Thursday, October 7, 2010

Black Ink's Latest

Black Ink has a new blog post that you can read here.

The post is excellent in its own right.

Black Ink's comment at 8:17 a.m. is downright inspiring.

13 comments:

Anonymous said...

Well it's obvious little Jimmy Leitner doesn't go out for breakfast. Who knew?

Anonymous said...

I know you're impressed with that guy, especially when he tees off on Lykos, but honestly his posts are childish in the extreme.

Wouldn't you agree that if there is a case backlog, sometimes going back decades, and the HPD has proven that it cannot be trusted with the crime lab, which we know is the case, that a prosecutor would be showing good leadership to help start a regional crime lab?

Look, I don't like Lykos either. But she's right on that issue. She should also work to coordinate things like mental health courts, because like juvenile cases, it's a particular category that requires more than your average prosecution. Because a DA can choose how those are charged, she'd be the right person to lead on that too.

Black Ink was no doubt championing the veteran's court, which as a veteran I feel is a crock, just because it deals with veterans and he has some sort of "wish I was shooting people in the service" fetish. But he decries her use of mental health courts and says it's not her job? Doesn't make sense.

Anyway, using words that are above his vocabulary doesn't mean he uses them well.

Rage

Anonymous said...

A regional crime lab would require all interested parties in dividing up the costs and establishing protocols that worked in the interests of justice. As it stands, no one should hold their breath waiting for that to happen because whatever popular view of Houston's crime lab you believe in, the state has swept far worse under the rub, as have most major cities and the feds.

You want good science, leave the worries about cost for later. You want timely results, pony up far more resources without the "do more with less" slogans at campaign time. Lykos only plays the issue since she has no statutory responsibility in paying for it, can Monday morning quarterback the rest of those in charge of such ideas, and knows that no matter what happens, she can get some mileage out of it; much like the dead youth story.

Anonymous said...

I don't care who pays or who gets mileage out of it. And your statement about a "popular view" of the crime lab is bullshit. It doesn't matter if other issues have been swept under the rug--we know about our issues and we need it fixed. Does it serve justice to have 20 year old rape kits waiting to be tested? Absolutely not. So let her get mileage out of it, but let's get it done.

Rage

Anonymous said...

Rage,
you don't care who pays unless it's you; the same as most people. All the public entities that could jump on this in the interest of justice throw their collective hands in the air when it comes to where the money will come from and who will have the power to run it. Lykos beats it to death simply because chumps carry her water and she knows that the city won't pay for a regional system unless it saves them money, nor will the county toss in half what it should unless it gets control, both for the obvious reasons.

As far as your contention about the city lab(s), they performed tens of thousands of tests and a handful showed mistakes. There is no perfect science and the price tag for perfection is infinite. The rape kits weren't processed primarily due to cost and lack of an in-custody suspect to compare the results against. In more recent years, there have been databases set up to allow for more reliable comparisons but they are still relatively new.

The same money used on testing those kits could be used on measures that could actually develop leads in those cases but as the city has repeatedly proven, it refuses to cut other spending or institute higher taxes for the tiny increase in clearance rate such a program would provide (only now, under great political pressure, has it deemed a need to toss major money out the window on these efforts).

The fact is, DNA testing without any other leads is largely a waste of resources. By all means, when they have a suspect they should test but it isn't the most cost effective way to solve cases (nor is DNA a smoking gun as has been suggested).

Anonymous said...

Anon 1:18,

Nice effort, but even if you dumb it down for Rage, it's impossible for her to see the big picture.
The poor gal just wants to be relevant so desperately.

Anonymous said...

you don't care who pays unless it's you; the same as most people.

Wrong. I'm perfectly willing to pay more taxes to help fund it. I'm also for paying more so that the DA's office can pay a competitive wage, so that the only people that were, when I graduated, willing to meet their terms (a three year contract at about $33,000 a year) aren't the bottom of the barrel.

But you wouldn't have a job then, so I can see why you;d be against better hiring criteria.

