Wednesday, October 17, 2012

Why Lloyd Oliver's Candidacy Isn't Funny

If you are a Democrat planning on voting straight-ticket, I hope you will take a minute and read this post before you do.

If you push the button to vote straight Democrat, you are going to be voting for Lloyd Oliver for District Attorney, and I'm pretty sure you don't want to do that.  His stance on domestic violence is an affront to anyone who cares about women's issues.  If you aren't aware of that, please, read on.

The Democrats had a good candidate for District Attorney in former-prosecutor and now-defense attorney, Zack Fertitta.  The insanity of Oliver defeating Fertitta in the primary in May was so completely unexpected that even the Democratic Party tried to have Oliver removed from the ballot.  That same insanity should serve as a wake up call that on Election Day anything can happen.

At first, the reaction to Lloyd Oliver being the Democrat's candidate was kind of funny.  I'll admit it.  His bizarre comments on everything from his three previous indictments to boxing lessons to his firm policy of starting court at 1 p.m. every day were a funny contrast to the platform of a candidate who actually knew what he was doing.

Of course, it seems much less humorous if you realize that come January 1st, Lloyd Oliver could be the District Attorney with some help from straight-ticket voting.

In an article in the Chronicle this past Sunday, Brian Rogers wrote a very thorough article detailing Oliver's checkered past.  I would say his past was "controversial," but that would incorrectly imply that there was some controversy over whether or not Lloyd Oliver is a buffoon.

Oliver claims to be "Not for Sale" as the D.A. candidate, yet all three of his prior indictments are directly related to him using his legal experience to illegally obtain money.  Shortly after his primary election, I had to speak with him because his website falsely listed me as a supporter of his.  Oliver was pleasant, but all he could talk about was how much money he was about to receive from "some of these P.A.C.s" the Democratic Party had.  He was delighted and he was soon seen driving a new convertible BMW around Downtown.

I'm afraid that Oliver is very much for sale, and not for very high prices, at that.  If you think that doesn't matter, think about what a Lloyd Oliver D.A.'s Office would be like.  He's already expressed his disdain for the Public Defenders' Office (which, pound for pound, is one of the most talented groups of defense attorneys in the county).  I highly doubt he will give their attorneys the time of day.  Private sector attorneys who might want a better deal on their clients will doubtlessly have his ear.  Especially since he doesn't know what he's doing in the first place.

If Lloyd's questionable past and his lack of ethics don't concern you as a Democratic Voter, than you really need to pay attention to his stance on Domestic Violence.

By clicking here, you can see Lloyd's March 29th performance on Reasonable Doubt, where he first describes his plan to dismiss domestic assault cases in favor of teaching battered wives how to box.  I was one of the interviewers at the time and was dumbfounded that any upright mammal would make such a stupid comment.  Surely, Lloyd Oliver would backtrack on his statement, right?  It was just a misstatement, wasn't it?

Nope.  On the campaign trail, Lloyd Oliver has held fast to his belief that domestic violence is not a big issue in this country and should simply be handled through combat.  In a recent episode of Red, White and Blue, he even went so far as to state that "part of [some couples] making love is [to] beat up one another first."

The idea of Democratic voters crossing Party lines to vote for Republican Candidate Mike Anderson isn't just mine.  Read the details of Chronicle columnist Patricia Kilday Hart's article on some of Lloyd's previous antics.  Read Ms. Hart's article about Lloyd's Domestic Violence stance here.  Political blogger Charles Kuffner (who tends to run a little on the Liberal side) even advocates voting straight-ticket Democrat and then going back to de-select Oliver.

I've never been a fan of straight-ticket voting.  I've been voting since I first became eligible twenty two years ago, and I've never once done it.  To believe that there aren't excellent candidates on both sides of the aisle is pure foolishness.

That has never been more clear in this year's Harris County District Attorney's race.

27 comments:

Anonymous said...

The insanity of Oliver defeating Fertitta in the primary in May was so completely unexpected that even the Democratic Party tried to have Oliver removed from the ballot.

That's not why they tried to remove him. Fertitta lost in a fair fight and no party will try to unwind a primary just because they don't like the result. When he endorsed a Republican, he went too far in the eyes of the party.

yet all three of his prior indictments

Innocent until proven guilty, right? Right? Bueller?

