Wednesday, March 9, 2011

Lisa Falkenberg's Article from Yesterday

Most of you have probably already read this, but in case you missed it, the Chronicle's Lisa Falkenberg did a great article yesterday on the D.A.'s Office's handling of the Tata case.

In case you missed it, you can check it out by clicking here.


Anonymous said...

It was a great article Murray. There were also some poignant comments although I was surprised there were so few of them.

No doubt, the article had Lykos and the gang spinning like tops. You know how she hates bad publicity.

Anonymous said...

Pat Lykos' way of doing business is vicarious. Whether it's blaming others for her own inability or taking credit for the ability of others.

Lykos is nothing more than a polished politician and as such demonstrates why the DA must stand for something more than simply serving as a mouthpiece for political correctness.

Standing for doing the right thing because it is the right thing to do; regardless how tough or unpopular it might be is what a real DA does.

When a DA fails to appreciate that the buck stops with her and that the law applies equally to all........she fails her community.

Lykos has never personally prosecuted a criminal case in her entire life and really has no idea how the process works.
Even the most basic aspects of accepting criminal charges are a challenge for Lykos and this gross inexperience is responsible for what is now common knowledge chaos at the Harris County District Attorney's Office.

I must admit that I rarely agree with Faulkenberg's stance on the issues; but condemning her expose with a platitude such as what a Houston Chronicle commenter posted,"Gosh, I wish I was half as smart as Lisa thinks she is"; does not explain away how truly incompetent Pat Lykos has demonstrated her "leadership" to be.
I hope Lisa Faulkenberg continues her new path of putting our community above political correctness in her evaluation of the Harris County District Attorney's Office.....we'll just have to see.

Anonymous said...

So is Lykos next move to fire Steve Baldassano and be public about it?

Anonymous said...

Yes, please, let's have 40 more arm-chair, used-to-be or
never-were-prosecutors make comments about a case he or she doesn't REALLY know.

If you've ever worked in this field, you know the facts are never 100% accurate when you hear or read about them in the media.

There are always things you know that can't or shouldn't be "out there" on a pending case.

Anonymous said...

They won't take charges for a known crime and issue a warrant for a known offender, yet they issue warrants for probationers who's only crime is falling behind on their payments. They will spent $2000 in man-hours to put someone in jail for failing to pay a $50 fine. There is no justice in the Harris County justice system, it's all about the money. It's all fluff,spin, PR, and image; how it plays in the media.

Anonymous said...

Something is not adding up here, something has to be missing. Maybe Lykos would have no idea how to charge, um, anything, but not Baldassano. There has to be more we don't know.

Anonymous said...

The rumor is that nobody is willing to take any case unless it's an absolute slam dunk because Lykos has threatened to fire anyone who loses. Everybody's just too scared to talk about it. Pesky rumors.

Anonymous said...

Anon 5:51
I assume you're on community supervision. Since you pled guilty or no contest to an offense and were placed on probation or deferred adjudication, you are a "known offender". Just like when you buy a car or put that TV on "rent-to-own" and you fail to live up to your end of the bargain, the "man" comes to repossess. Only in this case, it's not a TV or a car, it's you.

As for Steve, he's a stand up guy. Lykos should be thankful he still works for the DA's office. The investigators for the HAB are solid as well. The problem lies with an inherent conflict between investigators who want to make arrests, and prosecutors who don't want a judge to throw out a case because of bad PC.

Hindsight is always 20/20.

jigmeister said...

I understand the ADA's can't write a probable cause warrant anymore. Maybe it's time to re-think giving up that valuable tool. Certainly would have given Arson investigators enough time to follow up on any loose ends Steve saw. Certainly sounds like probable cause existed.

Anonymous said...

Ok, I am confused. Lykos claims the DA's office is not an investigative agency but she hides the names of the investigators on the payroll because they might be engaged in undercover work. (No other DA ever hid the names of the investigators on the payroll) So either the DA's Office is an investigative agency and Lykos is properly protecting her investigators or the DA's office is not an investigative agency and Lykos is hiding public information.

If you want to see what I am referencing, just request the payroll records from the auditor's office and you will get a list showing the names and salaries of all the employees except the investigators. Only the investigator's salary is reflected without any name associated with the salary.

Anonymous said...

Any word on the rumored firings today at the DA's office?

Anonymous said...

Anon--investigators salaries have to be hidden, for important security reasons....the reason being that a crapload of them get paid a ton for doing far less than most DAs.

Anonymous said...

Sounds like sour grapes to me.

Anonymous said...

No sour grapes....$68,000 to be a glorified gofer seems a little ridiculous. We are short on investigative staff just as we are on prosecutors. But instead of finding and filling a spot with someone who can actually INVESTIGATE, we have a person paid 68,000 a year to pick up reports and medical records and take photos of her greatness. He can't tell you when someone's next court date is let alone find a witness or help investigate a crime. Political favors play hell with the budget.

Anonymous said...

Tough luck on your murder case Murray. On the bright side, a murderer gets to go to jail!

A Harris County Lawyer said...

Thanks for your post Anon 2:52 p.m.

I've made it a point to not post anything about my cases on this blog whether they were guilty, not guilty or hung juries because there is only so much a lawyer can do with the facts they have before them and I wouldn't ever want to seem like I was taunting my opponent.

It was a tough case and Flader did a good job with it. I am satisfied that I did everything I possibly could to represent my client and provide him with an excellent defense.

If you think that I'm embarrassed about the verdict, you would be wrong. I put my heart and soul into it and I can't think of anything I would have done differently if given the chance.