Merry Christmas

I want to take a day off from politics and Grand Juries and wish everyone in my little CJC family a very Merry Christmas!


Anonymous said…
And to you and your family.

Edward D. Porter
Todd Dillon said…
Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year, Murray.
Anonymous said…
Merry Christmas, have a safe warm love filled holiday and an excellent new year.

Anonymous said…
Merry Christmas Murray. My most heart felt wish of holiday cheer and safe journey over you and your family - especially you and your son -


Old "Saint Anonumous"...
Anonymous said…
A very Merry Christmas to everyone!

Anonymous said…
Merry Christmas. May you get the most dazzling array of socks ever!
Anonymous said…
Merry Christmas and Happy New Year, Murray. Merry Christmas to everyone else too.

Republican Activist
Thomas Hobbes said…
Running late, but it's never too late to wish a Merry Christmas!
Anonymous said…
Merry Christmas and a favorable New year to you and yours! Thanks for what you do to put out this blog to keep us up on what is really going on in the HC CJC.
A regular reader.
Anonymous said…
Wishing you very Happy Holidays Murray and hoping that by the end of 2012, the need to make Anonymous posts will have ended!

Ding Dong!
Anonymous said…
off topic:

The G.J. could "split the baby" and not indict anyone yet as the State G.J. handbook Reads:

"The grand jury may also make reports to the district court on conditions in the county or the misconduct of an individual."

This is a PUBLIC RECORD. It won't specifically say who said what, but is could be a DINOMITE of a G.J. PSI - so to speak!

Merry Christmas
Anonymous said…
Given all the attention this whole situation has gotten - though possibly unpresidented in harris County - this is the least the G.J. could do id they choose to not Indict. Objectively, it could "cut" either way. But with the way the D.A.'s Office has basically played delay games and witnesses "hiding" out, taking the 5th that yes IS a Constitutional Right but not a Right one typically thinks of a prosecutor taking when they are not the target of an Investigation and possibly the G.J. is just trying to "follow the trail" to see where it leads.

Sure Ms. A.D.A who gets a drug case personally - take the fifth - drink a 5th. But a supervisor of 15 CCCL court prosecutors who are ALL doing their best to seek justice and not merely convict sees their fearless leader - taking the 5th regaridn this whole Breath Test BAT VAN stuff AND the ELECTED D.A. LITERALLY HIDING from the media unless there is some puff feel good news conference to give not involving herself - NONE OF THIS IS LEADERSHIP!

All of it IS being arrogant, obstinant, and obstructionist! God Bless the individual prosecutors assigned to each court just trying to do the right thing - with NO leadership!

At a minimum 185th G.J. the Public needs a report - even if it cuts the other way.

And to the Media - The way pat Lykos has ignored you during this very serious investigation - shame on you if you give her the light of a camera at any bullshit press conference!
Anonymous said…
After Leitner testified in the GJ for three hours he met behind closed doors with Lykos. I'm sure the questions the Grand Jury asked gave him a pretty good idea of who is the target and what potential offense they are considering. I'm also sure he didn't violate the secrecy admonition he was given in the GJ and reveal any of this to Lykos....right!
Jigmeister said…
Merry Christmas and Happy New Year all. This year has been interesting and just guessing, but next year might prove more so. cob
Anonymous said…
Is there an Urban Dictionary entry for DA-llatio? If not, there should be.
Anonymous said…
Political season is in the air.

Evidently Kenny Rodgers, a Lykos' insider when she came into the office, has been banished to the Juvenille division.

Guess his outspoken distaste for the Admin's ignorance and arrogance couldn't be tolerated any longer.

Fine example of retaliation by this Admin.
Anonymous said…
@ Anon 4:50, there isn't one but you can be the first to write one :)
Anonymous said…
20-25 new prosecutors going through orientation in January....any truth to this?
Anonymous said…
Cunnalykos??? Do you think that Oberg wasn't available, so she talked to DJ instead? He really delved into her deficiencies. One might think that he had jumped on the Lowry/Pollard (a/k/a Polland) train and was a paid endorser.....
Anonymous said…
Truth or Rumor?
Constable Jack Abercia Pct. #1 and Chief Deputy Michael Butler resigned last week?
Anonymous said…
Anyone know the status of the contempt hearing?
Murray Newman said…
Anon 10:42 p.m.,
I doubt the rumors of a 20-25 prosecutor "orientation" unless you are talking about Baby Prosecutor's school. That doesn't mean you are getting that many new people in January. It just means you are sending some of the rookies to school.

Anon 7:47 a.m.,
Haven't heard anything about Abercia, but nothing would surprise me these days.

