From Ellis McCullough today after a particularly hectic day of fighting with the CJC Elevators:
"I hope I live long enough to see this building imploded."
Well said, Ellis. Well said.
Tuesday, November 11, 2008
I'm Back
I've gotten a couple of comments on why I haven't posted lately.
No particular reason. Just didn't have a lot to say. I'm still taking in all of the ramifications of the November election and still trying to figure out what exactly happened at the Voting Booths.
I may post on those thoughts a little bit later.
But in the meantime, I thought I would let you guys know that I'm still alive.
No particular reason. Just didn't have a lot to say. I'm still taking in all of the ramifications of the November election and still trying to figure out what exactly happened at the Voting Booths.
I may post on those thoughts a little bit later.
But in the meantime, I thought I would let you guys know that I'm still alive.
Tuesday, November 4, 2008
The Election
Wow.
What a wild night. At the moment, I'm still rather speechless at the county-wide rejection of some of the finest Judges in the Country.
It is incredibly sad to me that Judicial Races still carry partisan titles with them, because that (and only that) is the reason the races ended today in the way which they did. Excellent judges were swept out by uninformed voters that pulled straight ticket. I'm still slightly confused by how one survived when the rest didn't (although I'm happy for Judge Ellis).
As I've discussed before (ad nauseum) the race for District Attorney was a tough one for me to evaluate. Ultimately, I'm satisfied that Lykos won the race, because I know that she will continue to prosecute as the job dictates that she should. I sincerely wish her luck in the job. It's not an easy one, and given the circumstances, it's going to keep getting tougher.
As for me, I believe that I will get up tomorrow morning and go do my job.
What a wild night. At the moment, I'm still rather speechless at the county-wide rejection of some of the finest Judges in the Country.
It is incredibly sad to me that Judicial Races still carry partisan titles with them, because that (and only that) is the reason the races ended today in the way which they did. Excellent judges were swept out by uninformed voters that pulled straight ticket. I'm still slightly confused by how one survived when the rest didn't (although I'm happy for Judge Ellis).
As I've discussed before (ad nauseum) the race for District Attorney was a tough one for me to evaluate. Ultimately, I'm satisfied that Lykos won the race, because I know that she will continue to prosecute as the job dictates that she should. I sincerely wish her luck in the job. It's not an easy one, and given the circumstances, it's going to keep getting tougher.
As for me, I believe that I will get up tomorrow morning and go do my job.
Sunday, October 26, 2008
The Race for Harris County District Attorney
It's been over six months now since Judge Pat Lykos defeated Kelly Siegler in the Republican Primary for the District Attorney's race, leaving her to face Democratic candidate and former Houston Police Chief Clarence Bradford in the November election. The last time I wrote anything definitive on the race was immediately on the heels of the run-off vote.
Many things have changed over the past six months. Time has passed and life has settled back down to a large degree -- just in time for everything to get all stirred up again for November! In the meantime, I'll try to take a little less emotional look at what is probably the most important race affecting those of us in and around the Criminal Justice Center.
In the wake of the Republican run-off, I, along with several other prosecutors had a sit-down meeting with Chief Bradford. I was impressed by his easy-going demeanor and his very apparent earnestness at explaining the direction he wanted to take the Office. He was very nice. He answered the tough questions about his past with HPD, and he stayed as long as we had questions. At the end of the meeting, I realized that he was a charismatic leader and I liked him very much.
The flak that Chief Bradford largely gets obviously comes from his time as Chief of the Houston Police Department, with the DNA Lab Scandal and the K-Mart Raid being the Top Two marks against him. It is true that some of the blame of those two events rests with Chief Bradford, but I don't think they should be the factors that are necessarily fatal to his campaign.
The crime lab was already in disarray long before he took over the helm of HPD. It is true that he didn't give the problems the proper attention that they deserved, but I think that he has gotten the lion's share of the blame without being the one most responsible for what happened there.
As for the K-Mart raid, you can count me as one of the citizens of the county that thought the motorcycle racers that regularly hung out at the K-Mart on Westheimer were a bad nuisance to the community. There was more than one occasion that I was driving on 610 when those bikers would all leave the parking lot and go jetting down the highway, causing chaos on the pavement. That raid needed to happen, and if it had gone as planned, it would have been loudly praised. Unfortunately, it got out of hand at the scene for whatever reason. Chief Bradford wasn't at that scene, and I think that we all know that sometimes the best laid plans can often go awry.
No, Chief Bradford's past with HPD does not concern me when looking at his ability to be District Attorney. There is also something to be said for his ability as a manager of large amounts of people in a major law enforcement entity in a large county. Those are relevant skills.
