Thursday, December 29, 2011


The upcoming Harris County Republican Primary is pitting two (2) former Harris County District Judges against each other to see who will represent the GOP in the 2012 race for Harris County District Attorney.........will challenger Judge Mike Anderson defeat the incumbent DA Judge Pat Lykos?

Murray Newman at his blog, "Life at the Harris County Criminal Justice Center" is currently sparring with his friend and co-blogger David Jennings over the issue.
Jennings' blog, "Big Jolly" has posted soft ball interviews of each candidate in a sincere effort to differentiate the candidates with  factual clarification of the issues instead of emotional or personal slurs.
Admittedly, I have been guilty of the later given my personal experiences with Lykos over the years.

Jennings, to his credit, appears to have a very strong desire to vet the candidates objectively and keep an open mind.
Notwithstanding, he also makes no bones about putting the success of the GOP above all else when it comes to who is the best candidate for Harris County, Texas and the nation.

Unlike the pay-to-play Terry Lowry political whores; Jennings wants facts instead of dollars from the candidates if they expect to garner his  refreshing!
It is, therefore, understandable that the special interest groups, unqualified moneyed politicians and those with disproportionate personal gain at stake are quick to condemn Jennings.

So when deciding who is most qualified to be the elected District Attorney of Harris County, the facts and not emotion ought to be what is determinative.

Whether or not the DA is a nice person, has a mustache, curses behind closed doors, has cute kids, has a driver, looks like a troll, drinks Jack Daniels or Bud Lite, etc. are peripheral issues not relevant to the administration of justice. 
What counts is whether or not the candidate for District Attorney SEEKS JUSTICE and has the ability to see to it that JUSTICE is SERVED..............not merely given lip service.

Pat Lykos has never tried a case personally as a prosecutor or otherwise; so there is no way to directly access whether or not she has actually sought or secured justice appropriately in that capacity.
She has, however, as the elected DA of Harris County indirectly prosecuted thousands of criminal cases through her subordinates.
It IS a fair extrapolation, therefore, to judge Lykos to some extent on the collective performance of her ADAs as to whether or not she has ethically and competently sought and secured JUSTICE for the citizens of Harris County.

Mike Anderson, on the other hand, has actually been in the trenches as a real prosecutor.  Therefore, unlike Lykos, Anderson has a personal trial record that can DIRECTLY show whether or not he was a prosecutor who sought justice or simply convictions.

The judicial conduct of Anderson and Lykos when each sat on the bench as Criminal District Judges can also be looked at to evaluate their individual commitment to the furtherance of JUSTICE as it goes to the individual's pattern of behavior.

When it comes to statistics, "let the buyer beware".........the same set of statistical "facts" can easily be manipulated to support contradictory conclusions when not appropriately evaluated........politics and science have about as much in common as politics and qualifications.
When evaluating trial STATS consideration must be given to the parameters delineated for:
* accepting charges at intake
* dismissing cases
* plea bargains
* going to trial
* charges filed
* punishment sought
* ethical conduct of ADAs and consequences

When evaluating a judge's performance consideration must be given to:
* appellate review
* judicial conduct
* the competence of the court appointed lawyers the judge selects
* docket management
* actual time spent at the courthouse

So if anyone cares to comment; rather than simply throwing personal insults why not instead take the high road and follow Big Jolly's lead: present specific substantiated points that go to the candidates record of securing or diverting justice AS YOU see them...........................your point or the rebuttal might actually serve as an epiphany for someone.


Anonymous said...

What no whining or personal attacks on Judge Pat? Who wrote this for you Black Ink surely not one of your former ADA buddies. If there really were specific bad things that Judge Pat has done don't you think the titty baby ADAs would have backed it up with facts by now? All I've read from you and your malcontent friends is really immature comments totally lacking professional behavior. It's scary to imagine how you people act in a court room.

Anonymous said...

What were the $200,000 worth of reimbursements to that fat-assed bitch for?

Anonymous said...

Why didn't that troll pig do anything to Don Hooper for using Rachel Palmer's badge to go harass people and act like he was an employee of the State?

Anonymous said...

Mike Anderson was a win at all costs prosecutor as an ADA and as a judge.
Mike Anderson was overturned more than most judges.
Mike Anderson's court appointed attorneys were among the most incompetent at the courthouse. What better way to help his old prosecutor buddies? And Mike Anderson was smart enough to appoint African American defense attorneys so it woud be political suicide to challenge him.
Mike Anderson like Chuck Rosenhal believes that the end justifies the means and that is not what John B. Holmes meant when he said "so long as it doesn't lead to a damn fool result".

