ST. LOUIS — Three years after they indicted one of St. Louis Circuit Attorney Kim Gardner’s investigators, seven special grand jurors are outraged to learn Gardner will not be facing more serious charges for her actions during the case, according to a letter obtained by the I-Team.
The special grand jurors wrote a letter to Judge Rex Burlison on April 12 – one day after Gardner appeared before a disciplinary panel to agree to a 40-page stipulation with the Office of Chief Disciplinary Counsel in which she admitted that her office withheld evidence from Greitens’ defense attorneys.
In it, they asked Burlison to forward their concerns to those making a decision about Gardner’s discipline after the Chief Disciplinary Counsel recommended Gardner get a reprimand for her conduct with no suspension or revocation of her law license.
"We are extremely disappointed in the joint stipulation," the jurors wrote. "We urge you to consider much stronger disciplinary action in this case."
At issue are notes taken during an interview with Greitens’ mistress, Gardner and Tisaby that were not given to defense attorneys. The grand jury indicted Tisaby, a former FBI agent, in 2019 on six counts of perjury and one count of evidence tampering after spending eight months investigating it.
“Our work exposed us to activity and behaviors in the St. Louis Circuit Attorney’s office that we considered are disturbing and certainly unethical," they wrote. "What we observed was not inadvertent nor inconsequential but was calculated deceit and/or outright incompetence; neither of which is acceptable behavior for a person holding this public office."
The letter continued: “The individual we indicted was accused of many crimes, however, he was a private citizen. In our opinion, Ms. Gardner’s offenses were markedly worse. As a lawyer sworn to uphold the law and as a public servant voted to the city’s highest prosecutorial office, her behavior should be beyond reproach. Yet her disregard for the law, as detailed in both the Special Grand Jury indictment as well as in the ethics charges, is reprehensible. Our assignment as jurors was to investigate the indicted but our efforts revealed Ms. Gardner’s illegal prosecutorial misconduct to the point that we believed her actions were was likely indictable as well. The fact that an ethics review was pending suggested gave us hope that Ms. Gardner would indeed face severe and appropriate consequences.”
A spokesman for the 22nd Judicial Court said Burlison did not respond to the letter from grand jurors, or forward it along as requested as it would be “highly inappropriate and irresponsible” to do so.
The three-member disciplinary panel that heard Gardner's testimony in April will send a report to the Missouri Supreme Court, which has the final say over discipline Gardner will face. Traditionally, the Office of Chief Disciplinary Counsel's recommendations are upheld.
"A strong message must be delivered in this case," the grand jurors wrote. "If not, we can only feel our time and energy were wasted."
Gardner's attorney Michael Downey provided the following statement:
"The letter from seven former grand jurors made public constitutes an extraordinary and extreme breach of public trust. A grand jury investigated and brought charges against William Tisaby. No charges were brought against Circuit Attorney Kim Gardner. That grand jury was then disbanded. The former grand jurors should have no proper means to communicate about their former service, or to communicate as in this case with the public or with a judge who did not preside over the grand jury process about their views purportedly as grand jurors.
"Further, the grand jury process allows only the prosecution to present its side of the case. These grand jurors never heard a balanced presentation, or anything about Ms. Gardner’s positions. The issuance of the letter, particularly to the public, is thus improper and unethical. Anyone involved in organizing, preparing, and coordinating such a letter would have violated several legal principles.
"As Ms. Gardner knows, the stipulation in her case was the result of extensive communications and negotiations with the Office of Chief Disciplinary Counsel, which has decades of experience and deep expertise dealing with lawyer discipline cases. Ms. Gardner believes the case against her, and the Hearing Panel and Supreme Court actions based upon the stipulation that Ms. Gardner and her counsel reached with the Office of Chief Disciplinary Counsel, should proceed as the law provides, without undue and improper attempts from outside parties to influence those proceedings."
A spokeswoman for Gardner's office provided the following statement:
"The St. Louis Circuit Attorney has cooperated fully from the outset. We appreciate that the Office of Disciplinary Counsel conducted a fair and thorough process, and we expect the stipulation agreed to by all parties will soon become final."
This is a breaking story, check back for updates.