What does concern me about Chief Bradford as the elected District Attorney is that everything I hear him talking about on the campaign trail seems to have more to do with being well liked than creating an effective District Attorney's office. Yes, it would be great if the Harris County District Attorney's Office was the most beloved of all D.A.'s offices throughout the country, but unfortunately, that's not really the job description.
Bill Turner, the elected District Attorney in Brazos County (and someone I consider to be a mentor to me) once told me that "being the District Attorney is the slow alienation of your community". What he meant was that the District Attorney and the prosecutors under him or her have to make tough decisions, and those decisions are often unpopular with the people they affect. But that's part of the job. Everybody cheers the traffic cop who saves the citizen trapped in a burning car, but we'll be cussing his name the second he writes us a traffic ticket, won't we?
(As a side note, if you are reading this in Brazos County, please vote for Bill Turner. He's one of the greatest prosecutors I've ever seen and he makes my old hometown very proud).
The bottom line is that a person doesn't become the District Attorney to be loved. They are there to do a job and it is a job based on tough decisions that have to be made. Often times public opinion has to be set aside to do what is legally correct. Over-exerting yourself trying to be well-loved will set a leader up to doing the wrong thing in the name of popularity. I would rather hear from a candidate who is talking more about being tough on crime than talking about building a public defender's office. That's not the D.A.'s job, and Bradford's devotion to community relationships and public perception greatly concerns me.
The lack of familiarity with what the job entails for him concerns me greatly.
Judge Lykos actually does have that familiarity with the job description. It is also my firm belief that (all campaign slams against Kelly Siegler during the primary campaign aside) she knows that the Harris County District Attorney's Office is the best damn D.A.'s Office in the Nation. While Chief Bradford is talking about a complete dismantling and rebuilding of the Office, she knows that it is an Office filled with the most talented Public Servants in the world. It may need some tweaking, but it doesn't need the massive overhaul that Chief Bradford is promising.
She knows from her experience as a judge how the Criminal Justice System works from inside the courtroom. She knows that the basic structure of the Office is a pretty amazing system that day in and day out meets the needs of a very crime-ridden community. She knows the difference between cases that can be legally proven and those that can't. She also understands that being the District Attorney often means doing the unpopular thing in the name of Justice.
There is also the high likelihood that she will be bringing along Jim Leitner as a part of her upper-Administration. Awhile back, I took some pretty serious potshots at Jim, when I was feeling angry and disappointed with him over his endorsement of Lykos.
For that, I'm sorry. Jim Leitner is a good attorney and a good person. If a Lykos Administration brings Leitner with it, then that's a definite positive.
So, I'm caught in a bit of a Catch-22 here.
On a personal level, I like Chief Bradford a lot, and I would gladly work for him. On the flip side, I think that the way that Lykos ran her primary campaign drug our Office through the mud and it ran one of the greatest prosecutors in the Nation out of public service.
I spoke out about it then, and I don't regret that. I stood by my friend who I believed to be the best candidate for the job and I did it wholeheartedly. I wouldn't be the kind of person I want to be if I had handled it any different.
I would imagine that Pat Lykos will probably fire me (uh, if I actually work there) if elected.
That would be her Right.
But the election isn't about what's best for me. It's about what is best for Harris County.
You can pick at and blast me all you want, but I'm proud of being a member of the Harris County District Attorney's Office. Chuck Rosenthal was not a representation of what we stand for or how we conduct ourselves on a day to day basis. From the top to the bottom, that Office is filled with people that I'm proud to say I work with every day. What was needed to restore the reputation of that Office was for Chuck to leave, which he did. Look at how well the Office has done under the few short months that Ken Magidson has been in charge there.
Ultimately, I think that Pat Lykos is the better of the two choices for Harris County, as much as it pains me on a personal level to say.
The next four years are going to be really interesting, no matter what.
If it gets too bad, just remember this slogan:
AHCL in Twenty Twelve!
Many things have changed over the past six months. Time has passed and life has settled back down to a large degree -- just in time for everything to get all stirred up again for November! In the meantime, I'll try to take a little less emotional look at what is probably the most important race affecting those of us in and around the Criminal Justice Center.
In the wake of the Republican run-off, I, along with several other prosecutors had a sit-down meeting with Chief Bradford. I was impressed by his easy-going demeanor and his very apparent earnestness at explaining the direction he wanted to take the Office. He was very nice. He answered the tough questions about his past with HPD, and he stayed as long as we had questions. At the end of the meeting, I realized that he was a charismatic leader and I liked him very much.
The flak that Chief Bradford largely gets obviously comes from his time as Chief of the Houston Police Department, with the DNA Lab Scandal and the K-Mart Raid being the Top Two marks against him. It is true that some of the blame of those two events rests with Chief Bradford, but I don't think they should be the factors that are necessarily fatal to his campaign.