I am not a fan of Pat Lykos but this is not a popularity contest. Mike Anderson scares me. He reminds me too much of Chuck Rosenthal. We need another Carol Vance not another Chuck Rosenthal. Carol Vance once told me justice requires that both sides follow the law and Mike Anderson is no Carol Vance.

Anonymous said...

anons 1:44-45,
The Anderson mob just can't help themselves. It's pretty clear Judge Pat needs more time to finish cleaning house.

Anonymous said...

Anon 9:43

I'm not an Anderson voter as of yet. I just know I'm not STUPID enough to ever vote for Da Troll. Hell, I'd vote for Obama over that thing.

GOP Precinct Chair said...

I'd suggest you look at the BAR polls of each candidate for when they were judges, the percentage of cases overturned on appeal (one had a lot more experience trying cases than the other), and stop allowing the same old hacks from populating the comment section unless they are going to add something of substance (yes, Hooper, this means you and the former GOP chair so tied to Lykos).

Anonymous said...

This is off topic but something that needs to be said:

When Carol Vance decided to retire as DA of Harris County he hand-picked John B. Holmes to be his successor. Carol Vance put the office above personal ego and did all he could to successfully transition the HCDAO to someone he knew had the integrity and ability to carry the legacy of justice forward--JBH was his protege.

However, when JBH decided he was going to retire--instead of following his mentor's example, ego got the better of him. When Johnny decided to go he just said, "fuck it--sera sera". He easily could and should have actively pursued a qualified relacement and paved the way for a smooth transition. That would have precluded the Chuckster from ever being a viable candidate and Lykos would have been a non-issue then and today. Instead, JBH chose to be passive aggressive forcing him to reluctantly endorse Chuck at the 11th hour to avoid someone even worse--Pat Lykos.

Shame on JBH for Chuck Rosenthal and Pat Lykos.

Anonymous said...

Anon 12:02,


Anonymous said...

anon 6:17 Please get facts before spewing information you clearly can't back up. Judge Mike Anderson was reversed less than once a year during his 12 years on the bench. I didn't pull other judges' information from the public records, just his, so I can't compare, but that sounds like some pretty solid "judging" in my book. If he was appointing lousy defense attorneys (which he wasn't) that number would be much higher.
And take a look at HBA bar polls. Mike was given consistent, glowing ratings at the top of the charts, where Patsy was consistently at the bottom of the charts (when you treat professionals like a door mat, it's going to come back to bite you.)

Anonymous said...

anon 3:50,
1.Who were the defense attorneys appointed by Anderson, how many appeals were filed, who were the appellate lawyers and what % of those cases were upheld on appeal.
2.My anonymous opinion is as good as yours until proven otherwise.Be specific.
3.Convictions and justice may be the same for you and Mike but that's what the voters think anymore
4. what % of the Bar actually votes in Bar polls? Do you really think the votes are based on actual ability?
anon 6:17

Anonymous said...

anon 8:52
The stats you request is not how information is dolled out by the clerks office, but here's some of it: The 262nd district court, while Mike Anderson was judge, tried an average of 50 jury trials each of the 12 years he served. That put in him the top three criminal district courts in Harris County for the number of jury trials every year he served. With very few exceptions, every one of those cases tried to a jury and resulting in a conviction was appealed. His AFFIRMATION rate over the 12 years was 99%+. Less than one case a year was reversed...talking to the clerk's office today, that is significantly less than any other district court this past 12 years.
As far as his appointments, he appointed some of the best lawyers in Houston that will take appoinments like Pat McCann, Skip Cornelius, and Wayne Hill. The complete list can be obtained at the clerks office.
Bar polls are here:
They only go back to 2006 on-line so you can't see how he stacked up against Lykos, but I'm working on getting those polls to scan and post then you'll see how Patsy fared and the differences will be abundantly clear.
Mike Anderson was never friends with, nor did he ever directly work for Chuck Rosenthal. I'm certain they don't even like each other. There is no risk of Mike being Chuck-like.

Anonymous said...

"Mike Anderson was never friends with, nor did he ever directly work for Chuck Rosenthal. I'm certain they don't even like each other. There is no risk of Mike being Chuck-like."

