Harris County District Attorney, Pat Lykos, wants to make Houston a safer more gentler place to be during Rodeo......or does she really?
Zero tolerance for rodeo season revelers has been mandated. If any cowboy or cowgirl is suspected of DWI during rodeo and refuses to submit to an intoxilyzer; a blood alcohol sample WILL be drawn.
There is no question that getting impaired drivers off of the roadways is in the best interest of society.
But one must question the motive of this particular edict.
Is this a publicity stunt or in the community's best interest?
New Year celebrants drew the same scrutiny.
The issue is: what makes alcohol related injuries or deaths on our roadways more significant during rodeo, New Years or other celebratory events?
Is it merely the sheer number of drunks during party season?
Dead is dead whether it's after a routine Saturday night or after the office Christmas Party or after a big time rodeo performance.
Why not have zero tolerance year round or not at all?
Consistency, fair play and due process do not seem to be priorities at the beleaguered Harris County District Attorney's Office since the new regime came to town.
Judge Pat, as DA Lykos demands to be called, established the highly controversial DIVERT program.
Controversial because many legal scholars consider this odd poorly drafted policy to be an illegal subterfuge of the Texas State Legislature.
Nevertheless, the main purpose of DIVERT is to ease overcrowding of our jails by giving non enhanced first offender drunk drivers essentially one free DWI.
So why the heck is Judge Pat wanting to launch a full court press "catch and release program" for drunk drivers during rodeo?
A District Attorney who politicizes drunk driving for personal gain with a total disregard for the health and safety of others is no different than the corner crack dealer.....they are both selling some bad shit.
Friday, February 26, 2010
Thursday, February 18, 2010
JUSTICE LESLIE BROCK YATES AND THE ROSENTHAL FACTOR
Justice Leslie Brock Yates, who is currently running for re-election to the Texas 14th Court of Appeals, has more in common with disgraced ex DA, Chuck Rosenthal, than choosing Allen Blakemore as her campaign manager.
The "Free Speech" argument must be taken in context when uttered by an elected public official who is entrusted to be impartial in performing his/her essential job duties.
When Chuck Rosenthal, a public figure and sitting elected District Attorney at the time he sent racist emails on his government computer, suggested that "Freedom of Speech" shielded his behavior, Harris County scoffed at the absurdity. The implication was indefensible given his position at the time of the bad behavior.
After all, Rosenthal had the power to decide whose freedom, in a diversely populated county of ~4,000,000 people, would be jeopardized by his judgment.
He was not simply an ordinary private figure employed in the private sector on his privately owned computer.
The same criticism can be applied to Justice Yates.
However, her bias and total disregard for impartiality is not based on a plausible, albeit unsubstantiated, extrapolation of a distasteful joke; but rather forms the basis of her attack ads on opponent Sharon McCally.
Yates' profiling and subsequent condemnation of plaintiff attorneys based purely on the "belief" that these folks improperly represent the little guy instead of big business, is reprehensible on its face.
Stereotyping plaintiff attorneys as bad folks is prima facie inappropriate behavior for an appellate judge.
How can we expect impartial judicial renderings from a judge who blatantly profiles groups of individuals for political gain and has demonstrated a proclivity to judge an opponent on pure rumor and innuendo?
The "Free Speech" argument must be taken in context when uttered by an elected public official who is entrusted to be impartial in performing his/her essential job duties.
When Chuck Rosenthal, a public figure and sitting elected District Attorney at the time he sent racist emails on his government computer, suggested that "Freedom of Speech" shielded his behavior, Harris County scoffed at the absurdity. The implication was indefensible given his position at the time of the bad behavior.
After all, Rosenthal had the power to decide whose freedom, in a diversely populated county of ~4,000,000 people, would be jeopardized by his judgment.
He was not simply an ordinary private figure employed in the private sector on his privately owned computer.
The same criticism can be applied to Justice Yates.
However, her bias and total disregard for impartiality is not based on a plausible, albeit unsubstantiated, extrapolation of a distasteful joke; but rather forms the basis of her attack ads on opponent Sharon McCally.
Yates' profiling and subsequent condemnation of plaintiff attorneys based purely on the "belief" that these folks improperly represent the little guy instead of big business, is reprehensible on its face.
Stereotyping plaintiff attorneys as bad folks is prima facie inappropriate behavior for an appellate judge.
How can we expect impartial judicial renderings from a judge who blatantly profiles groups of individuals for political gain and has demonstrated a proclivity to judge an opponent on pure rumor and innuendo?