The crime lab was already in disarray long before he took over the helm of HPD. It is true that he didn't give the problems the proper attention that they deserved, but I think that he has gotten the lion's share of the blame without being the one most responsible for what happened there.
As for the K-Mart raid, you can count me as one of the citizens of the county that thought the motorcycle racers that regularly hung out at the K-Mart on Westheimer were a bad nuisance to the community. There was more than one occasion that I was driving on 610 when those bikers would all leave the parking lot and go jetting down the highway, causing chaos on the pavement. That raid needed to happen, and if it had gone as planned, it would have been loudly praised. Unfortunately, it got out of hand at the scene for whatever reason. Chief Bradford wasn't at that scene, and I think that we all know that sometimes the best laid plans can often go awry.
No, Chief Bradford's past with HPD does not concern me when looking at his ability to be District Attorney. There is also something to be said for his ability as a manager of large amounts of people in a major law enforcement entity in a large county. Those are relevant skills.
What does concern me about Chief Bradford as the elected District Attorney is that everything I hear him talking about on the campaign trail seems to have more to do with being well liked than creating an effective District Attorney's office. Yes, it would be great if the Harris County District Attorney's Office was the most beloved of all D.A.'s offices throughout the country, but unfortunately, that's not really the job description.
Bill Turner, the elected District Attorney in Brazos County (and someone I consider to be a mentor to me) once told me that "being the District Attorney is the slow alienation of your community". What he meant was that the District Attorney and the prosecutors under him or her have to make tough decisions, and those decisions are often unpopular with the people they affect. But that's part of the job. Everybody cheers the traffic cop who saves the citizen trapped in a burning car, but we'll be cussing his name the second he writes us a traffic ticket, won't we?
(As a side note, if you are reading this in Brazos County, please vote for Bill Turner. He's one of the greatest prosecutors I've ever seen and he makes my old hometown very proud).
The bottom line is that a person doesn't become the District Attorney to be loved. They are there to do a job and it is a job based on tough decisions that have to be made. Often times public opinion has to be set aside to do what is legally correct. Over-exerting yourself trying to be well-loved will set a leader up to doing the wrong thing in the name of popularity. I would rather hear from a candidate who is talking more about being tough on crime than talking about building a public defender's office. That's not the D.A.'s job, and Bradford's devotion to community relationships and public perception greatly concerns me.
The lack of familiarity with what the job entails for him concerns me greatly.
Judge Lykos actually does have that familiarity with the job description. It is also my firm belief that (all campaign slams against Kelly Siegler during the primary campaign aside) she knows that the Harris County District Attorney's Office is the best damn D.A.'s Office in the Nation. While Chief Bradford is talking about a complete dismantling and rebuilding of the Office, she knows that it is an Office filled with the most talented Public Servants in the world. It may need some tweaking, but it doesn't need the massive overhaul that Chief Bradford is promising.
She knows from her experience as a judge how the Criminal Justice System works from inside the courtroom. She knows that the basic structure of the Office is a pretty amazing system that day in and day out meets the needs of a very crime-ridden community. She knows the difference between cases that can be legally proven and those that can't. She also understands that being the District Attorney often means doing the unpopular thing in the name of Justice.
There is also the high likelihood that she will be bringing along Jim Leitner as a part of her upper-Administration. Awhile back, I took some pretty serious potshots at Jim, when I was feeling angry and disappointed with him over his endorsement of Lykos.
For that, I'm sorry. Jim Leitner is a good attorney and a good person. If a Lykos Administration brings Leitner with it, then that's a definite positive.
So, I'm caught in a bit of a Catch-22 here.
On a personal level, I like Chief Bradford a lot, and I would gladly work for him. On the flip side, I think that the way that Lykos ran her primary campaign drug our Office through the mud and it ran one of the greatest prosecutors in the Nation out of public service.
I spoke out about it then, and I don't regret that. I stood by my friend who I believed to be the best candidate for the job and I did it wholeheartedly. I wouldn't be the kind of person I want to be if I had handled it any different.
I would imagine that Pat Lykos will probably fire me (uh, if I actually work there) if elected.
That would be her Right.
But the election isn't about what's best for me. It's about what is best for Harris County.
You can pick at and blast me all you want, but I'm proud of being a member of the Harris County District Attorney's Office. Chuck Rosenthal was not a representation of what we stand for or how we conduct ourselves on a day to day basis. From the top to the bottom, that Office is filled with people that I'm proud to say I work with every day. What was needed to restore the reputation of that Office was for Chuck to leave, which he did. Look at how well the Office has done under the few short months that Ken Magidson has been in charge there.
Ultimately, I think that Pat Lykos is the better of the two choices for Harris County, as much as it pains me on a personal level to say.