Anon 8:24 a.m.,
I think the contempt hearings are still alive, but I don't know what is being done on them at the moment.

Regarding the Big Jolly puff piece that he did, I will be doing an article on that. Hopefully later today.
Anonymous said…
Thanks Murray, in the puff piece she says claims she hired these 20-25 new prosecutors and isn't just hiring the media reps, so thats why I had that question. I thought it was odd she would come out of hiding to do this interview and not talk to the regular news media.
Scott C. Pope said…
". I thought it was odd she would come out of hiding to do this interview and not talk to the regular news media."

Why on earth would she talk to the media rather than a built in support group such as that blog? She's not looking to be popular in the city. She's looking to get re-elected, and to accomplish that she has to preach to her base--not the general public. She wants to sell herself to the republicans, and the republican base at this point will back the incumbent. There's no better place for her to get what she wants than a right wing blog.

She wanted a mouthpiece, and she got one. She's very, very good at that.
Anonymous said…
At first I was pretty pissed at the Jolly piece, then I saw he did one on Mike on the 15th / Dec.. THAT one seemed to read pretty well - at first.

As a whole however - on balance - no question he supports Lykos. He also seems to be an outsider to the basic inner-workings of this Office. Mike's piece was very good at capturing the entheusiasm of Mike's conviction to run - yet -Jolly seemd stupified that it really should be somone who HAS at least been a prosecutor to recognize all the nuances of the Office.

He even seems to cast a shot across the bow of this blog in calling out all the Annon. comments made here. I hope your response refutes some of her accusations or puff remarks.

I think Jolly means well - but - he pretty well doesn't hide his loyalties on either piece. More politition, doesn't know much about prosecution management.

Please Murray go tit for tat on all the puff, and fluff he ate for lunch with P.L. - He is definitely more politition than prosecutor oriented.
Anonymous said…
Excellent point - Annon 8:51. Hows about a good ol Q & A press conference Pat? You know like the thing the other side does to you witness AFTER direct in TRIAL.
Anonymous said…
This person has some interesting observations of the BAT van issues:

On the blog - search under "harris county" "BAT" or "Lykos"
Anonymous said…
This is not only a criticism of the current administration - I have seen this type of thinking over and over in my career in criminal justice.

Sometimes we implement programs based on NO evidence, just based on a hunch, or based on a few experiences.

Example: DIVERT. They say it works because of the low rate of recidivism.

Well, OK - how do you know that?

I could say that the oak tree in my backyard keeps away elephants. How do I know? Well, I have an oak tree in my backyard AND I also have no elephants.

Get it?

Just because A and B exist, does NOT mean that A CAUSED B.

Any person who has take a basic research course can tell you that.

So - the only way to really know if DIVERT is the reason for the low recidivism rate is by doing an experiment. You would have to have two groups - both groups would qualify for DIVERT - one group would get DIVERT and one would not.

Assuming you followed basic research protocol (randomization, time, etc), only then would you know if DIVERT is the reason for the difference.

There is a theory that the people who qualify for DIVERT would not likely be rearrested. So, perhaps the ARREST is what makes the difference, not the program?

I don't have an answer for that, but if someone does, I'd sure like to know.
Anonymous said…
One more - to follow-up with the research question regarding DIVERT.

There are other factors at work - you'd have to control for those.

For example: Interlock Device - there is some research that says the device reduces re-arrest.

So - perhaps that is the thing that contributes to the low recidivism rate ALONG with the variables for entry into the program (no previous arrest, etc).

A researcher would have to do some sort of mutli-variate analyse to tease out how much each of the important factors played in the re-arrest rate: type of person who can even qualify for the program; effect of first-time arrest on re-arrest for this population (not all populations who get arrested for DWI); interlock device; counseling in the program; stigma of being on community supervision; motivational aspect of completing the program, etc.

The big idea here: It is hard to figure out what programs really work.

The problem: Many people in criminal justice who make the policy decisions are not trained to think this way.

I think many of us support these types of programs with the BEST of intentions. We think we're helping people.

But, we'd all be better served if we asked these types of questions before-hand. Or, we could hire researchers to answer these questions for us.

P.S. Here's another example: Boot Camp. How much time and money did we spend on that BEFORE we listened to the researchers who showed that didn't work?
Anonymous said…
Let's face it, the office is hiring attorneys picked by Chow. An individual who has no idea what it takes to be prosecutor or manager of people.

Who is the world is going to train them to be prosecutors? Lykos, Chow, Leitner, Vollman, Palmer? The blind leading the blind.

