After promising to "restore public trust and confidence" in the District Attorney's Office, Pat Lykos' radio ad closes with Pat saying "my word is my bond".
Let's talk about that for a moment, shall we?
During her days on the bench, Pat Lykos was known for many things.
Honesty wasn't one of them.
In the McEntee story below, the Chief of her own court called her a liar for passing the buck on a bad bond decision. But the prosecution wasn't the only group that had issues with Lykos' "word being her bond" back in the 1980s.
In a 1987 Houston Chronicle article, writer John Makeig wrote about a case involving prominent Houston defense attorney Lewis Dickson during the Donald Gene Slatton trial. It's my understanding that Mr. Makeig has since passed away, but boy, he sure wasn't afraid of Lykos, was he? He's the author of most of these articles.
From reading the article, it appears that Dickson and Lykos didn't get along very well, which led to a Motion to Recuse her from the bench on a case Dickson was handling. Dickson cited a personal bias that Lykos had. As evidence of that, clerk Charlie "Chuck" Spinks was called to testify that Lykos had referred to Dickson as "with an obscene scatological term" according to Makeig's article (man, I love that phrasing!).
The Judge, under oath, testified that the, um, scatological term "is not in my vocabulary".
Lykos was a former cop. I would propose to you that any police officer who says that this "obscene scatological term" is not in their vocabulary is quite full of the aforementioned obscene scatological term.
Lykos also apparently insulted Dickson's father, who was a former District Court Judge.
In comes, prosecutor Ira Jones, who testified, also under oath, that Lykos used the obscene scatological term on a quite frequent basis. Tsk tsk, Pat. That is so unladylike.
(NOTE: This means that Pat Lykos was being accused of aggravated perjury. Couple this with Clarence Bradford being accused of it as well, and that leaves Kelly Siegler as the only person in the race not to have been accused of committing aggravated perjury.)
But the story doesn't end there.
According to a 1991 article in the Chronicle by writer Julie Mason (bringing the count to two Chronicle reporters who weren't scared of Lykos), Chuck Spinks was fired from his job as deputy District Clerk.
The reason? Judges Mike McSpadden, Doug Shaver and Woody Densen all signed a letter stating that Spinks had been wrongfully terminated for testifying against Lykos in the above-mentioned hearing.
Judge McSpadden didn't mince words, either. He authored the letter.
"Don't give us this play on words," McSpadden said. "Chuck was fired for testifying truthfully against Pat Lykos."
And you wonder why the Assistant District Attorneys don't want to work for her?
8 comments:
Alan,
We know what I do for a living.
We also know who else did what I do for a living. Again, you told me yourself.
Nothing sinister.
Everything hopeful.
Every second a moment to learn and to believe in the possibilities.
What would she do?
Let me give my extended audience a happy ending.
Let that message be one of faith and trust in you, the Chronicle and the media in general.
Help me finish the story.
Be honest.
Do your job, Alan.
Be the hero.
Don't you all get it??? These stories are being save for the race against clarene. That is the point of the endorsement. Alan knows the game plan or is a pathetic reporter. He is own rag produced these articles.
...I was just wistfully thinking the other day how much fun John Makeig would be having with Lykos running for DA....
He saw right through her BS....and back then, the Chron let him call a spade a spade.
Well, at least someone is uncovering the real truth about Pat Lykos.
While all these stories are older, I agree it's time for the Chron to do a background article on Lykos.
I wouldn't vote for the lady for dog catcher.
Only Bradford was "accused" of perjury in any legal sense, and the charges were dismissed as unfounded and Chuck Rosenthal took hits for a politicized prosecution.
If Lykos had been "accused of aggravated perjury," there would have been an indictment. Everyone is entitled to their own opinion, but not their own facts.
Ron, Houston voters have narrowed the choices down to three people who I wouldn't support for dog catcher. I'm reminded of the saying that if God had intended us to vote He'd have given us candidates.
Grits,
I use the term "accused of" loosely, obviously (much like Lykos uses the term "litigator" very loosely). There's two sayings that defense attorneys often say during trial.
1. "Those who do the accusing have to do the proving". Which is very very true.
2. "Not guilty means 'not proven'. You may believe that the person committed the crime, but it has to be proven beyond a reasonable doubt."
The whole principle of the criminal justice system is that an accusation means nothing. That's why I used my terminology.
Too bad you can't get the minutes of the judges meetings when she was on the bench. I hear they were interesting.
Jigmeister - That would require minutes to have been taken. That usually doesn't happen.
Post a Comment