Nonsense. He doesn’t work for Austin or Travis county. He was appointed for this case, by a judge from San Antonio. So he wasn’t even appointed by an Austin judge.
I am asking because of Article 19.42 of the Texas Code of Criminal Procedure:
(a) Except as provided by Subsection (b), information collected by the court, court personnel, or prosecuting attorney during the grand jury selection process about a person who serves as a grand juror, including the person’s home address, home telephone number, social security number, driver’s license number, and other personal information, is confidential and may not be disclosed by the court, court personnel, or prosecuting attorney.
(b) On a showing of good cause, the court shall permit disclosure of the information sought to a party to the proceeding.
That is correct. You cannot disclose their personal information, including all of the above. Their name, however is public record, as is their voter registration.
That’s interesting. Because if I have someone’s name and approximate area, for minimum expenditure of money I can easily find their home address and home telephone number.
Yes you can. But the court cant release that info.
In fact, if I have their name and approximate age(which is easy to guess from the video of them leaving the court room) I can get their address, voter registration, names of the people living with them, and Drivers license number, and a lot more from Public Data
Good to know that that law is meaningless. If I am ever on grand jury I will take that into account.
yep. I have a lawyer friend I met on a message board challenge me to find out information about him. Knew his name and his birthday (but not the year, from the message board birthday function), within 10 minutes I emailed him his address, his two previous addresses, his and his wife’s DL numbers and DOB, his voter registration, and what kind of car he drove. He was a bit creeped out, but has given me a lot of work over the years. Not much is secret anymore.
What does it matter if the prosecutor is an Austinite, anyway? Rick Perry is an Austinite, too.
This pretty much sums it up for me.
Austin is generally perceived as more liberal than most of Texas.
I had the same thought. She was filmed drunk and embarrassing her public office. Perry wanted her to resign and used the tools he had available.
While I’m sure Perry’s lawyer will waive the arraignment, Perry will still have to show up at the county jail for booking, fingerprints, and a mug shot.
Should we start taking bets on whether Perry smiles for his mug shot or not? 
See, this thinking is what I don’t understand. What does Lehmberg matter? She was arrested for DUI and behaved poorly while under arrest. So what? That is a matter for Travis County voters to consider if they were to see her name on a ballot. Otherwise, it doesn’t matter.
It has always seemed to me that a crime is a crime, even if the victim of the crime is a vile individual. If we accept that Lehmberg is the victim and we accept that she is a vile individual, does that mean that any crime committed against her should be overlooked? Why should Lehmberg’s DUI have anything to do with whether or not Perry committed a crime?
Frankly, I see this kind of thinking all too often. We saw it in Florida when it came out that Trayvon Martin may not have been a model citizen. We’re seeing it now in Missouri with people suggesting that Michael Brown may have been less than a model citizen. It is widely understood that Rosemary Lehmberg is not a model citizen. Since they are not without sin, does that mean that it is open season on all flawed people? Only the perfect can be victims of a crime; all others are simply on the receiving end of karma.
Alan Dershowitz is not amused: Dershowitz ‘Outraged’ by Perry Indictment.
Again let me point out that my analysis, which is really Eugene Volokh’s analysis that I am now getting credit for, goes only to Count II.
So to sum up: Charges were brought against Perry for threatening to veto funding for a department that is charged with investigating corruption, including corruption in his own programs, if the elected official in that department didn’t resign over a drunk driving arrest. Perry would be able to put in place one of his own people to replace her until the next election.
The judge for the district recused themselves, and a Republican judge from a different county assigned a republican to act as a special prosecutor. That special prosecutor conducted a lengthy investigation, interviewed 40 or more people, and decided a crime was committed. He brought it before a grand jury, with two registered republicans sitting on it, and the grand jury concluded there was enough evidence that a crime was committed to send it to trial.
If we let a Governor defund any agency that might investigate him, I don’t think that’s too good for accountability. If an elected official deserved to be removed from office there are procedures to do that. It’s not the governors place to decide it on his own.
Because, yanno, both sides do it.
I witnessed some of this kind of demagoguery after the last botched execution. Occasionally I tune in to Fox out of curiosity, and in the coverage of the execution scandal, they aired an interview with one of the murderer’s victim’s family members. He went on about what a vile person the murderer was, and how the botched execution didn’t matter because, “he deserved to suffer a little bit.” Then, it was over! No mention whatsoever that cruel and unusual punishments are illegal. There’s a pattern all right.
He’s trying to have it both ways. “Don’t like it? Don’t vote for Perry!” But that doesn’t apply to the DA because…?
What do you suppose the two registered Republicans might have done to stop the indictment?
Same thing the four dems on the jury, or the rest (independent) members of the jury could do. Vote against it.