I'm afraid that Oliver is very much for sale, and not for very high prices, at that.

Based on campaign contributions that could not make it to his personal bank account? And you even kind of imply that he's using that money to buy the BMW? That's (at best) misleading.

And how much money has Anderson received in contributions again? Because if campaign funding is your metric of corruption, Anderson has Oliver beat.

I highly doubt he will give their attorneys the time of day.

As opposed to the current stance on defense attorneys, as evidenced by the ADAs who post here, that "all prosecutors are good and all defense attorneys are scum." That's a paraphrase, but it's true to the content of the posts around here.

describes his plan to dismiss domestic assault cases in favor of teaching battered wives how to box

Without a doubt, this statement was inexcusable.

On the campaign trail, Lloyd Oliver has held fast to his belief that domestic violence is not a big issue in this country and should simply be handled through combat.

Now this statement has some artistic license to it. He did say that many instances should not be prosecuted. He has said that education and treatment should be increased. Although some people around here don't want to believe I've ever handled criminal cases, I have handled about half a dozen family assault cases, every one of which was dismissed because the witness recanted or refused to show up in court--because an investigation into the facts showed that they were lying in the first place. It most often happens during a break up or divorce, but it is not uncommon in general for false physical abuse allegations to be made. There are lots of valid indictments, but lots of invalid ones, too, and the ADAs I've dealt with in these cases were gung-ho and ready to prosecute even in the face of sworn discovery responses or testimony in civil/family cases where the accusation was recanted, or in the face of a witness who continually refused to show for court. It happens. And prosecutors do not use their "discretion" to "do justice" nearly as often as they would have you believe.

he even went so far as to state that "part of [some couples] making love is [to] beat up one another first."

Yeah, well, I once dated this feisty Armenian...

Never mind.

The idea of Democratic voters crossing Party lines to vote for Republican Candidate Mike Anderson isn't just mine.

How could it be? Plenty of Dems cross party lines, especially in the South. Hell, most Southern Republicans used to BE Democrats.

even advocates voting straight-ticket Democrat and then going back to de-select Oliver.

But not voting for Anderson.

I believe that Oliver will continue to prosecute the domestic violence cases that matter. I just believe he's an idiot with no language skills. And I think that the damage Anderson will do to Harris County is far worse, so I'm not changing my vote.

Rage


Anonymous said...

And, Rage. None of us care what you think.

Anonymous said...

People who do not want to see Lloyd Oliver elected are well within bounds to discuss his legal knowledge and strategy, his proposed policies and the like. If you are going to talk about his criminal record it would be worth noting that one case was No Billed on one of the three cases that went to the grand jury. He had his case dismissed after indictment and without trial in another case and he received an instructed verdict of not guilty in another charge. He has not been found guilty of any financial impropriety and none of these disposed of cases made it to a jury decision before being washed out of court. Good for him that he was able to buy or lease a nice BMW. If anyone can show that he obtained it with money obtained illegally or unethically they should do the voters a service and put that information out there. It seems there was never a crime committed as it would appear that the cases were lacking if a Grand Jury did not indict one, the DA dismissed one and a judge directed a verdict of not guilty in another. If he were a better lawyer these records would be expunged or maybe he likes to refer to the prosecutions from time to time to show how the DAO regardless of whom is at the helm wastes time prosecuting non crimes and wastes resources on issues with no victims due to petty payback for hurt feelings during the course of prosecutions. Yet these same DA's will not properly prosecute officials (usually gung ho police officers who could not tell you what the 4th Amendment says) who assault citizens, violate their Constitutional rights and then get caught lying about it with no meaningful repercussions. I am certain that that won't change under a Mike Anderson. It may take a less talented defense oriented Prosecutor to consider issues like Brady and exclusionary rules as due process and not merely as bumps in the road to a conviction.

Anonymous said...

You commenters are giving Olive far too much credit for knowing anything about the law. He may have the mechanics down to handle small, simple cases, but this is NOT a man who ponders the impact of his actions, who discusses policy that follows the law, or who wants anything more than a steady paycheck for 4 years. He has only HIS interests in mind as he campaigns for the job of District Attorney--a job of service to OTHERS.

Anonymous said...