Wednesday, February 17, 2010
THE MONEYED POLITICIANS AND PARTY TENURE POSTURING CONTINUE TO HOLD HARRIS COUNTY HOSTAGE
The deluge of political mail-outs and sample ballots that flooded my office and personal address yesterday rekindled my abhorrence for the hypocrisy, innuendos and outright misinformation disseminated by the process.
The First Amendment doesn't permit someone to stick political signs in my yard without permission and there ought to be a way to prevent unsolicited political garbage from being stuffed in my mailbox. I consider it an abuse of political free speech and more akin to a form of trespass by proxy or at least littering.
An extension of the optional call block system applied to phones that intercepts harassing peddlers and protects our privacy, should be available to stop these political mail-outs.
Unfortunately, political mail-outs are very effective in tricking voters.....that's why they're so prolific.
Glaring examples of this voter manipulation against community interest are the well orchestrated Republican campaigns of Danny Dexter against the overwhelmingly more qualified but underfunded Marc Brown in the 180th Criminal District Court contest and politically connected Rachael Palmer in the County Criminal Court 13 race who is vastly outclassed in every aspect of the law by the exceptionally qualified Don Smyth.
Although Steve Hotze's endorsement of Dexter is very disturbing, he gets credit for not having the stomach to endorse Palmer, her political offerings notwithstanding.
The average Harris County voter has no idea which judicial candidate is most qualified and generally relies on endorsements and candidate-published name recognition when deciding how to cast his ballot.
How are these folks able to appropriately evaluate the veracity of the numerous judicial campaigns?
Heck, if I wasn't part of this legal microcosm I would probably vote for Dexter and Palmer based on the overwhelming published "support"!
How would I know what incredibly better judges Marc Brown and Don Smythe would be if I didn't actually KNOW the candidates and their respective qualifications?
Judicial benches should not be for sale to those who know the right people instead of the right stuff.
Equal protection under the law is hindered when the bench is occupied by the most moneyed, instead of the most qualified candidate.
But as we all know, the idealism of truth, honesty, integrity, and ability are no match for who you know and how you spin it in modern American politics......and if anyone doubts that they don't know Pat Lykos.
The First Amendment doesn't permit someone to stick political signs in my yard without permission and there ought to be a way to prevent unsolicited political garbage from being stuffed in my mailbox. I consider it an abuse of political free speech and more akin to a form of trespass by proxy or at least littering.
An extension of the optional call block system applied to phones that intercepts harassing peddlers and protects our privacy, should be available to stop these political mail-outs.
Unfortunately, political mail-outs are very effective in tricking voters.....that's why they're so prolific.
Glaring examples of this voter manipulation against community interest are the well orchestrated Republican campaigns of Danny Dexter against the overwhelmingly more qualified but underfunded Marc Brown in the 180th Criminal District Court contest and politically connected Rachael Palmer in the County Criminal Court 13 race who is vastly outclassed in every aspect of the law by the exceptionally qualified Don Smyth.
Although Steve Hotze's endorsement of Dexter is very disturbing, he gets credit for not having the stomach to endorse Palmer, her political offerings notwithstanding.
The average Harris County voter has no idea which judicial candidate is most qualified and generally relies on endorsements and candidate-published name recognition when deciding how to cast his ballot.
How are these folks able to appropriately evaluate the veracity of the numerous judicial campaigns?
Heck, if I wasn't part of this legal microcosm I would probably vote for Dexter and Palmer based on the overwhelming published "support"!
How would I know what incredibly better judges Marc Brown and Don Smythe would be if I didn't actually KNOW the candidates and their respective qualifications?
Judicial benches should not be for sale to those who know the right people instead of the right stuff.
Equal protection under the law is hindered when the bench is occupied by the most moneyed, instead of the most qualified candidate.
But as we all know, the idealism of truth, honesty, integrity, and ability are no match for who you know and how you spin it in modern American politics......and if anyone doubts that they don't know Pat Lykos.
Monday, February 15, 2010
SHOULD PRINCIPLE OR POLITICS DETERMINE VENUE FOR JIHADISTS?
WASHINGTON — The Obama administration prefers a civilian trial for the alleged 9/11 mastermind, but says that in the face of public and political opposition it must be open to a military tribunal.
In an interview published Monday in The New York Times, Attorney General Eric Holder said, "I have to be more forceful in advocating for why I believe these are trials that should be held on the civilian side."
However, Holder did not rule out a military trial for Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, saying, "You have to be flexible."
And there we have it!