Did you really mean to say that any ADA who was ever subordinate to Chuck Rosenthal, tolerated being around him and did not openly condemn him was at risk of being Chuck-like?
WOW! I guess if Chuck had been Mike's Chief or Mike just happened to work for the HCDAO when Chuck was the elected DA Mike would be too Chuck-like to apply for the job? Really?
Johnny Holmes endorsing both Chuck Rosenthal AND Mike Anderson says a lot more about their similarities than pointing out 2 of Johnny's top rival lieutenants didn't like each other---imagine that!
Chuck Rosenthal and Mike Anderson might not be friends but they are cut from the same cloth.
We don't need Mike Anderson bringing back the Chuck-like days.
We need to move forward not backards.

Anonymous said...

anon 2:47--the point was that not everyone who worked at the office marched in lock step. Not everyone who worked for Rosenthal became Chuck-like. It is possible to work as a direct report to someone without morphing into them or adopting their mannerism and flaws. If you knew Mike and Chuck well you would know they are not "cut from the same cloth" when it comes to ethics, knowing right from wrong, and exercising good judgment. Chuck had his little click of boys (and, yes, they were all male) who thought like him and talked like him. They are all gone from the office. Mike Anderson was never one of Chuck's cronies.

BLACK INK said...

Anons 3:28 and 2:47,

We all can agree that whether or not Mike Anderson was ever subordinate to, or "friends" with Chuck Rosenthal is not relevant to either individual's prosecutorial philosophy.
We have all had good and bad Chiefs and have feigned more than a couple of friendship at the HCDAO.

True that both men were brought up through the ranks together by the venerable JBH and rose to his inner circle.
Those shared experiences, however, do not impugn Rosenthal's bad character on Anderson.

There were many good ADAs, men and women, who were tarnished simply because they worked for Chuck Rosenthal under difficult circumstances.
Career prosecutors who were forced to deal with DA Rosenthal face to face on a regular basis and were not publically critical of his behavior were labeled "Chuck-like".
We can also agree that was not fair either.

Politics is based on perception and anything but fair........this is NOT just an, "all for one and one for all" Criminal District Court race; this is top tier politics and will be dirty, unfair and extreme.

The outcome of the Harris County District Attorney's race will not be determined by which candidate is most qualified to promote AND secure justice; but rather by which candidate can best smear their opponent's reputation.

Anonymous said...

Anon 3:28,

Didn't Chuck's little click of boys who thought like him and talked like him include former ADA Craig Goodhart who's been yapping about being rehired at HCDA once Mike Anderson becomes DA? I wonder if Craig still thinks he's a cop and carrys that big ass automatic pistol everywhere he goes?
All bullshit aside, that move is a tough spin for your running buddy.

Cowboy Up said...

Anon 10:47 you forgot another Chuckster clicker boy who grew up in Pasadena with Mike Anderson--John Ray.
I can't wait to see Mike Anderson's campaign contribution list to see who all is buying their job back. But hey, at least Jim Leitner will be back on the appointment list or applying at the PDO.
You just can't make this shit up.

Tom said...

The district attorney is above all a policy maker. The first assistant runs the office on a day-to-day basis applying the DA's policies.
At the end of the day, the DA in a large office is a manager/CEO, not a trial lawyer.
When Johnny Holmes was DA, I think he tried only one case that was not a cop-killing. It was a substitute teacher charged with selling weed to a student. Holmes asked for a life sentence and the jury said 5 years probation.
It's almost impossible to determine a judge's reversal record. It's easy to find out how many cases were reversed in his court but you can't tell if the elected judge or a visiting judge tried the case.
Lykos was the first outsider to become DA since the 1960s. She fired some prosecutors who were well respected and well liked by their peers. Some probably needed to be fired and others had made it clear publicly that they didn't want to work for her.
She's had a hiring and raise freeze almost since she took office.
Like all people, she's done some good things and some not so good things. Her DIVERT program is a systematic pretrial diversion program for DWI first offenders, something which can be considered much fairer than the ad hoc pretrial diversions used by her predecessors. Her decision not to prosecute trace drug cases has helped relieve prison and jail overcrowding so that there is space for violent criminals.
And, the crime rate is dropping and continues to drop in Harris County even though fewer people are in jail.
Maybe she's done something right.
On the other hand, Pat Lykos will bever get an award for being a cuddly person. She's just not.