The next four years are going to be really interesting, no matter what.
If it gets too bad, just remember this slogan:
AHCL in Twenty Twelve!
The Chronicle's Judicial Endorsements
The Chronicle made its judicial endorsements in today's newspaper on the 9 races up for grabs in the CJC.
I disagree with them on their endorsement of Reuben Guerrero over Bill Moore for reasons I've stated here, but other than that, I was kind of amused to see that we agreed on eight of the nine races.
I'm glad to see that the Chronicle editorial board has some sense.
But on the other hand, I feel like I've totally lost my street cred.
I disagree with them on their endorsement of Reuben Guerrero over Bill Moore for reasons I've stated here, but other than that, I was kind of amused to see that we agreed on eight of the nine races.
I'm glad to see that the Chronicle editorial board has some sense.
But on the other hand, I feel like I've totally lost my street cred.
Happy Birthday to My Best Friend
On a personal note, today is my little boy's third birthday.
In a world that is often very dark, he is truly a Bringer of Light.
I wish a very Happy Birthday to my Reason for Being, my Best Friend, and, pretty much, just my Everything.
I love you with all my heart, Little Man.
In a world that is often very dark, he is truly a Bringer of Light.
I wish a very Happy Birthday to my Reason for Being, my Best Friend, and, pretty much, just my Everything.
I love you with all my heart, Little Man.
Saturday, October 25, 2008
The 351st District Court Judicial Race
The race for the 351st District Court has Republican incumbent Judge Mark Kent Ellis facing Democratic candidate and defense attorney Mekisha Walker Murray. In this instance, my personal knowledge of Judge Ellis is only in passing, but Mekisha is a former prosecutor and a personal friend of mine.
Judge Ellis is an 8-year veteran of the District Attorney's Office, which he followed with 3 years of private practice. He has been on the bench since 1997. He has handled numerous death penalty Capital Murder trials and brings to the table eleven years of experience on the Bench. He is known as a very capable and intelligent judge who truly loves the law.
If anything, it could be said he might actually love the law a bit too much, as he is well known for spending upwards of about four hours during his portion of voir dire educating the jury panel on the "ins and outs" of how criminal law works. Now, this is often times rather aggravating to the prosecutors and defense attorneys (who are already quite familiar with the law), but Judge Ellis regularly gets compliments and thanks from the jurors who listen to his lecture. I don't think that anyone could make an argument that Judge Ellis is cutting any corners when it comes to ensuring well-educated jurors will end up on juries in his court.
In addition to his regular duties in the 351st, Judge Ellis is a former-member of the STAR Court judges dealing with defendants with substance abusers. In 2006, however, he switched from working in the STAR Court to being one of two judges supervising the Harris County Mental Health Court, which is a specialized court dealing with Defendants suffering from mental health issues.
I think that both prosecutors and defense attorneys alike can agree that dealing with mental health issues in the criminal court system is a complex and often troubling prospect. Everyone agrees that the criminal justice system and the way it is currently set up is ill-equipped to deal with persons accused of crimes who also suffer from legitimate mental illness. There is a line that must be walked that balances fairness to people who don't fully grasp the consequences of their actions and still takes into account the safety of the general public.
It's not an easy task, but it is one that Judge Ellis has volunteered his time to help work through.
Mekisha Murray, as I mentioned before, is a former prosecutor and current defense attorney. I like Mekisha and I think she has a brilliant legal mind and is an extremely hard worker.
When she was in the Justice of the Peace Division, Mekisha was known for doing legal research on Class C violations and case law regarding the traffic code. She was known for being an extremely intense prosecutor who worked very hard on her cases, often very late into the night. She served at the D.A.'s Office for somewhere around five or six years, I believe, before leaving as a Felony Two.
For those of you not familiar with the Office, the position of Felony Two is one of the most difficult positions in the Office. A Felony Two carries an enormous case load of serious felony trials ranging from high amounts of narcotics to Aggravated Robberies to Aggravated Sexual Assaults to Murders. Pretty much the only case that a Felony Two is not considered qualified to try is a Capital Murder case. A prosecutor will spend anywhere between four to five years in the position of Felony Two before being considered for promotion to Felony Chief. If the prosecutor has been able to survive those years of being a Felony Two, they can pretty much handle anything.
Mekisha left the Office fairly early on into her tenure as a Felony Two and didn't rise to the level of Felony Chief.
I don't say this to disparage Mekisha, because I think that at some point she will gather the credentials to be a good candidate for Judge. But as it stands now, she has been attorney for slightly less than six years. There's something to be said for experience, and she is still in the process of acquiring it at this point. I, myself, have only been a lawyer for almost ten years now, and I don't consider myself qualified to be a judge at this point based on my years of experience. I have a hard time thinking that Mekisha is quite there yet, either.
