New evidence sparks old feuds in murder case

David Temple during cross examination by prosecutor Kelly Siegler in his November 2007 murder trial. David Temple during cross examination by prosecutor Kelly Siegler in his November 2007 murder trial. Photo: Steve Ueckert Photo: Steve Ueckert Image 1 of / 5 Caption Close New evidence sparks old feuds in murder case 1 / 5 Back to Gallery

New evidence that might prove convicted killer David Temple did not fatally shoot his pregnant wife in 1999 reignited old feuds Wednesday and led to accusations of dirty courtroom tricks and cheap political shots.

The new evidence is an admission by Riley Joe Sanders, then 16, whose conversation with friends about firing a shotgun while burglarizing the Temple home was overheard by a witness who came forward this summer.

Among other things the witness told authorities he heard was that Sanders said he "shot a dog" and left it in a closet, a point seized on by attorney Chip Lewis, who represents Sanders.

"Did the witness overhear Mr. Sanders and others talking about a burglary in the area that went bad where a dog was shot and put in a closet?" Lewis said.

Lewis has not been allowed to see the sworn testimony or know the identity of the witness. "If they're talking about a burglary gone bad in the area, that is a far cry from a burglary gone bad inside the Temple home," he said.

'Dog' called code

Temple's attorney, Dick DeGuerin, confirmed that he expects the evidence to show Sanders was talking about burglarizing the Temple house, and the witness believes Sanders was using "dog" as a code for Belinda Temple, who was shot in the back of the head with a shotgun in the closet of the master bedroom.

"It was not another burglary, and it was not another house," DeGuerin said. "It was said as code."

DeGuerin criticized Lewis and others for appearing to know the identity of the witness and his sworn affidavit.

"There's a leak somewhere," DeGuerin said. "The transcript and what the witness said is supposed to be under seal."

DeGuerin is trying to get a full hearing to argue that new evidence - and evidence that was withheld during the trial - shows his client is innocent.

Attorneys for the Harris County District Attorney's Office said in court Wednesday that the new evidence should be investigated by a special prosecutor the office appointed for the task last month, and that any other appeals are premature while Temple's case works its way through the appellate courts.

"I think it should be investigated," Assistant Harris County District Attorney Alan Curry said. "My opinion of David Temple's guilt or innocence is on the record, but I think it should still be investigated."

He noted that the office appointed attorney Brad Beers to review the new evidence independently.

Both sides are expected to file briefs arguing about the appropriate jurisdiction for a hearing about the new evidence Sept. 28. State District Judge David Mendoza is expected to hear the matter Oct. 1.

DeGuerin vs. Siegler

In addition to new evidence showing Temple's innocence, DeGuerin also is arguing that former prosecutor Kelly Siegler refused to give him evidence, specifically grand jury testimony and offense reports, that would have helped exonerate Temple. That testimony narrows the window in time in which Temple could have killed his wife to just a few minutes, according to court records filed by DeGuerin.

Siegler vehemently denied DeGuerin's assertions, and said she will be filing an affidavit refuting "each and every point."

"It's vile what he's doing," Siegler said. "He's manipulating words, he's taking things out of context to make me look like a crooked prosecutor. That did not happen."

DeGuerin said the district attorney's office was "schizophrenic" in its assertion at the appellate level that Temple is guilty while hiring a special prosecutor to investigate his innocence.

In court, he called for the district attorney's office to recuse itself from all aspects of the case.

Other attorneys accused the office of taking up the case for political reasons.

"This is a personal fight between Dick DeGuerin and Kelly Siegler," said Paul Doyle, an attorney who represents another teen who is being implicated in the burglary the witness described.

He said District Attorney Pat Lykos is allowing DeGuerin free reign because she and Siegler were political foes in the Republican primary for district attorney four years ago.

Lykos' term ends Dec. 31 because she was beaten by Mike Anderson in May's GOP primary.

"This is because Pat Lykos doesn't like Kelly Siegler," Doyle said. "The reason they're doing it this way is because they have four months left of a lame-duck district attorney who's going to let them do whatever they want."

Politics denied

In a written statement issued by the office, Curry said politics is not the motivation behind the review.

"We do this because it is the right thing to do. The alternative would be to ignore both our legal duty and moral obligation to examine allegations of prosecutorial misconduct and claims of actual innocence," Curry said. "That is not how this administration operates."