Today, for our four week anniversary, Alan Bernstein wrote me a fair article on the candidates and their personnel files. Alan, I just feel terrible, because I didn't get you anything. Please forgive me. The article is on the front page of the Chronicle, but I had a little bit of a harder time finding it on the website, so above is the link.
Here's the summary, it's a look into the personnel files of Jim Leitner, Pat Lykos, Doug Perry and Kelly Siegler (in that order).
Jim's file is the shortest, but probably the most glowing. It describes him as "an excellent trial lawyer who works long, productive hours", and it was written in the 1970s. I think its probably fair to describe Jim in the same way today.
Next is Lykos, who Bernstein notes received "subpar ratings" in her judicial bar poll ratings.
Um, yeah, that's one way of describing them. She attempts to justify that because she "didn't let the lawyers run the courtroom". Yeah, no judge does. It should be noted that at the same time period where Lykos was getting low bar poll ratings for refusing to "let the lawyers run the courtroom", Judge Ted Poe was on the bench. Judge Poe never let any lawyer run his courtroom, and he always got excellent judicial bar poll ratings.
Bernstein then lists some snippets from Lykos' evaluation in 2005 from her supervisor:
"A wise choice of language will go a long way toward winning staff and directors to her projects".
A below standard rating on her ability relating to team members and other county staff.
(NOTE: the supervisor hopefully notes that Lykos was "improving her manner of showing professional courtesy, teamwork and respect of support staff and peers").
Are you kidding me? This evaluation was written in 2005, and Lykos still hasn't learned how to play nice with others?!?! A 60-something-year-old woman who is still having to be told the childhood rule of "being nice to others"?!?!?
Anyway, on to Doug Perry, who was described as a "bumbler" when he first joined the force in 1981, and ultimately resigned and had to re-apply with the force.
I don't really know what else to add to that.
And then you have Kelly's.
Excellent evaluations. Letters from victims, law enforcement officers, and jurors commending her. There's an evaluation from former judge Joan Huffman (who was at the time Kelly's supervisor) commending Kelly for researching a Defendant's story and ultimately establishing his innocence.
She gets a few dings for making quick "value judgments" on people and speaking about it in "strong terms".
And in 1989, her supervisor, then-Division Chief Chuck Rosenthal listed Kelly could "use some improvements" when it came to her "legal knowledge".
Wow. Talk about irony, Chuck.