In the case of Judge Ellis, you are dealing with a long-standing judge who, not only has experience, but also is trying to make a difference in the community. His work with both the STAR Court and now the Mental Health courts clearly illustrate that it would be in the public's best interest to keep Judge Ellis on the bench.
Judge Ellis is an 8-year veteran of the District Attorney's Office, which he followed with 3 years of private practice. He has been on the bench since 1997. He has handled numerous death penalty Capital Murder trials and brings to the table eleven years of experience on the Bench. He is known as a very capable and intelligent judge who truly loves the law.
If anything, it could be said he might actually love the law a bit too much, as he is well known for spending upwards of about four hours during his portion of voir dire educating the jury panel on the "ins and outs" of how criminal law works. Now, this is often times rather aggravating to the prosecutors and defense attorneys (who are already quite familiar with the law), but Judge Ellis regularly gets compliments and thanks from the jurors who listen to his lecture. I don't think that anyone could make an argument that Judge Ellis is cutting any corners when it comes to ensuring well-educated jurors will end up on juries in his court.
In addition to his regular duties in the 351st, Judge Ellis is a former-member of the STAR Court judges dealing with defendants with substance abusers. In 2006, however, he switched from working in the STAR Court to being one of two judges supervising the Harris County Mental Health Court, which is a specialized court dealing with Defendants suffering from mental health issues.
I think that both prosecutors and defense attorneys alike can agree that dealing with mental health issues in the criminal court system is a complex and often troubling prospect. Everyone agrees that the criminal justice system and the way it is currently set up is ill-equipped to deal with persons accused of crimes who also suffer from legitimate mental illness. There is a line that must be walked that balances fairness to people who don't fully grasp the consequences of their actions and still takes into account the safety of the general public.
It's not an easy task, but it is one that Judge Ellis has volunteered his time to help work through.
Mekisha Murray, as I mentioned before, is a former prosecutor and current defense attorney. I like Mekisha and I think she has a brilliant legal mind and is an extremely hard worker.
When she was in the Justice of the Peace Division, Mekisha was known for doing legal research on Class C violations and case law regarding the traffic code. She was known for being an extremely intense prosecutor who worked very hard on her cases, often very late into the night. She served at the D.A.'s Office for somewhere around five or six years, I believe, before leaving as a Felony Two.
For those of you not familiar with the Office, the position of Felony Two is one of the most difficult positions in the Office. A Felony Two carries an enormous case load of serious felony trials ranging from high amounts of narcotics to Aggravated Robberies to Aggravated Sexual Assaults to Murders. Pretty much the only case that a Felony Two is not considered qualified to try is a Capital Murder case. A prosecutor will spend anywhere between four to five years in the position of Felony Two before being considered for promotion to Felony Chief. If the prosecutor has been able to survive those years of being a Felony Two, they can pretty much handle anything.
Mekisha left the Office fairly early on into her tenure as a Felony Two and didn't rise to the level of Felony Chief.
I don't say this to disparage Mekisha, because I think that at some point she will gather the credentials to be a good candidate for Judge. But as it stands now, she has been attorney for slightly less than six years. There's something to be said for experience, and she is still in the process of acquiring it at this point. I, myself, have only been a lawyer for almost ten years now, and I don't consider myself qualified to be a judge at this point based on my years of experience. I have a hard time thinking that Mekisha is quite there yet, either.
In the case of Judge Ellis, you are dealing with a long-standing judge who, not only has experience, but also is trying to make a difference in the community. His work with both the STAR Court and now the Mental Health courts clearly illustrate that it would be in the public's best interest to keep Judge Ellis on the bench.
Monday, October 20, 2008
The 339th District Court Judicial Race
In all of the political contests involving the Harris County Criminal Justice Center, there is probably no greater disparity between the candidates' qualifications and ability than there are between Republican Incumbent Judge Caprice Cosper and her Democratic opponent, Municipal Court Judge Maria Jackson.
As I've written before and my friend, Mark Bennett has written, Judge Cosper is the best Judge in the Criminal Courthouse. Please keep in mind that although Mark is one of my very good friends, he and I seem to disagree on damn near everything. But we are in agreement here that Judge Cosper is an amazing Judge and the thought of her losing her bench to a judge that tries only traffic cases is both nauseating and sad.
I've mentioned previously that there are four judges who comprise the supervision of the STAR Court Program. All of their roles are equally important in the success of the program, but (call me biased) I would describe Judge Cosper as the heart and soul of the program. She was one of the founding judges who helped start it, and she takes personal pride in the program.
