Posted on 11/17/2007 11:25:55 PM PST by Paleo Conservative
HOUSTON — Attorneys for a former high school football coach convicted in the shooting death of his pregnant wife want the Houston Chronicle to identify a reader who posted a comment about the case on the newspaper's Web site.
The thread, posted in the "reader comments" section, suggests that the juror spoke about the deliberations while the trial was still ongoing.
David Mark Temple's attorneys issued a subpoena Friday calling for the Chronicle to appear in court Monday, with registration information the reader may have given the newspaper.
The comment was posted around 9 a.m. Thursday, about seven hours before a jury found David Mark Temple, 39, guilty of shooting Belinda Tracie Temple in January 1999. Belinda Temple, a special education teacher at Katy High School, was eight months pregnant.
In the posting, the reader, who goes by the screen name "REFster," wrote: "Psst ... My boss is on the jury. Thinks they'll have a verdict this afternoon."
After another reader asked REFster if he knew how his boss would vote on the verdict, REFster replied: "He is playing it very close to the vest. I'm sorry to say at this point, I got nada."
The last comment by REFster was posted about 6 p.m. Thursday. About 2,000 comments were posted about the Temple case.
Jurors are not allowed to talk about a case outside the jury room while a trial is underway, and are instructed not to discuss the case with their spouses, family members or friends. They are also ordered to avoid any media reports. Jury deliberations are also supposed to remain confidential until a trial has ended.
Jurors in the Temple trial are scheduled to begin hearing testimony in the punishment phase of the case on Monday.
Defense attorney Dick DeGuerin said he did not know what he would ask the court to do about possible jury misconduct. The jury could be polled on whether they had violated the court's instructions, DeGuerin said.
Prosecutor Kelly Siegler declined to comment Friday.
The Chronicle's management said they had not decided how to respond to the subpoena.
"We're studying the situation," Chronicle editor Jeff Cohen said.
Typical lawyer. Forget about justice. Use any trick to defend the guilty.
Too broad. It should read "typical criminal defense lawyer."
Prosecutors and most civil attorneys have different standards.
“Prosecutors and most Civil Attorneys have different standards”.
Not neccessarily. See Nifong and Johnny Sutton.
So, if you were charged with a crime you'd want your lawyer to avoid such tricks?
Actually, I don't see a lot here; somebody wants to know when the boss is going to be available and the boss says something like 'probably tomorrow'. That's hardly "discussing the case."
It depends. I would have a guilty conscience and then probably not. If I was innocent - then yes. I don't trust our govt. at all.
Actually, I don't see a lot here; somebody wants to know when the boss is going to be available and the boss says something like 'probably tomorrow'. That's hardly "discussing the case."
I agree there. It's the lawyer for the killer that's using the tricks. Do you really want a killer to go free because some guy talked to his boss?
law is not important he is a killer
law is not important he is a child molester
law is not important he is a rapist
law is not important he is a republican
The law is always important or we go down the slippery slope
declare a mistrial and re try him but do not say we can ignore the law just because
How could I have left the infamous Ronnnie Earle off the list of crooked Prosecutors? He is just as sorry (If not more so) as Nifong and Sutton!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.