An insider's view of what is really happening in the Harris County Criminal Courts
Murray,this may be a rumor,but we heard the republican candidates have cut a deal that if elected they will create a public defender system. The deal includes cutting pay using the budget as an excuse.
A public defender's office would be enormously expensive. They would have to have twice the number of lawyers as the DAs office, because the ACLU and others would be all over them for not being able to effectively handle their dockets b/c they have too many cases (no one seems to give a shit that the HCDA prosecutors carry a caseload that renders most of them ineffective for the state). That, combined with the fact that the republican base would be annoyed with this expense to help defend criminals, makes this expenditure unlikely until the county has more money.
murray, love to read this blog but noway I can vote for don for judge he has a vendetta against officers. Yes have done wrong but he went out of his way to ruin many officers on petty crap. Instance was like the harris county deputies at the bootcamp. all were found not guilty but hounddog don took them to trial one at a time and not guilty. concerned police officer thanks for letting me sound off murray
Re: Anon. 10:13 PM:FACT NOT RUMOR: Just like Congress, but unlike the federal judiciary, Texas State judges ARE required to run under a Party designation (which I believe IS nonsense). However, UNLIKE Congress, Judicial meetings are open to ALL members of the judiciary and obviously can not exclude any other judge due to Party affiliation. On such a large budgetary issue like a P.D. office, the entire Harris County Judiciary - INCLUDING THE ONES JUST ELECTED - would be 1) Allowed, 2) Expected to participate, & 3) Expected to attend, ANY JUDICIAL meeting dealing with this issue; Instead of creating a RUMOR, by quizzing sheepishly: "...this may be a RUMOR, but WE heard (Emp. added)..." Go ask the judges elected in 2008 if this IS true THEY WOULD KNOW just like anyone.FACT NOT RUMOR: The biggest cheerleader for creating a PUBLIC DEFENDER'S OFFICE is Dem. Sen. Rodney Ellis. FACT NOT RUMOR: Last Fall at a Democratic Judicial candidate meeting, Sen. Ellis personally asked all present if they would support by voice vote their Party's support of the creation of a Public Defenders Office in Harris County. With the exception of one candidate everyone else voted Yeh. - even though the majority of these candidates, just like some of their R opponents in open races, ARE ALL on the County "Tit" getting appointments. I mean really...WHO is going to stand up to Sen. Ellis at a major political judicial meeting of his party on this issue? FACT NOT RUMOR: Commissioner's Court is Party affiliated and holds the purse strings in Harris County. I'm sure the Democratic members would be more than willing to share what they know.FACT NOT RUMOR: IT'S TOO EXPENSIVE to create a P.D. office. Can't "cut the budget" & create a P.D. Office at the same time. Even if created without a conspiracy, a P.D. office would still have to be substantially be on par with the D.A.'s Office, IE: Lawyers, support staff, investigators, salary, health insurance, retirement benefits, etc...Presently local lawyers cover all this for themselves. SUGGESTION TO (Anon: 10:13): Rather than "stirring the pot" a week before an election with an anonymous politically charged accusation, get all your facts straight first, then write back with some FACTS. "WE ALL" here in this forum -Democrat, Independent & Republican - anxiously await your response.
FACT NOT RUMOR: Last Fall at a Democratic Judicial candidate meeting, Sen. Ellis personally asked all present if they would support by voice vote their Party's support of the creation of a Public Defenders Office in Harris County. With the exception of one candidate everyone else voted Yeh. - even though the majority of these candidates, just like some of their R opponents in open races, ARE ALL on the County "Tit" getting appointments. I mean really...WHO is going to stand up to Sen. Ellis at a major political judicial meeting of his party on this issue? ===========================You are not saying every Dem candidate agrees with a PD, just the ones present at this meeting, right? And you are not saying that all the Dem candidates were at the meeting either right? To be clear on these FACTS.Nor are you saying that the Dem candidates that have said they like the idea of a PD, want a 100% PD, right?
Dear Anon. 11:03 AMFrom Anon. 10:13 AMYou sound defensive (no pun intended). So with all the double negatives YOU must be saying you agree with the underlying premise of the "FACT" as being TRUE. Otherwise, why would you be so guarded and defensive about either 1) A specific tally of who voted how, & 2) Making sure everyone knows "some" Democratic candidates might not have been present.If having a Public Defender's Office is NOT such a great idea, why is Mr. Ellis and his Party making it such a LOUD Party Platform? If you are a candidate who does Ct. App-ts. & you are a "D" - do YOU agree with your political party & Sen. Eilis's stance on this matter? If you were present at the meeting in the Jury Assembly room last Fall why didn't you vote NAY. THAT'S, what I'm saying how about YOU?
