Prosecutor Gayland Gieger

Assistant District Attorney Gayland Gieger was the State’s lead prosecutor in Daniel Holtzclaw’s case. Post-conviction evidence exposes a sweeping pattern of misconduct: suborning perjury, fabricating scientific “facts,” inventing evidence that did not exist, suppressing exculpatory information, and weaponizing the courtroom to secure a conviction at any cost.

​

This was not prosecution. It was prosecutorial fraud.

​

1. Suborning Perjury and Fabricating Science​

​

When key accuser Adaira Gardner expressed fear and reluctance to testify (perjury is a felony), Gieger cornered her with a lie dressed as science:

​

“I believe you… we were looking for a match… and it was you. We found your vaginal fluid on the inside and outside his police pants.”

 

None of this was true.

​

His own analyst, Elaine Taylor, had already told him she “could not determine whether the sample came from vaginal fluid or saliva” and had “no idea” what the biological source was. No test for vaginal fluid was ever performed.

​

​

​​

​

​

​

​

​

​

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

But the lie worked — Gardner testified.

​

Then Gieger repeated the fabrication to the jury, now with theatrical flourish:

​

“DNA from the walls of [Adaira Gardner's] vagina was transferred in vaginal fluids onto the outside and the inside of the exact location she says his penis came in contact.”​

​

Lies piled on top of lies.

 

It was not an honest mistake.​ It was calculated scientific fraud.

​​

2. Inventing Negative Results to Eliminate Innocent Explanations

​

To make the DNA look bulletproof, Gieger went further.

​

In closing argument he claimed DNA was found only on the fly and not on the pockets or cuffs — as if that proved the DNA came from a sexual assault rather than innocent transfer.

 

The truth?
 

The pockets and cuffs were never tested. There were no negative results. Gieger simply made them up.

​

He fabricated a forensic exclusion to eliminate innocent interpretations that would have helped Daniel.

​

3. Fabricating the Defendant’s Words

​

Gieger didn’t just lie about science. He lied about Daniel’s own statements. In closing, he told the jury:

​

“He says in that interview, ‘I cannot remember if I got an erection.’ Those are his words.”

​

They were not his words.

​

When asked if he had an erection, Daniel told detectives:

​

• “I don’t… I don’t think I did.”
   

• “I’m pretty positive I didn’t get a hard on."

​​

​​

​

​

​

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Gieger flipped a clear denial into an admission of sexual arousal — and then told the jury the line was “on the video.”

​

It wasn’t.

​

This was not argument.

​

It was forgery of testimony.

​

4. Malicious Character Assassination

​

Unable to prove a coherent case, Gieger attacked Daniel’s private life.

​

He told the jury that Daniel’s relationship with his girlfriend involved “six days of medicated, unconscious intercourse” — a monstrous distortion of testimony about the couple having sex before reading Bible verses together.

​

In reality, Kerri Hunt stated she would wake up if sexual intimacy occurred.

​

Gieger’s version wasn’t clumsy — it was designed to turn Daniel into a sexual deviant in the jurors’ minds, without a shred of evidentiary basis.​

​​

5. Political Ambition as Motive

​

Years later, in 2021, Gieger launched his campaign for Oklahoma County District Attorney.

At the center of his pitch? His thirteen years as head of the Sex Crimes Unit — the very position from which he prosecuted Daniel.

​

For a prosecutor trying to climb the political ladder, high-profile convictions are currency. And Daniel Holtzclaw’s case was his crown jewel.

​

The incentives were clear: Secure the conviction at all costs, then run for public office on it.

​

THE BOTTOM LINE

​

Gayland Gieger did not pursue justice. He pursued a conviction — by any method necessary.

​

Prosecutor Gayland Gieger:

​

• Fabricated scientific “facts”
   

• Lied to a witness to coerce testimony
   

• Lied to the jury about that same “science”
   

• Invented statements Daniel never made

​

• Engaged in vile character smears unsupported by evidence
   

• Then used the conviction as a stepping-stone for political office
   

This was not zeal.

​

 It was a systematic dismantling of due process.

​

A prosecutor’s power is enormous.

​

Gieger used that power not to seek truth, but to manufacture guilt — and an innocent man is in prison because of it.