Every indication is that mistakes were made by the justice system during this emotionally charged, high-profile situation. It happens… We aren’t seeking revenge… The people who made these mistakes have moved on…
- DA Jana Duty was replaced during re-election and has since passed away
- Defense lawyer Patricia Cummings closed her office and moved out of town after the trial
- Judge Billy Ray Stubblefield took early retirement in 2014 immediately after Kelley’s trial—less than 2 years after his re-election to the court in November 2012.
- Prosecutor Geoffrey Puryear is no longer serving in Williamson County. His father,
- David Puryear, senior member of the appeals court, was not reelected in the last election
Please help the State of Texas move on.
I noticed that “a prayer” is often given at the end of an appeal. My prayer is that you will give Greg Kelley the opportunity to show you what he can do. Please help exonerate Greg by giving him a full pardon based on actual innocence, or take whatever action you can, to help Greg receive the exoneration he most certainly deserves.
1. Here’s what we know about Shama McCarty
- Shama raised 4 boys. They all became criminals.
- she admitted to violating city code by having twice as many children as allowed
- she told the court she didn’t know anything happened in her daycare
- Chief Mannix told Facebook that HM’s parents spent 2 hours discussing the molestation with her on June 15, 2013–2 days after leaning their son had been molested
- Prosecutor Sunday Austin cross examined McCarty. “Maybe you are having trouble remembering things that are harmful to Kelley”, Austin said. “No”, said McCarty. There’s a lot you can’t remember, do you agree?” said Austin. “Yes” said McCarty.
- both the prosecution and defense agreed her testimony was “a mess”
- After the trial, Shama went back to Sri Lanka, her native country
- While Greg was in prison, he was asked by an official visitor, what he thought of Shama’s testimony. Greg responded that she was clearly not telling the truth, and she “acted like an idiot” to deflect the questions that were asked of her..
2. During the 2014 trial and at the 2017 hearing, here is what Cedar Park police detective Chris Dailey told the court.
- During the August 2017 hearing, Chris Dailey testified the only person he spoke with was Geoffrey Puryear. ADA Mathews is now Judge Stacy Mathews. The court determined that Dailey lied, because ADA Mathew advised Dailey not to file charges against Kelley because the the 2nd victim failed to make an outcry. Dailey then spoke to ADA Geoffrey Puryear. Dailey ignored Mathews and arrested Greg Kelley that same day.
- L.M.(the second “victim”) mentioned twice that Jonathan was the assailant.The detective testified that the boy misspoke
- he admitted that he believeed Greg Kelley was the assailant from the beginning
- he changed the assault date given by the incident office to match the time period Greg lived at the daycare, but, during the August 2017 hearing, he stated that he didn’t know why he did it
- he admitted in court that he deleted the majority of emails between the CPS and himself. (Coincidently, CPS deleted the same emails with the detective.)
- he admitted that he knew it was wrong to ignore the protocol which states that investigators should not erase emails pertaining to an ongoing investigation.
- he illegally shared information about the case with the parent of another child in order two get a 2nd child to admit that Greg abused him. (the 2nd child recanted his admission during the trial)
- he admitted that he shouldn’t have revealed details of the case in order to acquire another victim
- he admitted that used direct questioning to manipulate the answers he wanted from the boy
- he did not establish rapport with the boys before beginning his interview
- he wore his gun into the interview with little boys who had just turned 4-years-old
- he admitted that he shouldn’t interview young boys at all
- he did not investigate the scene of the crime
- he did not question the daycare workers
- he did not interview the parents of other children
- he did not return phone calls to parents of the children who attended daycare
- he did not investigate the home where the assault occurred
- he did not investigate Jonathan McCarty
- he did not investigate any of the10 teenage high school boys who lived in the daycare
- he did not interview a man who had been convicted of sexual assault of a minor and sometimes stayed in the daycare center
- he stated that he had “no idea that Jonathan and Greg looked so similar”
- he did not interview any of the adults in the home
- he did not get a list of the adults in the home
- he did not get a list of the children in the daycare
- he admitted that it was wrong to ask leading questions and pressure the boys into responding the way he needed to hear their remarks
- After studying this case, for the 2017 hearing, Texas Ranger Cody Mitchell said, “I would be scared to death that I could end up in the same position with no evidence whatsoever and no investigation done, and be convicted of something I may or may not have done.”
3a. What did Cedar Park Chief of Police Sean Mannix say in the Austin American Statesman and in television interviews before Greg went to trial?
- He started his job in 2013.