My question to the United States Attorney General is:
WHY exactly would it be better to try these folks in a civilian court instead of a military tribunal?
I do not buy that the United States government has as much damning evidence against these terrorists as Orange County had against OJ Simpson and therefore a conviction is guaranteed no matter what the venue.
I do not buy that spending $200,000,000.00 per year for logistical support and security in NYC brings "closure" for New Yorkers.
I do not buy that giving enemy combatants a civilian trial with all the rights and privileges appurtenant thereof, shows how great and strong American justice is.
Of note, the greatest source of power for a terrorist is not the actual act of terror itself; but rather the exorbitant publicity that follows....a NYC TRIAL would be the mother load of publicity for these bastards.
When a group of individuals declare a Jihad against the sovereignty of the United States of America those individuals are enemy combatants and are not entitled to the privileges of a speedy trial, Miranda, civilian discovery etc.
How the U.S. conducts covert operations to gather Intel should not be on public display for all the world to evaluate.
The media's publication of US Military battle plans and strategy before engagement should be enough to satisfy their thirst.
So unless you believe that Eric Holder is really that ignorant of the law and its consequences you must ask:
What is the Obama Administration's real agenda?
In an interview published Monday in The New York Times, Attorney General Eric Holder said, "I have to be more forceful in advocating for why I believe these are trials that should be held on the civilian side."
However, Holder did not rule out a military trial for Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, saying, "You have to be flexible."
And there we have it!
My question to the United States Attorney General is:
WHY exactly would it be better to try these folks in a civilian court instead of a military tribunal?
I do not buy that the United States government has as much damning evidence against these terrorists as Orange County had against OJ Simpson and therefore a conviction is guaranteed no matter what the venue.
I do not buy that spending $200,000,000.00 per year for logistical support and security in NYC brings "closure" for New Yorkers.
I do not buy that giving enemy combatants a civilian trial with all the rights and privileges appurtenant thereof, shows how great and strong American justice is.
Of note, the greatest source of power for a terrorist is not the actual act of terror itself; but rather the exorbitant publicity that follows....a NYC TRIAL would be the mother load of publicity for these bastards.
When a group of individuals declare a Jihad against the sovereignty of the United States of America those individuals are enemy combatants and are not entitled to the privileges of a speedy trial, Miranda, civilian discovery etc.
How the U.S. conducts covert operations to gather Intel should not be on public display for all the world to evaluate.
The media's publication of US Military battle plans and strategy before engagement should be enough to satisfy their thirst.
So unless you believe that Eric Holder is really that ignorant of the law and its consequences you must ask:
What is the Obama Administration's real agenda?
Wednesday, February 10, 2010
THE HOUSTON CHRONICLE'S ANTI DEATH PENALTY AGENDA REDUCES IT'S CREDIBILITY ON THE ISSUE TO THAT OF AN EDITORIAL RAG
"Drama likely as Scardino, Siegler face off in retrial"
So reads today's headline in The Houston Chronicle as it reignites the personal smear campaign on one of the most talented prosecutors in Harris County history and the death penalty generally.
The Houston Chronicle begins it's assault with:
"Two experienced attorneys, one a former Harris County star prosecutor known for theatrics and the other a skilled defense attorney, will face each other in the retrial of Anthony Graves, whose capital murder conviction was overturned by a federal appeals court."
The obvious implication is that Siegler is merely a very good experienced "actor" while Scardino, on the other hand, is a very good experienced trial lawyer. Not too subtle.
The Chronicle goes on to say:
"Kelly Siegler — once a feared Harris County assistant district attorney — has been hired by Washington-Burleson County District attorney Bill Parham as special prosecutor in the Graves case."
Feared-- not respected, not fair, not a good trial lawyer, but simply feared.
The Chronicle then concludes:
".....Attorney Nicole Casarez, a journalism professor at St. Thomas University whose students found evidence they say shows that Graves is innocent, and Amarillo attorney David Mullin are working on the case for free because they believe in Graves' innocence."
Well there we have it! The defendant is obviously innocent so why even bother with a trial.
"Siegler, who declined to comment, has faced Scardino and Phillips in previous trials."
Well why did Siegler not comment? She must have something to hide, right?
OR perhaps Siegler prefers to work up the case and have the requisite familiarity with the actual facts BEFORE making a comment. For all we know Siegler may, after factual review, concur with the Texas Court of Appeals. Maybe justice at all costs is more important than winning or losing at all costs for someone of her caliber.
Oddly the results of who prevailed at the referenced "face-offs" between Siegler and Scardino/Phillips are not mentioned; I am willing to bet that Siegler crushed the pair of defense attorneys at each "face-off".
