MLK said: "Injustice Anywhere is a Threat to Justice Everywhere"

End Corruption in the Courts!

Court employee, judge or citizen - Report Corruption in any Court Today !! As of June 15, 2016, we've received over 142,500 tips...KEEP THEM COMING !! Email: CorruptCourts@gmail.com

Sunday, May 4, 2008

Judge and Wife Face More Charges

Judge and His Wife Face Second Grand Jury on Fire at Their House
Texas Lawyer by John Council - May 2, 2008

Prosecutors Wednesday again will present a matter involving a fire at the home of Texas Supreme Court Justice David Medina to a Harris County grand jury, according to an official with the Harris County District Attorney's Office. Medina and his wife, Francisca, were both indicted on Jan. 17 in connection with the June 28, 2007, fire that damaged the Medinas' home and a neighboring home in Spring, Texas.

In the indictment in Texas v. David Michael Medina, David Medina was charged with tampering/fabricating physical evidence, a felony, for allegedly presenting a letter concerning an arson fire "with knowledge of its falsity and with intent to affect the course and outcome of the investigation." In the indictment in Texas v. Francisca Jane Medina, Francisca Medina was charged with arson, a felony, for allegedly unlawfully starting a fire by igniting a combustible fluid. Those charges were dismissed by 176th District Court Judge Brian Rains on Jan. 18 at the request of the Harris County District Attorney's Office on the ground that there was insufficient evidence. On Jan. 22, 263rd District Judge Jim Wallace ruled that the grand jury was not properly impaneled. Scott Durfee, general counsel for the Harris County District Attorney's Office, says that he would not elaborate on why prosecutors are taking the Medina matter to a second grand jury.

"It's just being re-presented, because it's being re-presented," Durfee says. "Ultimately, all I can say that an indictment dismissed at an earlier stage doesn't foreclose the re-presentment of a case at a later date. Some cases just merit a second look." Medina did not immediately return a call for comment. His attorney, Houston solo Terry Yates, believes the second grand jury look at the case is a "legitimate inquiry." "I think they have some witnesses to go before the grand jury and they want to take them in there to see what they have to say," Yates says. "He [David Medina] didn't do anything wrong, and he has nothing to fear. We'll just see what happens after this grand jury gets done looking at this matter."

The dismissal of the Medinas' indictments was one of the controversies that dogged former Harris County District Attorney Chuck Rosenthal. Some members of the grand jury that indicted the Medinas were angered that the district attorney's office dismissed the case and publicly leveled accusations that Rosenthal moved to dismiss the indictments for political reasons. Rosenthal repeatedly denied those accusations. Rosenthal resigned from his position on Feb. 15 after racist and sexist e-mails were found on his office computer. In a press release he sent out that same day, Rosenthal said prescription drugs had impaired his judgment.

Robert Ryan, the foreman of the grand jury that indicted the Medinas, says he is curious about the motives of the district attorney's office in presenting the case to a second grand jury. "Obviously this is just a real political mess," says Ryan. "I have no idea how another grand jury will find," he says. He continues, "I think the voters of Harris County are entitled to fair and impartial justice -- whichever way it winds up." Dick DeGuerin, a partner in Houston's DeGuerin Dickson & Hennessy who represents Francisca Medina, believes politics had nothing to do with the dismissal of the Medinas' case.

"There wasn't any special treatment," DeGuerin says. "There's no evidence against his wife; there is no evidence against him." DeGuerin says the grand jury "thought that Medina was given special treatment, which wasn't true. If he hadn't been a Supreme Court justice, the district attorney's office probably wouldn't have taken it to the grand jury." DeGuerin believes the Harris County District Attorney's Office is presenting the Medina matter to a second grand jury because of the "hue and cry" from the first grand jury over the dismissal of the case. "I think they want to show another independent grand jury that's there's nothing to it," DeGuerin says.

7 comments:

fire buff said...

a successful lighting strike, hey it's just business to the biggest crooks - attorneys

lawyer hater said...

since lawyers think they are the smartest they likewise think that they can get away with anything, so 2 + 2 = 4. That's what we have to endure in New Jersey anyway. Hang all the dirty bastards.

Anonymous said...

I'm sure they make a nice couple. Partners in crime. And this is who runs our system of law and order?!?

Anonymous said...

Hey, give them a break! Maybe an arm or a leg, whatever. They are scum.

the sleuth said...

these folks are in the CRIME ZONE

fed-up said...

"There wasn't any special treatment,"..."There's no evidence against his wife; there is no evidence against him." Did these fine up standing officers of the court destroy the evidence so there would be none? That's the way they help out their fellow lawyers. The Judge and his wife deserve hard time, no country club prison for them.

FirstSeekTruth said...

Expose Medina. Share this video that shows who he really is.
http://youtu.be/jRGusuVo1N8

Blog Archive

See Video of Senator John L. Sampson's 1st Hearing on Court 'Ethics' Corruption

The first hearing, held in Albany on June 8, 2009 hearing is on two videos:


               Video of 1st Hearing on Court 'Ethics' Corruption
               The June 8, 2009 hearing is on two videos:
         
               CLICK HERE TO SEE Part 1
               CLICK HERE TO SEE Part 2