- He was quoted in a Facebook article… “The Fight for GK movement has taken on a cult-like appearance, as it is mostly high school kids that have only been exposed to the news reports and what fellow supporters have told them, with no interest in seeking the truth.”
- He spoke about Greg’s case to the media before Greg Kelley went to trial. Here’s what he said in a 2013 TV interview: “…while I believe a person is innocent until proven guilty, I also do not believe that a cabal of 4-year-olds are out there making up stories about this gentleman.”
3b. What did Cedar Park Chief of Police Sean Mannix say in the Austin American Statesman, television interviews, letters to his staff, and his Facebook letters sent to bloggers Amy Smith and Kim Williams Frank after Greg was convicted?
- Mannix stated in a 2014 TV interview after the trial: “If Mr Kelley had the character to do the right thing on several occasions. Pedophilia like alcoholism is a disease. It is not having a desire for young children that got Mr Kelley into trouble, it was acting on that desire. Mr Kelley let his demons get the better of him and has signaled that he has no desire to treat the disease, as the first step is recognition and personal accountability. Instead, he chooses to claim innocence, con his friends and family, and blame the system and others for his actions.”
- Here is what Cedar Park’s Chief of Mannix wrote to Amy Smith’s organization…
- “He [Greg] did get to tell his story on the stand and was caught lying to the court, about a lie of stolen honor when he told somebody he was a Marine sniper return ing from Afghanistan. As an old Marine I am disgusted with this lack of honor. No evidence of Kelleyt’s innocence has ever been b rough forw3ard but him or his defense team, other than claiming innocence.”
- On the other hand here’s what Judge Newell wrote about Prosecutor Geoffrey Puryear’s rebuttal witness, Phillip Forbes:
- Forbes, a veteran, testified that Applicant represented himself as a Marine. Forbes said he had “brief conversations with Mr. Kelley about his time in the service and his deployments to Afghanistan, and then just recently when he got back from a deployment.:”
- Applicant has maintained his innocence throughout this process. And although the State discredited his character for truthfulness at trial, his white lie about serving in the military pales in the face of the new evide3nce. Applicant has provided, in these habeas proceedings, ample evidence of his good character via a multitude of letters from his high school peers, work peers, TDCJ peers, coaches, teachers, bosses, friends, and family. The State’s case, as the State here acknowledges, has been significantly undermined by the newly discovered evidence.”
4. This is what was said about CPS forensic child interviewer, Jennifer Deazvedo by the prosecution and defense expert witnesses.
Deazvedo clearly violated the APSAC interview rules which state that her job is to “elicit as complete and accurate a report from the alleged child as possible in order to determine whether the child has been abused and, if so, by whom”
She had no idea what a “structured interview” was and she didn’t know what “confirmation bias”was
She didn’t attend the preliminary or grand jury hearing, as Judge Stubblefield requested. Geoffrey Puryear told the judge she was out of town.
According to appellant attorney, Keith Hampton, “she did little else than prep a very young child for prosecution, precisely the opposite of what is expected of a genuinely neutral and unbiased Child Advocate should do.”
The parents said they questioned their son 8 timers before taking him to the CAC, but Diazvedo made no effort to explore the nature of these previous conversations which is contrary to the APSAC (Amer.Prof. Society on the Abuse of Children)
She did not ask about the inconsistencies in the 4-year-old’s ever-changing stories.
She did not determine how the little boy “knew” some things he claimed (such as the whereabouts of Shama or the other workers)
She allowed the showing of the little boy’s videotape which was made at the CAC according to trial lawyer, Patricia Cummings who stated that repeatedly showing his own CAC interview is “tantamount to coaching”
5. These are a few of the questions asked concerning Judge Billy Ray Stubblefield’s (JBRS) conduct during the trial
When the detective admitted to pressuring the little boy into admitting that something happened when it apparently didn’t happen, and the boy recanted his testimony, the judge dismissed those charges against Kelley. But couldn’t he also declare a mistrial?
Why were BOTH boys allowed to accuse Greg of this crime, but never make a face-to-face or in-court identification of their accuser?
Couldn’t the judge declare a mistrial when the child tells the jury that “Greg forced him to have oral sex, and that he was molested right before his mother came into the room and had a physical altercation with the defendant”? Instead, the judge agrees that this altercation never happened. So he dismissed this part of the boy’s statement, but keeps the rest?
How does the judge pick and choose the parts of the testimony that are given and say the rest of the testimony is invalid because it doesn’t make sense?