Frankly, this is just another example of an Admin with no real clue but self-gratification at the expense of HC citizens.
Anonymous said…
Scott Pope,

I thought the only mouthpiece she was interested was attached to Hanna Chow's snorkel.
Anonymous said…
It is surprising that David Jennings (Big Jolly) is pro-Lykos since Lykos is the darling of the insiders, such as Jared Woodfill. In 2010, Jennings was vehemently against Jared Woodfill's re-election. Woodfill and Lykos are extremely tight allies.

Jared Woodfill does not care that Lykos is unqualified for her position or that she is doing a terrible job. All that counts with him is that she has supported the party. Woodfill continually uses the county party to improperly back Lykos in a contested primary. Woodfill has been strongly admonished by the county party advisory committee for this but continues to do it anyway.

Jennings' backing Lykos is very inconsistent for him. Lykos is the ultimate insider. Apparently, Jennings has flipped to backing unqualified insiders now.
Anonymous said…
Does anyone have any information on Lykos initiating a grand jury to investigate the grand jury that is investigatimg her?
Murray Newman said…
No, Anon 2:04 p.m.,

Nobody has heard anything about a Grand Jury being organized to investigate the 185th Grand Jury.

That's probably because it isn't happening. It is nothing more than one of those silly Hooper-esque little veiled threats like the ones where he claims that a Federal Grand Jury is investigating.

The only difference between your threat and the Federal Grand Jury threats is that yours is coming from a Harris County computer. Now, most folks around the D.A.'s Office are too worried to post anything on this blog for fear of retaliation.

So my guess would be that you are such a good lap dog for Lykos that you feel quite free to make your threats from a work computer. Just sayin'.
Anonymous said…
Hopefully some of the baby prosecutors are in courts with good prosecutors who want to teach, train, and mentor the right way.
Anonymous said…
I look forward to your response to Big Jolly's puff piece. One clear difference between you & Dave is that you recognize that anything Hooper says is BS. Dave's problem is that he is a friend of Hooper's. Unfortunately his credibility declines when he quotes silly Hooper-esque vile untruths I quit reading Big Jolly when he published the flier that Hooper distributed under his Prop 1 organization trashing a candidate for city council (as revenge for a 5 year vendetta). The flier was 100% false and Dave gave Hooper the forum to take the despicable, untrue information prime time.
Just Sayin' said…
Anon 10:08,

Politicians and logic don't mix.

As a neonatal troll, Patsy Lykos suckled troll teats.
As an adult troll, Patsy Lykos' daily routine consists of inhaling 4 packs of unfiltered Camels and crushing liters of Jack & Coke.

Therefore, employing the "logic" of DIVERT outcome studies, trolls who breast feed as infants become chain smoking alcoholic adult trolls.

Just Sayin'
Anonymous said…
Therefore, employing the "logic" of DIVERT outcome studies, trolls who breast feed as infants become chain smoking alcoholic adult trolls.

This needs a Ralph Steadman illustration.

Anonymous said…
Murray, why do you even let that IDIOT Hooper post anything on here? Just cull his stupid rants and we don't have to put up with him anymore. I'm actually embarrassed for him.
Anonymous said…
Ralph Steadman is Rage's baby daddy and great grandson of Patsy "the Nefarious Troll" Lykos. So there we f'ing have it!!!
David Jennings said…
Hey, Murray, I swear I didn't mean to become the focus of your "Merry Christmas" comments! Really!

Couple of things. If "you all" think that my Lykos piece was a "puff piece" then I'm certain that you also thought that about my piece on Mike Anderson. Right? Because I approached both the same way.

I do not support one candidate or another. I just don't. I don't care if you believe that or not, I'm just telling you that you are wrong if you think or say that I do.

Let's see - Don Hooper. Yeah, I think of him as a "friend". We've never sat down and broken bread or shared a drink but in my various meetings with him he has not been (a) wacko or (b) disturbed or (c) looney or (d) anything but friendly. Are we best buds? No. But it happens that I like most people that I meet - Don is no exception. If that means that you will not read BJP, by all means, do not read BJP. Promise, it ain't gonna hurt me.

Me as a party "insider". That is almost too hilarious to comment on. I'll just say this: ask anyone that is even remotely connected with the official HCRP if I'm an "insider". Too funny.

Have I gone over to the dark side of the pay to play gang like Polland and Lowry and the gang? Laughable. This stuff comes straight out of my pocket, I've never made or expected to make a dime.