When the STAR Program was first established, I'll admit that I was skeptical over the possibility of really making a meaningful change in the lives of hard-core addicts. I was very wrong about that. Under the guidance of Judges Cosper, Thomas, Anderson and Wilkinson, I've seen some amazing stories of recovery and redemption. I've also seen the pride and happiness in the faces of people who are winning their fight with their addictions.
That type of meaningful change couldn't have happened without judges like Judge Cosper.
When not working in the STAR Program, Judge Cosper is even better on the bench in the 339th District Court.
Trying a case in front of Judge Cosper is like trying a case in front of a Westlaw data base. She keeps up to date on all of the latest case law and legislation. During a tricky (from a legal standpoint) case in many courts, prosecutors and defense attorneys often are having to take "time out" to do some last minute legal research. It doesn't happen in the 339th, because the Judge knows the law off the top of her head.
As far as her judicial demeanor, she approaches each case with an open mind. Somehow she manages to tackle her job with a combination of compassion and toughness that is difficult to describe without seeing it in person.
Those defendants that appear before her on non-violent offenses that deserve a second chance will get them. But, Judge Cosper will order them into a treatment program that will do everything possible to ensure that defendants won't find themselves back in the criminal justice system again. She is the Judge who won't let a young person take a final felony conviction on a first time drug case, if she feels that a deferred adjudication will give them a chance to rehabilitate themselves and avoid a final conviction.
On the other hand, she will hand out the maximum sentence to violent offenders without batting an eyelash when appropriate. She knows the difference between people with legitimate problems and those who are just grasping on to any excuse that they can find for their behavior. She can cut through the difference and administer true justice.
She consistently does the right thing over and over again. She plays no favorites with either the State or the Defense, and I doubt that anyone could find a defense attorney who has practiced in front of her that would describe her as anything less than completely fair.
Like I said, she is the best Judge in the Courthouse.
Her opponent is a municipal court judge that has been a lawyer for less years than Judge Cosper has been a judge. Municipal court judges serve an important function in government and I do not mean to diminish that. But the bottom line is that the municipal courts handle only Class C Misdemeanors. For those of you who read this that aren't familiar with criminal law, a Class C misdemeanor is only punishable by a fine.
That basically translates into the fact that Maria Jackson has never had the power to sentence a person to a day in jail and now she seeks to hold a position where she would be handing down life sentences and signing death warrants. Her experience is primarily with traffic violations and now she seeks to deal with Capital Murders?!
The disparity between the two candidates is beyond enormous and is probably the best illustration why Judicial elections should have absolutely no ties to partisan politics.
Sadly, there is a real danger that those people who are still foolish enough to vote "straight ticket" on their ballots could remove from office the Best Judge in the courthouse in favor of a person who isn't even remotely qualified. I've never voted "straight ticket" in my life, nor will I. If anyone is so weak-minded that they can't put individual thought into who they are voting for, then they shouldn't be voting in the first place.
Folks, do me a favor and get the word out to all of your friends who might possibly be voting straight-ticket Democrat and tell them about the mistake they would be making.
Unless Judge Cosper is re-elected, everybody loses on this one.
In case you missed it the first two times, she's the Best Judge in the Harris County Criminal Justice System.
As I've written before and my friend, Mark Bennett has written, Judge Cosper is the best Judge in the Criminal Courthouse. Please keep in mind that although Mark is one of my very good friends, he and I seem to disagree on damn near everything. But we are in agreement here that Judge Cosper is an amazing Judge and the thought of her losing her bench to a judge that tries only traffic cases is both nauseating and sad.
I've mentioned previously that there are four judges who comprise the supervision of the STAR Court Program. All of their roles are equally important in the success of the program, but (call me biased) I would describe Judge Cosper as the heart and soul of the program. She was one of the founding judges who helped start it, and she takes personal pride in the program.
When the STAR Program was first established, I'll admit that I was skeptical over the possibility of really making a meaningful change in the lives of hard-core addicts. I was very wrong about that. Under the guidance of Judges Cosper, Thomas, Anderson and Wilkinson, I've seen some amazing stories of recovery and redemption. I've also seen the pride and happiness in the faces of people who are winning their fight with their addictions.
That type of meaningful change couldn't have happened without judges like Judge Cosper.
When not working in the STAR Program, Judge Cosper is even better on the bench in the 339th District Court.
Trying a case in front of Judge Cosper is like trying a case in front of a Westlaw data base. She keeps up to date on all of the latest case law and legislation. During a tricky (from a legal standpoint) case in many courts, prosecutors and defense attorneys often are having to take "time out" to do some last minute legal research. It doesn't happen in the 339th, because the Judge knows the law off the top of her head.
As far as her judicial demeanor, she approaches each case with an open mind. Somehow she manages to tackle her job with a combination of compassion and toughness that is difficult to describe without seeing it in person.