Lloyd Oliver is advocating that the DA's office confine their prosecution to those persons who are actually abusing their spouses. He is accurate when he states that most of the domestic violence investigations should be resolved with some counseling. Lloyd Oliver is not for sale. Mike Anderson is already bought and paid for. I find that scary. The quotes in Brian Rogers article show that some defense attorneys are motivate solely by their own personal interest, when it comes to supporting a candidate. Randy Shaffer, who has never made his living off the government was positive about Lloyd's ability to do the job. Bob Moens, who depends on government appointments, was critical of Lloyd. That just goes to show that Lloyd is an outsider. The fact that he is an outsider is what frightens people who are benifiting from the Holmes-Rosenthal dinasties. Lloyd Oliver only proposes that Harris County be practical about where the County invests its limited resourses. That means refraining from prosecuting domestic cases where it appears that the incidents can be resolved better with counseling.

Anonymous said...

Anon 12:53 aka Donnie,

It was Kent Schaefer, not Randy and Kent was being facetious you dimwit. Bob Moen does not take court appointments either. Lloyd is an outsider because he is a nut case.

Anonymous said...

Just getting the other point of view out there, 11:30. That it happens to be accurate, I know, is not something you will ever care about.

Rage

On another note, it took me three tries to prove I'm not a robot. Close one.

Anonymous said...

I think Oliver's BMW buy was on the plan that he will lose and then continue promoting himself as a "former DA candidate" to unsuspecting defendants who don't know better and probably didn't pay close attention to the voting. If he wins, well he keeps the BMW and hires Lykos and her crew to continue on in the office while he collects the paycheck. He's already said he has run in so many races for name recognition and I refuse to believe he actually wants to win this race....watch him on any program you've mentioned, its like a joke to him.

Anonymous said...

Rage, you really are an idiot if you think Lloyd Oliver would do less damage to HCDAO than Mike Anderson. And the mere fact that a candidate for the DA's Office has been indicted three times is enough to not even consider voting for him regardless if he has been convicted. You don't get indicted multiple times without there being major issues in your life.

Nyone who knows Lloyd also knows, Like the late Judge Jimmy James, that Lloyd is not only a buffoon, he truly is the slimiest lawyer in Harris County. He has held that position for many years and wears the appellation like a badge of honor. He is classless, obnoxious, and dishonest. If that's what you're looking for in a DA, then, by all means, vote for him.

Anonymous said...

candidate for the DA's Office has been indicted three times is enough to not even consider voting for him regardless if he has been convicted.

How about president and VP? Does it matter that Bush and Cheney had three CONVICTIONS between them?

Something tells me you see that as being OK.

You don't get indicted multiple times without there being major issues in your life.

Is "multiple times" the issue here? Ask Tim Cole, Michael Richard, the yogurt shop defendants, or countless others if an indictment means guilt.


Don't bring a knife to a gun fight son.

Rage

Anonymous said...

Rage,
You're comparing apples to oranges. Lloyd is running to be the top law enforcement person in the county. People who strive to uphold the law don't rack up a bunch of indictments and wear them like a badge of honor.

Anonymous said...

OMG Rage and they allow you to vote, now that is scary.....

Surely your kidding, you can't be that stupid...

Anonymous said...

FYI---

I heard a rumor that Rachael Palmer gave $500 to Robert Talton's campaign in return for his promise of a job. Robert Talton is running for Harris County Attorney and promised to run an ethical campaign. Hmmm..... Where is a special prosecutor when you need one?

Apparently Palmer is not the only one trying to align with Team Talton, least of all we forget poor Lana Shadwick....

Well in any event, it seems clear that the Hoopster, Rachel and Shadwick are all doubling down on their exit strategy for either a job with Oliver and or Talton.



Meanwhile the Hoopster is out campaigning for Oliver.

Oh by the way, Robert Talton can't even afford to pay for his current secretary, but don't despair, he promised her a job too.

Anonymous said...

Murray,
The letters and numbers we have to type to prove we are not a robot are getting more and more illegible. it is a pain. Anything you can do about it?

Anonymous said...

So, as a defense attorney, Mr. Oliver is free to comment on the physique of women and question the sexuality of others. As an elected district attorney, wouldn't that sort of behavior violate not only Harris County Personnel Regulations (which include elected officials) but also subject the county to potential liability?

Anonymous said...

