judge tapped all his home's equity

By MIKE TOLSON

An investigation into a suspicious fire that destroyed the home of Texas Supreme Court Justice David Medina brought unprecedented scrutiny of his life: from cell phone calls to bank records to personal relationships to the whereabouts of family members on the night in question.

That investigation remains unfinished, in part because the Harris County District Attorney's Office moved to have grand jury indictments against Medina and his wife dismissed as soon as they were returned earlier this month. But one thing that has emerged, however incomplete, is a picture of a high state official with serious financial issues.

Long before his home burned, Medina had used it as a source of ready cash. Assisted by a mortgage company whose name became synonymous with the excesses of the subprime lending frenzy, he took advantage of a rising market to draw every dollar of available equity from his house, even though the result was increasing monthly payments that may have played a role in a 2006 attempt to foreclose on the property.

Sonia