Texas grand jurors said, despite Rick Perry's allegations, that "they carefully weighed the evidence and eschewed political considerations during their deliberations."

...................................................................................................................................................................
Grand jurors offended by Perry suggestion indictment was political
By Brian M. Rosenthal and Patrick Svitek, August 20, 2014

Several members of the grand jury that indicted Gov. Rick Perry denied their deliberations were tainted by politics Tuesday and said they were offended by the governor, his lawyers and his supporters casting their decision as based on anything other than the law.

Four jurors told the Houston Chronicle they carefully weighed the evidence and eschewed political considerations during their deliberations.

"We were asked to serve, we attended eight sessions over the course of five months, we listened to hours of evidence and we formed opinions, and those opinions were not motivated by politics," juror Scott Hillman said. "They were simply motivated by our understanding of the facts as applied to the law."

Hillman called the governor's comments in the days since last Friday's indictment "disrespectful."

"I see him laugh at these charges, and I think he's laughing at the process, and he's laughing at the grand jurors," Hillman said. "We took our role very, very seriously."

Perry was indicted on one count of abuse of official capacity, a first-degree felony punishable by five to 99 years in prison; and one count of coercion of a public servant, a third-degree felony carrying a punishment of two to 10 years in prison.

The charges are related to Perry's threat to veto funding for the Travis County District Attorney office's Public Integrity Unit unless District Attorney Rosemary Lehmberg resigned after a drunken-driving arrest and a widely-watched video of her booking in which she was so belligerent with police officers she had to be restrained. Perry said Lehmberg had lost the public's confidence. Lehmberg refused to resign, and Perry vetoed the unit's $7.5 million in state funding.

Perry has defended himself in part by painting the indictment as the product of an overzealous prosecutor in a liberal part of the state. He dismissed it as a "farce" in a Saturday news conference, and said in a Monday radio interview it was something "we would expect in the old Soviet Union, not in the United States of America."

Conviction unlikely?

The governor's message has seemed to resonate, as even liberal commentators have taken to calling the indictment flimsy. Only probable cause is required for an indictment, less than what is needed for a criminal conviction, and several pundits have said they do not believe Perry will be convicted.

On Tuesday, the jurors who talked with the Chronicle said they were confident in their decision.

One, who asked not to be named, said he expects public perception about the case to change once the full scope of the prosecutor's evidence becomes public.

"I think if and when the facts come out, that'll change," the juror said. "There was nothing political at all" in the grand jury deliberations, he added. "Not anyone in there. Period."

Still, Republicans said it was impossible to deny that Travis County is a Democratic bastion in solidly red Texas.

State GOP chairman Steve Munisteri cited the conviction of former U.S. House Majority Leader Tom DeLay, which was later overturned but remains under appeal, as evidence of the bias of the area.

"Having attended part of the Tom DeLay trial, I think every Republican officeholder should be quaking in their boots that the Public Integrity Unit is headed up by Rosemary Lehmberg and the people deciding it are from the Austin, Texas, and Travis County voter pool," Munisteri said.

Primary participation

The Chronicle was able to identify nine of the 12 Travis County residents who served on the grand jury. Of those, five have voted only in Democratic Party primaries over the last 20 years, according to county records. One has voted in both Democratic and Republican primaries during that time, while three have not voted at all.

None of the nine appear to have donated anything to major political candidates over that time.

The Chronicle was unable to confirm the identities of three of the jurors because they have common names.

All six of the confirmed jurors reached by the newspaper said they were told it would be illegal for them to discuss the grand jury proceedings. Four talked in general terms to voice frustration with Perry's criticism.

Juror Janna Bessin called it "unfair."

"It's too bad," she said, "but I guess that his side's job - to really spin it."

Rhoda Chambers, who is the only person listed in Travis County with her name but would only confirm her service on a jury that ended last week, said grand juries involve careful consideration of facts.

"For me, it's not a political decision," Chambers said. "That's what a grand jury is about - take the emotion out of it and look at the facts and make your best decision."

The grand jurors were selected last April by San Antonio-based State District Judge Bert Richardson, who was appointed to the case after Travis County judges recused themselves.

Four potential charges

Richardson, currently running in the November general election as a Republican for a seat on the state Court of Criminal Appeals, selected the jurors from regular county jury-service lists, which include voter registration rolls and driver-license files.

The special prosecutor appointed to the case, San Antonio-based Michael McCrum, was nominated by former President George W. Bush to be an assistant U.S. attorney and nominated by President Barack Obama to be a U.S. attorney.

McCrum last week told Texas Lawyer that he presented the grand jury with four potential charges: abuse of official capacity, coercion of a public servant, bribery and official oppression.

"I looked at all statutes. I thought four could potentially fit," McCrum said. "At the end of the day, the grand jury returned an indictment just on the other two statutes. There's a variety of reasons that they may have done that. I don't know."
...................................................................................................................................................................