I sat next to a close personal friend of JBRS, and even she and her family was surprised at some of his decisions and lack of decisions during the 2014 trial.
Didn’t JBRS work closely with Williamson County District Attorney Jana Duty and Defense Lawyer Patricia Cummings on the Michael Morton case?
Why did the judge give limited, narrow instructions to the defense when speaking of Greg’s character, yet he improperly allowed a rebuttal witness for the prosecution, wide latitude in telling his story?
Why was Phil Forbes, the rebuttal witness allowed to tell his story to the jury when it was not relevant to this lawsuit? Isn’t this forbidden during a case like this?
After more than 12 hours of deliberation, the jury sent word to the judge that they could not come to a decision. According to a KXAN televison reporting, at about5 11:00 pm, “the judge told the jury that they would be sequestered and would not be sent home until there was a guilty verdict or another unanimous verdict.” Why wasn’t “a hung jury” offered as an option?
According to new reports, less than 15 minutes later, the jury agreed to convict Greg. 2 jurors said after the trial, that “some jurors simply went along with the others in voting for conviction to avoid being sequestered.”
One juror stated that the judge told the jury to “come to a unanimous decision or they would be sequestered for the evening at great inconvenience to their friends and family who would need to bring medication, night clothes, toilet articles, etc., to the court house around midnight”
A friend who worked in the courthouse on the evening of the deliberation, stated that the outcry against the 3 holdouts was so loud they could be heard in the hallway by courthouse workers and others. It was written in Facebook article, that “within 15 minutes the yellers won, and the 3 holdouts caved in”
After the trial, JBRS refused to hear the motion for appeal and recused himself., just like he did ion the Michael Morton case. Shortly after that, he retired, ending his judgeship in October 2014, instead of finishing his term which he was supposed to fulfill until February 2, 2018. Why did JBRS recuse himself from rehearing the Morton case, and the Greg Kelley case?
6. Here is why Greg’s defense lawyer Patricia Cummings (I’ll call her “PC”) was accused of “ineffective assistance of counsel.”
- PC appeared to be hiding the fact that Shama’s youngest son, Jonathan might have been a suspect in the assault on this little boy. 2 girls (in 2014) signed affidavits accusing Jonathan of using a date rape drug and assaulting them. He was known to have child pornography on his iPhone and computer.
- PC heard a CPS recorded interview in which the victim mentioned that the assailant was Jonathan. The victim mentioned his name twice and the detective also mentioned it. PC did not investigate Jonathan as a suspect after hearing the recording.
- On the first day of the trial, Judge Stubblefield asked PC if Jonathan was a suspect. PC responded like this: “Can I stop you? I’m not taking the position that Jonathan committed this crime…”
- Tracey Anderson knew Jonathan very well. Her daughter, Gaebri, was Greg’s girlfriend. Jonathan had a crush on her and wanted her for himself. He tried to impress her by telling her things that only he and his mother, Shama McCarty, knew. When Tracey told her these things and suggested Jonathan as a suspect, PC put out her hand and said, “Stop right there, We’re not going in that direction!”
- Lee Bridges, David Anderson, and PC’s own investigator AJ Kern, tried to warn PC about Jonathan as a suspect. Kern testified during the 2017 hearing that PC”was blinded by her conflict of interest”,
- PC was certain her strategy to convince the jury that HM was untruthful would work. The jury just wanted a different suspect. “PC did not suggest an alternate suspect.”
- It was mentioned by several jurors that the jury voted “guilty” because the defense did not offer any alternatives.
- The daycare OWNER raised 3 boys who had criminal records. There were 12 teenage boys who had lived in the daycare during the time in question. Patricia Cummings chose a defense that the little boy was not telling the truth. She felt she could prove that these this little boys had not been molested. She did not implicate any boys in this crime.
- Before Greg’s trial, PC was able to secure an early release from prison for one of Shama’s sons, who was convicted of assaulting a minor girl. She was able to reduced his sentence to 8 years.
- Jonathan had opportunity (his mom was the daycare owner) and motive (if Greg were in prison, he could attract Gaebri
- When Greg was awaiting trial, the little boy said his assailant’s genitals were dark in color. Greg’s were photographed, but they were too light. Jonathan’s genitals would have been the right color. The prosecution chose not to mention this during the trial.
- HM told the jury his assailant was wearing SpongeBobSquarePants pajamas. Jonathan wore pants like that around the house and also at school. Greg informed his lawyer about this, but she failed to mention that in court.