Just reminding everyone, this is not a discussion of a public defender office, VOTE and vote Tuesday if you have not voted. And vote for qualified candidates. Some of the most important are the 180th and CCCL 13 races. Get out and vote for Marc Brown and Don Smyth.
I agree with get out the vote for Marc and Don but don't forget about Ct 3. Everyone is always so focused on Dexter and Palmer getting a bench they are not qualified for that you are forgetting about WOOD in Ct 3. Heck, at least Dexter and Palmer have practiced a moments worth of criminal law, good or bad. Wood has not. Go vote!
Anon 4:33 sorry I forgot, get out and vote in CCCL 3 and not for Wood. There are two very good candidates, Hart and Fleming. Pick one and vote.
I have worked with both Fleming and Hart. I supervised Natalie Fleming for a time and am very familiar with both Cary Hart and Natalie and their work at the District Attorney's office while I was there. Natalie is a super nice person, but Cary is far the better attorney. I am surprised though that the Blue Hairs are not aggresively pushing Natalie because of her husband, Michael Feleming, former co.atty. I recommend a vote for Cary Hart. She was a very talented prosecutor, and I assume is an equally talented defense attorney.
Joe Licata is the man for CC 3. Not a long time prosecutor and a lot of experience. He will not go along with the Public Defender or anything else .The rest will go along because they have been on county payroll.
Anon 11:23,Fine if you support Joe. He is a good guy. But it is a lie for you to say the rest will "go along" because they were on the county payroll. You want to talk about how Joe is the man? Fine but don't go lying about the rest. You must have never met Cary to say something like that. And as for him not being a long time prosecutor, well, he sure wants people to think he was. Listen to his commercial where it says he has spent 31 years as a prosecutor and defense attorney. He spent 3 years as a prosecutor in the early 80's but his commercial makes sound like more than that. Why? Because he knows that is what the Republican voters want to hear. At least he and Cary can say they have done both though. They are the only 2 in the race that can say that. He is qualified, no question. But so is Cary. Again, talk up Joe all you want but don't go fibbing anyone else.
Double your vote and take an "ignorant" friend!!! Do whatever you need to do, but VOTE DAMMIT!!
Anon 6:52,"Listen to his commercial where it says he has spent 31 years as a prosecutor and defense attorney. He spent 3 years as a prosecutor in the early 80's but his commercial makes sound like more than that. Why? Because he knows that is what the Republican voters want to hear."Really? What about the Republican Blue Hair perception that veteran prosecutors are corrupt in Harris County? Just sayin'
Anon 7:44,Then why is he so deceptive in his commercial? Why not yell from the roof top that he has been a criminal defense attorney for the last 25+ years? Nothing wrong with that. Nothing at all. But that is not what he says. The point was you want to make yourself or your candidate into something they are not, fine but don't LIE about the others.
Yesterday KNTH had 180th candidates on for a Q & A. Danny did not show, what happened?
Anon 5:17,A lie is a lie regardless whose credentials are referenced.The GOP couldn't care less about genuine credentials any more than the Democrats. It is all about party dominance and has absolutely nothing to do with integrity or qualifications.I feel your frustration and am glad that many other good and fair people are starting to become more active in the political process. If more of us start to walk the walk and not settle for just talking the talk we have a real chance to chip away at the insidious corruption that has taken over not just Harris County. Until very recently, I never used to vote in primaries; let alone runoffs. I used to vote for candidates simply because they had an R after their name. I used to vote for candidates because their name sounded good or familiar. I was unduly influenced by bought and paid for political endorsements. I never took the time or effort to educate myself on the actual qualifications of the candidates....there were just too many.I used to be the clueless poster boy you righteously condemn.My hope is that if someone as entrenched in their ways as me is now so mad at what is going on in their community and country that they actually act and not settle for quiet discontentment.The time is NOW to stand up for what you believe in. Obama and Lykos are not what is wrong with our country and county; it is us, the voters, who are either too apathetic or too easily influenced by corrupt values.
Well said, Black Ink. You are correct in your bottom line assessment of the party. It is on us, the public, to do something about it. The question remains, will we?Anon 5:17
can I vote twice ???
Anon 5:17,The answer is NO.Anon 10:00,If you're a convicted felon, in this country illegally, a subscriber to the Houston Chronicle, an unemployed government dependent, or registered to vote through ACORN.....then you can vote as often as you choose.
Post a Comment