Judge Mary Lou Keel appeared at the Downtown Pachyderm on February 25, 2016, to promote her candidacy for the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals, the highest criminal court in our state. This court reviews death penalty cases along with all other criminal appeals and makes decisions on important issues like prosecutorial misconduct.
Judge Keel is the current judge of the 232nd Criminal District Court. In October 2015, Keel impaneled the grand jury that indicted pro-life activists David Daleiden and Sandra Merrick and failed to act against Planned Parenthood.
The indictments have been controversial to say the least and few, if any, questions have been answered. One of the biggest questions – who was on Keel’s grand jury? During Keel’s appearance at the Downtown Pachyderm, I asked her if she would release the names of her grand jurors and she responded that it was illegal to release these names. I found this response curious because, during the 83rd Legislative Session, I successfully campaigned to kill a bill that would make the names of grand jurors secret.
Keel returned to the Downtown Pachyderm on St. Patrick’s Day. Again, I asked Keel about the names of her grand jurors. This time I was ready for her predictably dismissive response. I then asked Keel why she had an order on file with the Harris County District Clerk to protect the names of her grand jurors if it was illegal to release these names. According to Keel’s position, didn’t existing law already protect her position of secrecy? There is only one answer –Keel, running for the top appellate criminal court in Texas, wants to hide the names of her grand jurors.
Listen to Jim Leitner describe the problem of secret grand jurors.
On May 13, 2013, Jim Leitner and I traveled to Austin to lobby the House Criminal Jurisprudence Committee on SB 834. Jim Leitner is the former First Assistant in the Harris County District Attorney’s Office – the number two in command. He also has experience as a criminal defense attorney and grand juror. Leitner told the legislators that the ability to get the names of grand jurors acts as a deterrent to inappropriate actions by grand jurors. This concept is crucial when grand juries are involved in political cases or those with political implications, such as the Planned Parenthood investigation. Leitner emphasized that our country has never benefited from secret tribunals.
Three different Texas Attorney General opinions have been written on this subject and all three opinions state that no law precludes the release of grand juror names. One opinion is from Governor Greg Abbott and another is from Senator John Cornyn, both former justices on the Texas Supreme Court.
Grand juries are secret tribunals. The evidence presented to grand juries is one-sided as the prosecutors are the only attorneys permitted to attend the sessions. Witnesses enter the grand jury room without counsel by their side. The check and balance to these secret proceedings is the ability to release the names of grand jurors once their term has ended.
At this point, how do we know that the president of Planned Parenthood Gulf Coast was not Keel’s grand jury foreman? The only check we have against a political conflict is the ability to see and understand the identities of these grand jurors. The concept of this check and balance is fundamental to our system of justice and is as important as the grand jury itself. It is basic and understood. Now we have a Judge who apparently has something to hide about the make up of her grand juries. What is Mary Lou Keel hiding?
Keel’s candidacy for the Court of Criminal Appeals is a flawed one. Fundamental to an appellate court judge is the recognition of important legal concepts involving grand juries. The concept of checks and balances is crucial to our justice system and our government. Transparency is the key. Keel likes to hide things and this type of thinking is not what we need on the state’s highest criminal court. Please vote for Ray Wheless.
We should have “Courts of Public Inquiry” and eliminate the “behind closed doors” grand juries.
Don,
I requested names and addresses of Grand Jury members in Montgomery County in 2009.
The response of Judge K. Michael Mayes of the 410th District Court was to issue a standing order sealing information of Grand Jurors and alternates “NOW or HEREAFTER”. You can see a copy of the order at the link below.
I had the same question at the time. If the names are secret by law then why was his standing order necessary?
https://drive.google.com/open?id=0B8kblcrgwfDgamRpckJFMHBOdk0
Mr. Don, would the release of just their names necessarily fix any improprieties? Unless a grand juror was a well known individual for some reason, couldn’t they easily fall beneath the radar of additional scrutiny you are suggesting? The implication here is that each grand juror would then be investigated if someone didn’t like a stance a particular panel took, a slippery slope potentially leading to retaliation or pressuring. Was this grand jury empaneled under the new law as media reports have suggested or the old way?
Kevin,
Let’s see what happens here. I did not think she was hiding something until her second appearance before the DT Pachyder. There is a way to get the names and that is my next story.
Don,
What does this Statute mean???
Texas Code of Criminal Procedure Art. 19.27. ANY PERSON MAY CHALLENGE.
Before the grand jury has been impaneled, any person may challenge the array of jurors or any person presented as a grand juror. In no other way shall objections to the qualifications and legality of the grand jury be heard. Any person confined in jail in the county shall upon his request be brought into court to make such challenge.
http://www.statutes.legis.state.tx.us/Docs/CR/htm/CR.19.htm#19.27
Adrian,
The intent here was diversity I believe. Let me see if we get one of our learned scholars chiming in on it.
I sure would welcome an authoritative explanation.
Diversity may be one justification, however the point I wanting to explore is the access the statute seems to grant. When it states “Any Person” that implies that you or I or any person could challenge a grand juror for credible reasons e.g. crook, drunk, related to the judge, or more.
Another apparent privilege is Art. 20.09. DUTIES OF GRAND JURY. The grand jury shall inquire into all offenses liable to indictment of which any member may have knowledge, or of which they shall be informed by the attorney representing the State, or any other credible person.
Does this mean we can get around the prosecutors when necessary?
http://www.statutes.legis.state.tx.us/Docs/CR/htm/CR.20.htm#20.09
The signature of the foreman of the grand jury is on the indictment.
I didn’t attend the first Pachyderm meeting that Keel spoke at, but at the March 17 meeting, she said that the grand jury was selected from a panel from the jury room. I think it would be incredible odds against the foreman of the grand jury working at Planned Parenthood.
Don, you’ve written repeatedly that you don’t like grand juries picked by commissioners (pick-a-pal, as you call them). Now, there’s a grand jury that was selected at random, and you’re still complaining.
I’m Tom Zakes and I approve this message.
Tom quit sucking up to Mary Lou Keel.
In looking at the law as cited in your link, it says the following:
c) On request, the court shall permit disclosure of a list of the names, races, ethnicities, and genders of the grand jurors to an attorney representing a party to the proceeding for the purpose of a constitutional challenge to the array after indictment.
Does this not mean that in order to learn the names you will have to mount a constitutional challenge? Are you planning to do this?
Doug,
If I am not mistaken you are referencing the law that did not pass the legislature.
I am waiting for the criminal proceedings underway to progress. The lawyers for David Daleiden and Sandra Merrick have a right to this information. I am hoping their lawyers ask for it.
I have spoken with the requisite pro-life organizations who are also anxious to obtain said information and a copy of the grand jury transcript.
I am sure the transcript in no way will reflect DA Devon Anderson’s description as to how the indictments happened. The defendants also have a right to the transcript.
Don, we’ve known each other long enough for you to realize I don’t “suck up” to anyone.
Each candidate in this race has qualities I admire.
I wrote my post to set the record straight, not to encourage a vote for or against either of the candidates.
If you look at my facebook posts, I even stick up for your hero in the presidential race if people get out of bounds in their criticism of him.
I’m Tom Zakes and I approve this message.