Those defendants that appear before her on non-violent offenses that deserve a second chance will get them. But, Judge Cosper will order them into a treatment program that will do everything possible to ensure that defendants won't find themselves back in the criminal justice system again. She is the Judge who won't let a young person take a final felony conviction on a first time drug case, if she feels that a deferred adjudication will give them a chance to rehabilitate themselves and avoid a final conviction.
On the other hand, she will hand out the maximum sentence to violent offenders without batting an eyelash when appropriate. She knows the difference between people with legitimate problems and those who are just grasping on to any excuse that they can find for their behavior. She can cut through the difference and administer true justice.
She consistently does the right thing over and over again. She plays no favorites with either the State or the Defense, and I doubt that anyone could find a defense attorney who has practiced in front of her that would describe her as anything less than completely fair.
Like I said, she is the best Judge in the Courthouse.
Her opponent is a municipal court judge that has been a lawyer for less years than Judge Cosper has been a judge. Municipal court judges serve an important function in government and I do not mean to diminish that. But the bottom line is that the municipal courts handle only Class C Misdemeanors. For those of you who read this that aren't familiar with criminal law, a Class C misdemeanor is only punishable by a fine.
That basically translates into the fact that Maria Jackson has never had the power to sentence a person to a day in jail and now she seeks to hold a position where she would be handing down life sentences and signing death warrants. Her experience is primarily with traffic violations and now she seeks to deal with Capital Murders?!
The disparity between the two candidates is beyond enormous and is probably the best illustration why Judicial elections should have absolutely no ties to partisan politics.
Sadly, there is a real danger that those people who are still foolish enough to vote "straight ticket" on their ballots could remove from office the Best Judge in the courthouse in favor of a person who isn't even remotely qualified. I've never voted "straight ticket" in my life, nor will I. If anyone is so weak-minded that they can't put individual thought into who they are voting for, then they shouldn't be voting in the first place.
Folks, do me a favor and get the word out to all of your friends who might possibly be voting straight-ticket Democrat and tell them about the mistake they would be making.
Unless Judge Cosper is re-elected, everybody loses on this one.
In case you missed it the first two times, she's the Best Judge in the Harris County Criminal Justice System.
The 338th District Court Judicial Race
The 338th District Court Judicial Race has two candidates that I can actually say were still working as prosecutors back when I started at the Office. The Republican candidate is incumbent Judge Brock Thomas and the Democratic Candidate is former prosecutor (on both the State and Federal levels) Hazel Jones. (And, as a side note, I have to commend both candidates for having extremely well-done websites!).
Although I worked in the Office with both candidates, and was just a lowly Misdemeanor Three, they were both extremely nice and helpful to everyone in the entire Office. Hazel was much more quiet while Judge Thomas was more of a leader. They were both very kind to me as a young prosecutor,
Judge Thomas has presided over the 338th District Court since 2002, and in my opinion, has done an exemplary job. He has presided over tough, and at times, tedious cases (such as the Priscilla Slade trial) and he has done so efficiently and in a professional manner. Although I have not practiced in front of him, Judge Thomas is said to have held himself to an extremely high standard when he was a prosecutor and he holds the prosecutors in his court to the same high standard.
Although some cynical folks like to sarcastically refer to the Harris County District Attorney's Office as a "Judicial Finishing School", I've never heard any complaints from the Defense Bar about Judge Thomas being anything but professional, fair, and intelligent.
In addition to his duties in the 338th, Judge Thomas is also one of the four judges who presides over the STAR Court, helping people charged with crimes and suffering from drug addiction to confront and beat their addiction. It is an extra duty that he has also handled with professionalism, and more important, compassion.
In short, Judge Thomas is an excellent judge.
As I mentioned earlier, I have absolutely nothing negative to say about Hazel Jones. She is an impressive, intelligent, and kind attorney with a very stunning resume. She is a native Houstonian who cares very much about her community and has excelled in the legal community. She has been on both sides of counsel table - as an Assistant District Attorney and as an Assistant U.S. Attorney. She currently has her own defense practice.
I would vote for her in different circumstances, but in this case, I think that Judge Thomas has done too good of a job for too long to see him depart from his job.
Although I worked in the Office with both candidates, and was just a lowly Misdemeanor Three, they were both extremely nice and helpful to everyone in the entire Office. Hazel was much more quiet while Judge Thomas was more of a leader. They were both very kind to me as a young prosecutor,
Judge Thomas has presided over the 338th District Court since 2002, and in my opinion, has done an exemplary job. He has presided over tough, and at times, tedious cases (such as the Priscilla Slade trial) and he has done so efficiently and in a professional manner. Although I have not practiced in front of him, Judge Thomas is said to have held himself to an extremely high standard when he was a prosecutor and he holds the prosecutors in his court to the same high standard.