There are two buffoons pictured in the Houston Press article and they both have plenty in common:

Lloyd Oliver and Jared Woodfill. Totally shocking that they both won their primary election.

Anonymous said...

There are plenty of reasons to vote for Mike Anderson or to vote against Lloyd Oliver other than indictments that never resulted in convictions. The lack of convictions say more about the DA's actions than anything about Lloyd.

Anonymous said...

4:40, you think the President's criminal history means less than a DA candidate's?

As for apples and oranges, the President is the chief executive--you know, that branch in charge of enforcing the laws? The executive branch is the one to which all prosecutors belong.

Not surprising you'd try to rationalize your failed moral decisions.

Rage

Anonymous said...

I went on the District Clerk's site and found 1 indictment for bribery of a witness(directed verdict of acquittal), 1 indictment for Barratry dismissed before trial, and 1 No Billed Barratry charge. Is this third indictment in another county? Expunged? Sounds to me like some ADAs were ticked off at him for not kissing the ring and pleading cases to keep things easy for everyone.

Anonymous said...

Anonymous 12:47-
You obviously are misinformed to reach your conclusion about "ring kissing" as part of the protocol for prosecuting Lloyd Oliver.

Lloydmhas drawing the attention of law enforcement for many years because of his total lack of legal morals. He loves to push the limit as if he enjoys narrowly getting away with criminal behavior.

I know you're not Don because you can spell three letter words. The way you defend Lloyd, I'm guessing you might be his boyfriend.

Anonymous said...

Examples??? And regarding barratry, it never ceases to amaze me how when something is done through government there is no moral problem with it. Some jack ass contributes to a judges campaign and get on his appointment list and that is not barratry. The state outlaws gambling, but runs a lottery...countless examples. Parts of Barratry laws have been struck down as unconstitutional. The rest need to fall as well. Civil disobedience is sometimes needed to strike down bad laws that are in place merely to protect turf. The way you attack Lloyd with nothing to back it up, sounds like you may have been jilted by him. Just move on...you can get over it.

A Harris County Lawyer said...

Anon 8:49,

Your defense of barratry is very touching. Civil disobedience? Really?

So, you're okay with someone who just bonded out of jail being met at the door of the jail by someone who isn't a lawyer. That non-lawyer tells the recently released defendant that they have their lawyer on the phone and hands them a cell phone. That lawyer charges some cut-rate charge and proceeds to do virtually nothing on their case other than pocket their money and plead them out without even analyzing the case.

You consider that "civil disobedience?" What else is "civil disobedience?" Robbery? Murder? Rape?

Anonymous said...

I certainly would not defend an attorney doing nothing on a case that he takes, but if you stick to the subject of barratry there is very little difference between that and court appointments who often do exactly the same thing justified of course by the cut rate charge and that they get their business from a judge instead of a guy on a cell phone outside of the jail. Going through a judge makes barratry so much more moral. It used to be that direct mail was barratry...until about '94 when someone challenged the Constitutionality of the law. Are you aware of specific reliable facts that Lloyd stationed a guy outside the jail with a cell phone to solicit business? And following taking a retainer did nothing but attempt a quick plea without evaluating possible defenses? If so I believe you have a duty to report this unethical behavior to the bar. I just don't hear anyone saying something like they heard or saw Lloyd do something specific that is unethical or illegal. And I don't see his clients blogging about his lack of effort on their cases. Where are the ADA's with stories of his pleading cases that should have been winners for his clients? I just keep hearing comments that he is unethical, skirts the law...with no examples or facts to back it up. Just classic ad hominem argument. That is why lawyers are considered to be modern day sophists. Come on Rage...jump back in here.

Anonymous said...

It's too early for that much hyperbole, Murray.

Rage

Anonymous said...

Come on Rage...jump back in here.

Who the fuck are you, and why would I help your sorry ass out?

Rage

Anonymous said...

Rage, I'll post my name if you post yours. I don't need your help. Just respect a lot of what you say on this blog and the way you say it even when you act like a sorry ass:-).

Anonymous said...

The turds who blog here may be too young to remember when Lloyd Oliver and Lee Burrows respectively were the prosecutor and municipal judge for the, now defunct, speed
trap of Patton Village. That is public knowledge as reported in one of the local newspapers. I will wait till he gets elected to tell what failed to make the papers.