A few links for the weekend about the Harris County DA race.
First, Charles Kuffner did post his interview with Republican primary challenger, Mike Anderson. Mike continued to make the charge that the DIVERT program and the DA’s “crack pipe trace evidence” policy are illegal. He even stated that the DIVERT program has been ruled illegal. He talked about his time as a drug court judge and how he had seen lives changed. Overall I thought he did a good job of promoting his campaign.
One of the things that I didn’t like about his interview, and of some of the comments that he has made elsewhere, is that the DA’s office is forcing investigators to put “laydown” cases against prominent people aside and not prosecute them. He stated that he had just today talked to several investigators about this and they were frustrated. If this is true, then he has an obligation to bring them to the public’s attention. I’m tired of all of the charges and innuendo in this race that are not backed up by evidence. It is easy to say that the DA’s office is corrupt – prove it. If the DA is protecting prominent individuals and Mike knows about it, he needs to put it forward with real names, not just innuendo. It reminds me of the anonymous blog comments saying that public safety is suffering but that the commenter can’t say anything because he or she will lose their job or be denied a promotion. Sad to think that people with such weak spines are “protecting” us.
The second link is from PBS’s Red, White, and Blue program last night. In it, ADA Rachel Palmer’s defense attorney David Mitcham destroys the runaway grand jury and criminal defense attorney/blogger Mark Bennett agrees that the grand jury was motivated by something other than the truth. Just watch (start at the 7m 24s mark for the fun):
The last link is a look at DA Pat Lykos as a “pioneer” woman. I’ve been meaning to do something similar and might still but for now, this piece in “Women & Guns” has a lot of the information about her that I’ve found out since I’ve tried to get a better perspective of who she is and why so many people do not like her. The vast majority of the “charges” are coming from people that do not like Lykos personally. It is a shame when these types of attacks are used to oust someone from office.
Her actual record is very good and she has done a lot to reform that office. This makes for bitter employees. And the “law and order” types are not happy when someone seeks justice because they want revenge, as in shoot now, ask questions later.
I saw one local activist criticize her because he didn’t think she would look good on a swimsuit calendar. Another criticized her because she smokes. Another because she is “old”. Yet another because she prefers whiskey over wine and ladies do not do that. It is hard for women to make it to the top in any field but law enforcement is even harder. I can tell you that before I started deep research, I was not a fan. I now have a lot of respect for her and the journey her life has taken.
Anyway, back to the article. This is one of my favorite parts:
While holding her job as a Houston Police Officer, Pat worked her way through college at the University of Houston and law school at the South Texas College of Law. When she was assigned to night shifts, she took classes during the day; when she had day shifts, she went to night classes.
When she became eligible, she took the exam for sergeant, finishing No. 1 at a time when few women were even allowed to take the promotional test. But the (male) Chief of Police told her that he would not have a woman as a sergeant because a woman couldn’t do the physical things on the streets that a man could. He told Pat that if he was forced to promote her to sergeant, she would be working a different shift every month so that she would be 80 years old before she got out of law school. He told her to take the exam for detective. Pat took the detective exam and she was promoted to detective. The following day, she turned in her resignation. “It was my way of sending a message to them.”
She’s still that same feisty person today. As a father of two young women, I appreciate the path that she has blazed. That doesn’t mean that she should get a free pass as DA but it does let you know why so many people hate her for no good reason.
“Her actual record is very good and she has done a lot to reform that office. This makes for bitter employees.”
Ok–if you don’t like anderson and anonymous DAs making assertions without backing them up, why do you get to do so? What is her “record” exactly? What do you mean by saying she has a good record?
What “reforms” were needed at the office, and how has she accomplished them, exacty?
And finally, why on earth would a good record and needed reforms make for bitter employees? Why in the hell would her employees be angry if she was doing a great job?
I get that you support the incumbent, I do. You don’t have to answer anything–it’s your blog after all.
Scott, I think that I have pointed out what she has done but you might have overlooked it. I have said that I liked the DIVERT program, the crack pipe residue policy, targeting high crime areas, the way that she changed the focus of cold cases, creating combined databases to help locate criminals using fake names, and most especially requiring ADA’s to give full discovery to defense attorneys.
But you are very much wrong when you state that I “support the incumbent”. You can say it but that doesn’t make it true. Murray can say it but it doesn’t make it true. Ask their campaign if I support them. All I’m trying to do is get a balanced view of the campaign out, which no one else seems to be doing. And yes, my respect for her as a person has grown, no question about that. But I also respect Mike after meeting him and learning more about him.
Unfortunately, the anti-Lykos crowd prefers to attack anyone that says anything at all that is positive about her. It is a shame that they don’t support Mike but he is playing into that by continuing to attack her on non-issues, so I can see how it happens.
One other reform that I haven’t talked about yet is one that hit ADA’s in the pocket book. Previously, ADA’s could use comp time to go and teach a course for HPD – for which they were remunerated. DA Lykos decided that was a form of “double-dipping” and stopped the practice. When you take money from someone, yes, you do get bitter employees.
I’ll keep on doing what I’m doing. Did you happen to notice that I updated the ADA retention post based on the total years suggestion? And I promoted the update just as much as I would any other post on BJP?
Think what you want, I’ve been doing this a long time and nothing bothers me. Just last week, a Ted Cruz supporter criticized me because I said something that wasn’t positive about him. They used the fact that I advised people to support a Democrat, Jeff Weems, in the last election because the R’s put up an incompetent candidate. That makes me a liberal, of course.
Notice that I haven’t criticized you or others for saying that you would vote for Fertitta if Lykos is again the candidate. Gary Polland I ain’t. Cheers.
Oh, and one other thing Scott. Let’s assume that you are correct and I’m saying that she has a good record without backing that up. It isn’t true but lets assume it is.
There is a HUGE difference between a regular voter with zero ties to law enforcement saying that DA Lykos has a good record based only on news reports and no research VS an anonymous blog commenter that swears up and down they work as an ADA and they see corruption every day, they see “laydown” cases being tossed aside but choose to do nothing about it because they might be denied a promotion. Huge difference – if you can’t see that, then nothing I can say will help you.
Thanks for your thoughts. I disagree with many of them as being either reforms or accomplishments, but thanks for letting me know where you stand.