Re I oppose Woodfill, therefore I should be against anyone he supports. Nonsense. Never have I said anything remotely resembling that. Jared is a nice guy that has zero skills at running the party. I gave it my all in defeating him in 2010 - the voters said no. Not only my all, but $500 of my own money. Can any of you guys say the same? I lost, end of story. That doesn't mean that I hate the candidates that Jared likes.

About "anonymous commenters". That wasn't specifically addressed to Murray's blog, a blog that I personally like and read. And have linked from BJP for several years. And recommend to others. I just don't give much stock to anonymous commenters, be they here, the Chron, BJP, or anywhere else.

Murray knows more than most how much I despised the personal attacks on Kelly Siegler. We have actually talked on the phone! How about that!

But I'm not going to favor one candidate over another in this race as I did in 2008 UNLESS you can prove to me that one is better than another. I laid out DA Lykos' case - and look forward to Murray's rebuttal of my "puff piece". Although he won't be rebutting me, he will be rebutting DA Lykos.

Rather than just yell louder and louder that you hate her, why don't you guys provide some actual data to back up your attacks on her. For instance, about that yelling and cursing, really now, shouldn't that be an easy one for some of you guys?
Anonymous said…
Earlier posts re: Lykos expense reports - Curiosity got the best of me regarding Lykos expense reports - and I am now as concerned as previous poster(s) regarding our tax dollars at work. Lykos has two accounts 1) "Lykos, Patricia" & 2) "Lykos, Patricia R" Adding the accounts together Snookems has received $200,000 in reimbursements in 2010 & 2011. To compare, I looked at the County Attorney (<$12,000 for same time period - I hope someone follows up that can get an explanation for us!!
Anonymous said…
Mr Jennings,
What frustrates people the most is that despite reading all of the facts on this blog detailing how horrible she is and how many good people she has run off, you are still asking for evidence of why she needs to be defeated. Throw in her mishandling of the administrative side of the office and the fact that she isn't a prosecutor, ergo how can she manage them, and the question becomes: how can you or anyone else support her?
Sorry if you discount those of us who are forced to make anonymous comments or risked being fired or retaliated against. If you worked for her, you would do the same to preserve your job for your family's sake.
Anonymous said…
David, the fact that you are comfortable with Don Hooper and call him a friend is troubling. The man lost a paternity suit and still refuses to pay child support. He lives off his wife's income to avoid the obligation. We are at times judged by the company we keep. I do not think you have sold out. I think you are naive. Vote for Paul Simpson!
Anonymous said…
To the guy posting from a county computer:

You have to be one of the 10 people in the DA's Office that support her because no one would even look at Murray's blog, much less post from a Harris County computer. You even do it from Intake. I guess if a ADA can take the the Fifth, then you can do ever what you want to do.

Hope you'll be looking for a job on 1/01/2113 because you're not doing a very good job. Actually, you should have never been hired.

Sorry, get back to writing on this blog on county time. You don't even do that well, much less your job.
Anonymous said…
Big Jolly is absolutely right. Those of us employed by the HCDAO often use this blog to vent our frustrations. But there are Republican precinct chairs who read this blog and we can do a far better job of convincing them if we provide actual evidence as opposed to "we hate her because she is mean."

Here's a starter - Pat Lykos hates the death penalty. With only one exception that I'm aware of, all of her decisions to seek death have dealt with Penry cases (for those of you not familiar with criminal law, these are the cases where death penalty cases were reversed for the jury instructions that were given). She has let cop killers escape the death penalty, as well as people who murdered children.

Big Jolly, if you talk to the DAs handling the death penalty cases I believe you will be disappointed with how soft Lykos is on the worst of the worst. We know that since life without parole is now an option the death penalty is more seldomly sought everywhere. But compare how soft she is to other places and you will see that Lykos is far more similar to the "Yellow Dog Democrat" that the Houston Press described her as when she first ran for DA in 2000 than a true Republican candidate.
Anonymous said…
Hey Jennings,

Take some time and talk to some of the former employees. All her grand things and ideas were done by other people. She just took credit for it. I'd say talk to the current employees, but they are afraid to say anything. Obviously, you never worked for her because you'd hate her because she'd use and abuse you.
Anonymous said…
12/24/2011 8:28:
You are right about there being times when a number of ADAs left the office under Johnny Holmes. The difference was WHY they left. Invariably it was because they needed to make more money for their familys. Back then, a junior ADA made a pitifully small salary but they had learned to be great trial lawyers and left with a huge amount of integrity. Those same caliber ADAs that have left under Lykos have done so because of their integrity. Big difference.

Popular posts from this blog

Boss Ogg's Slate

Rent-A-Center & the Civil/Criminal Continuum

The 2022 Primary Elections