Nice effort, but even if you dumb it down for Rage, it's impossible for her to see the big picture.
The poor gal just wants to be relevant so desperately.


You still hate women? Your mama would be proud that you're using gender as an insult.

Rage

Anonymous said...

Rage,

1. Well since you're too timid to reveal your identity how does anyone really know whether you pee standing or sitting?
2. How is referencing a gender neutral individual as a female insulting unless the individual being so identified has an underlying contempt for women?
3. Being a prosecutor is not a money issue so you would not understand why very talented people choose the career.
4. You obviously don't have enough talent or money to make a difference in public policy at any level.
5. Sounds like you need to woman up buddy because if you're not a girl I'm sure your boss is and hence the resentment.

Anonymous said...

1. Well since you're too timid to reveal your identity how does anyone really know whether you pee standing or sitting?

Says anonymous! I tell you what, I'll make you the same deal I made Arthur Seaton, and now Black Ink, both of who were too chickenshit to take me up on it--you put your name out there, and I'll put mine.

2. How is referencing a gender neutral individual as a female insulting unless the individual being so identified has an underlying contempt for women?

Because you know I'm a man, and think calling me a woman will offend me. As a woman, I'd still have more balls than you, and it just shows your pettiness.

3. Being a prosecutor is not a money issue so you would not understand why very talented people choose the career.

There are some true believers. Most that I know took the job because they had to. You sound like one of those. What was your GPA and law school?


4. You obviously don't have enough talent or money to make a difference in public policy at any level.

You'd be pretty interested to know what policies I've helped change. Some that even affect your job, assuming you're a prosecutor.

5. Sounds like you need to woman up buddy because if you're not a girl I'm sure your boss is and hence the resentment.

I have no resentment at all. In fact, if you know some girls (who don't laugh at you on a regular basis), send 'em my way. I'd be glad to cozy up to some new ones.

Rage

Anonymous said...

Someone please pass the popcorn...

Anonymous said...

Dear Rage,

The manner in which you interact on this and other blogs such as Grits for Breakfast demonstrates your pathetic desire for relevance.
Meaningless postering will never substitute for accomplishment....a trait you share with Pat Lykos.
The only reason you remain anonymous is because you are a cowardly instigator.
Your job has nothing to do with your identity only your perceived importance.
Your final reference to sexual gratification will never replace your actual lonely delusions.
An anonymous individual who consistantly attempts to bolster his self image on a blog is obviously lacking significant credentials in the real world.
The term for you "Rage" is grow up.

Harold Simons

Anonymous said...

"Wrong. I'm perfectly willing to pay more taxes to help fund it. I'm also for paying more so that the DA's office can pay a competitive wage, so that the only people that were, when I graduated, willing to meet their terms (a three year contract at about $33,000 a year) aren't the bottom of the barrel. But you wouldn't have a job then, so I can see why you;d be against better hiring criteria." Rage in yet another personal attack

I'm not an ADA, nor have I ever been one or aspire to become one. I didn't call you out on your anonymity nor did I insult whatever pay you make yet you jump the gun regarding all sorts of things.

I am just another citizen trying to make a living that sees wasteful government practices differently than you. The cost for a marginally better system has been presented to me and I took issue, as have many others when viewed without the left-leaning filters of the Chronicle.

Lykos rides this issue for the mileage alone, knowing it won't happen for previously stated reasons. She has already been seen milking the death of a youth for political gain so it comes as no surprise. Your support of her is not surprising either, especially given your agenda.

Like most people these days, I have healthy skepticism regarding government agencies but also towards those who so freely spend our tax dollars like rageful, drunken sailors on shore leave. If processing every piece of evidence to the fullest extent of forensic science regardless of other solvability factors floats your boat, so be it but the rest of the world doesn't think the cost makes sense.

Anon 1:18

Anonymous said...

Anon 1:18,

CSI is not just TV it is reality. Most inmates are innocent. It is better to spread the wealth and spend 1 billion dollars on every criminal case than to use common sense. Only ADAs and racists agree with you. All police are liars and evil. I am the greatest defense attorney that ever lived.

Rage