- Jonathan cut classes frequently between 1:30 and 3:00 according to the Leander High School attendance secretary. This was the time when the children took their naps. PC did not mention this during the trial.
- Four adults and students were willing to testify that Jonathan was a likely suspect. PC chose not to pursue that line of defense.
- After the trial, 2 people signed affidavits that Jonathan bragged to them that he was the one who molested HM. He told them that it wasn’t Greg who committed the crime, it was him.
- PC did not question why the detective chose to use Dec.- June as an acceptable time-frame for the boy’s assault, and did not insist that the July dates made a lot more sense. Perhaps she believed that these dates were more helpful to protect Jonathan McCarty from suspicion.
7. Geoffrey Puryear was the prosector in Greg Kelley’s trial.
- ADA Stacey Matthews, the first prosecutor named to this case had a conversation with Detective give Dailey before Greg was arrested stemming from LM’s [the second victim’s] outcry. After being advised that LM failed to make an outcry after two interviews, Matthews told Dailey, “At this point, my recommendation would be not to file charges.” Dailey spoke with ADA Geoffrey Puryear the following week. Dailey ignored Matthew’s recommendation and arrested Greg for the offense that same day. Later, Puryear replace Matthews as the prosecutor for this trial.
- The State’s Child Expert, Dr. Lee Carter and the Defense’s Child Expert, Dr. Stephen Thorne agreed when he said, “it’s not a very good case”. Dr. Carter said, “In LM’s case, we don’t have a good idea of what happened to him.”
- When Ranger Cody Mitchell was interviewed in August 2017, he was asked,
- “When they presented this case at trial, they actually excluded the date that the parents and the outcry witness reported to the police, correct?”
- Mitchell replied, “Greg Kelley was their suspect. They believed that Greg Kelley moved out of the house on that day, and they backtracked it a month, month and a half, two months from the date that he moved out going b backwards. They were concentrating on time frames that he was there.”
- The questioner then asked, “…when you say ‘they’, you mean the Cedar Park Police Department and the district attorney’s office, correct? Mitchell said, ‘That’s correct.”
- In Judge Newell’s exoneration document he wrote, “On March 18, 2014, HM [the 1st victim] said in an interview that his assailant wore SpongeBob pajamas. The prosecution did not disclose this information until the date of trial, July 7, 2014. The disclosure was too late for counsel to make effective time use of this fact at trial. ”
- The following article was found on page 31 of Judge Newell’s exoneration report:
- The experts agreed that preschool-age children are the most susceptible to the creation of false memories., and that the repeated questioning that took place here was not ideal. The evide3nce showed that HM was subjected to some eight “non-professional conversations,” prior to the CAC interview, and four or five meetings with the district attorney’s office after, including one in which he was shown the video recording of his CAC interview; and that LM was questioned by his parents, repeatedly interviewed at CAC, and then met with the district attorney’s office four times. As Dr. Carter put it, “repeated questions about that event, whether it’s true or not, may cause the child to believe ‘Well–she keeps asking me the same question. It must b e because something happened.’ And so the answer has been telegraphed and they offer it.”
- This article was taken from the Institute for Psychological Therapies, Vol.9:
- “After using improper interviewing methods, a determination of what actually happened too the child is virtually impossible. Primary evidence has been destroyed.”
- The following was copied from pages 22-23 in Patricia Cummings’s Amnicus Brief filed on 1/12/18:
- “Prior to trial HM met with the prosecutors on multiple occasions (at least twice a month from January 2014 until July 2014) to prepare for his testimony and during two of those meetings he was actually shown the children’s advocacy Center video recording of his interview. So, by the time of his testimony, HM’s version of events evolved significantly.”
10. What was the jury‘s response to this trial following Greg’s conviction?
- One juror submitted an affidavit that stated, “the prosecution’s case…was trash. I was not persuaded Greg Kelley was guilty beyond a reasonable doubt.” The rest of the jury was livid at me. There was no way we were going to get people to vote guilty…the judge would not send us home until there was unanimous verdict.”
- The three hold-out jurors expressed their discomfort at being harassed by the nine hostile jury members
- A friend who works at the courthouse, said she could “feel” the yelling and hostility down the hallway.
- One juror was quoted in the AAS as saying, “The jurors who voted guilty, did so NOT because of reasons of evidence, but because of Kelley’s mannerisms or how his defense attorney presented herself.”
One of the local media personalities who asked to remain anonymous, followed Greg’s case from 2013 through 2014. He told a first-person witness to the trial, “this is the worst case of injustice he has witnessed in his career.” Others are saying the same or similar things.