Although some cynical folks like to sarcastically refer to the Harris County District Attorney's Office as a "Judicial Finishing School", I've never heard any complaints from the Defense Bar about Judge Thomas being anything but professional, fair, and intelligent.
In addition to his duties in the 338th, Judge Thomas is also one of the four judges who presides over the STAR Court, helping people charged with crimes and suffering from drug addiction to confront and beat their addiction. It is an extra duty that he has also handled with professionalism, and more important, compassion.
In short, Judge Thomas is an excellent judge.
As I mentioned earlier, I have absolutely nothing negative to say about Hazel Jones. She is an impressive, intelligent, and kind attorney with a very stunning resume. She is a native Houstonian who cares very much about her community and has excelled in the legal community. She has been on both sides of counsel table - as an Assistant District Attorney and as an Assistant U.S. Attorney. She currently has her own defense practice.
I would vote for her in different circumstances, but in this case, I think that Judge Thomas has done too good of a job for too long to see him depart from his job.
The Chronicle Endorses Pat Lykos
I got an e-mail bright and early this morning from my old friend/arch-Nemesis (kidding!)Alan Bernstein checking to make sure I had seen that the Chronicle had endorsed Pat Lykos for District Attorney. Alan was bringing to my attention my comments earlier this year (under one of my more conspiratorial days) where I predicted that the Chronicle folks were supporting Lykos during the primary so that they could turn around and endorse Bradford in November.
He wanted to make sure that I knew I was wrong!
Well, this whole "being wrong" thing isn't something that is all that new to me, but I am more than willing to address the topic for old times' sake.
I'm still thinking out the D.A.'s race and I plan on addressing it in the next day or so, once I'm done with my analysis of all the Judicial Races. But there were a couple of things that I found interesting about the Chronicle's endorsement.
Although endorsing Lykos, the article seems to give her a bit of criticism on her personal skills and demeanor. The endorsement notes "She has been criticized privately and officially for poor listening skills and brusqueness with colleagues and subordinates".
At the same time, they never really list what exactly they have against Clarence Bradford, other than noting [regarding the crime lab scandal] that "the corruption and ineptitude in that lab began before former Police Chief Bradford took office, but his under-aggressive responses have weakened his leadership credentials".
They also list several ideas that Bradford had as part of his platform and they stress that they hope that "Lykos should take them seriously".
I guess what I'm getting at here is that although the Chronicle gave Lykos the official nod, they sort of seemed rather half-assed about it, and they surely didn't really come out with guns blazing against Bradford. About the only thing the editorial is decisive about is pointing out the District Attorney's Office's "long-standing dysfunctions".
Like I said, I'm still in the middle of a lot of mixed emotions when it comes to the D.A.'s race, but I'm still feeling pretty solid in my dislike of the Chronicle editorial board (which Alan is not a part of). The folks there just seem to have a really solid dislike of the D.A.'s Office and those who work there.
But, for the meantime, Alan, I will admit that you were right and I was wrong.
Kind of.
He wanted to make sure that I knew I was wrong!
Well, this whole "being wrong" thing isn't something that is all that new to me, but I am more than willing to address the topic for old times' sake.
I'm still thinking out the D.A.'s race and I plan on addressing it in the next day or so, once I'm done with my analysis of all the Judicial Races. But there were a couple of things that I found interesting about the Chronicle's endorsement.
Although endorsing Lykos, the article seems to give her a bit of criticism on her personal skills and demeanor. The endorsement notes "She has been criticized privately and officially for poor listening skills and brusqueness with colleagues and subordinates".
At the same time, they never really list what exactly they have against Clarence Bradford, other than noting [regarding the crime lab scandal] that "the corruption and ineptitude in that lab began before former Police Chief Bradford took office, but his under-aggressive responses have weakened his leadership credentials".
They also list several ideas that Bradford had as part of his platform and they stress that they hope that "Lykos should take them seriously".
I guess what I'm getting at here is that although the Chronicle gave Lykos the official nod, they sort of seemed rather half-assed about it, and they surely didn't really come out with guns blazing against Bradford. About the only thing the editorial is decisive about is pointing out the District Attorney's Office's "long-standing dysfunctions".
Like I said, I'm still in the middle of a lot of mixed emotions when it comes to the D.A.'s race, but I'm still feeling pretty solid in my dislike of the Chronicle editorial board (which Alan is not a part of). The folks there just seem to have a really solid dislike of the D.A.'s Office and those who work there.
But, for the meantime, Alan, I will admit that you were right and I was wrong.
Kind of.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
The Truth About Prosecuting Domestic Violence Cases
When I was in college at A&M, I worked as an intern at the Brazos County District Attorney's Office for two and a half years. It wa...