Oddly the results of who prevailed at the referenced "face-offs" between Siegler and Scardino/Phillips are not mentioned; I am willing to bet that Siegler crushed the pair of defense attorneys at each "face-off".
"...Scardino's toughness and Siegler's flair for the dramatic..."
Puh...leeze!
"....Parham said he hired Siegler because he only has three assistant district attorneys, two of them inexperienced. “I have a small office and I need the extra help,” Parham said.
This is not the first time that Siegler has been hired to help a district attorney in a small county. Wharton County District Attorney Josh McCown hired Siegler in 2008 to help prosecute the county's first death penalty trial in 29 years."
Perhaps staff writer Harvey needs to tell the rest of the story.....The Wharton County defendant was convicted and sentenced to death for executing a Texas game warden.
It is my opinion that at The Houston Chronicle:
The anti death penalty agenda has clouded their objectivity.
Editorializing has supplanted journalistic integrity.
Personal vendettas have eroded balanced reporting and trust.
It is no wonder readership is so dismal at the once venerable publication......
Tuesday, February 9, 2010
CONROY MURRAY, M.D.......ORDINARY NEGLIGENCE OR CRIMINAL CONDUCT
Should a patient's social status and notoriety be a factor in evaluating the guilt or liability of a treating physician's conduct? The answer seems to be obvious, but society has chosen otherwise.
If the "King of Pop" had instead simply been the head of the local PTA, does anyone really think that Dr. Murray would be facing involuntary manslaughter charges?
What kind of precedent does this set for the administration of health care in America?
Henceforth should all health care providers suspected of malpractice now be presented to a Grand Jury as well?
Every bad outcome does not constitute criminal activity.....accidents and poor judgment are often simply just that.
When a bus driver, without evidence of enhancement, accidentally crushes and kills a small child who runs in front of his vehicle it is tragic but vastly different than a reckless tow truck driver racing down a feeder road with cocaine metabolites on board who T-bones a car killing it's passengers.......the prosecutors need more than a bad outcome to a celebrity patient to prosecute a doctor who exercised poor judgment.
If the "King of Pop" had instead simply been the head of the local PTA, does anyone really think that Dr. Murray would be facing involuntary manslaughter charges?
What kind of precedent does this set for the administration of health care in America?
Henceforth should all health care providers suspected of malpractice now be presented to a Grand Jury as well?
Every bad outcome does not constitute criminal activity.....accidents and poor judgment are often simply just that.
When a bus driver, without evidence of enhancement, accidentally crushes and kills a small child who runs in front of his vehicle it is tragic but vastly different than a reckless tow truck driver racing down a feeder road with cocaine metabolites on board who T-bones a car killing it's passengers.......the prosecutors need more than a bad outcome to a celebrity patient to prosecute a doctor who exercised poor judgment.
Monday, February 8, 2010
HARRIS COUNTY'S POLITICAL ENDORSEMENT INDUSTRY IS NOTHING MORE THAN LEGALIZED PROSTITUTION
The political endorsement industry has truly become a seedy business.
In Harris County, WHAT an individual knows, too often takes a back seat to WHO he knows, literally. When a candidate succumbs to the brothel mentality that lures him into the political elite's backseat; we're the ones getting screwed at the end of the day.
The Harris County "King Makers" (as these skanks like to be called), not the voters, elect our local politicians.
I am not sure who is more vile and disgusting: the vermin of the political endorsement industry or the apathetic uninformed citizenry of Harris County who have,by proxy, conceded and acquiesced the process.
What coffee or luncheon a politician attends and who is outright paid off is more significant to a successful campaign than what qualifications or experience a candidate has.
Unf*ckingbelievable!
The average citizen lives in an oblivious fog to this reality; while those of us informed as to the actual qualifications, ability and experience of the candidates in a particular race are self righteously appalled.
But lest we be hypocrites; most of us that truly are well informed on a particular race, are so for personal reasons; proclamations to exclusively serve the best interests of the community, notwithstanding.
One of the things I hope this new movement to awaken America achieves is that people of character become more informed and involved in the political process generally and not limit involvement to narrow personal needs. That not only do they become fed up with this corrupt way of pre-selecting our candidates based on payoffs and political extremism; but also that some of them decide to stand up and replace the self serving professional politicians.
President John F. Kennedy was profoundly prophetic when he implored Americans to: "....Ask not what your country can do for you; but what you can do for your country..."
Men and women in our communities with real life experience who have excelled in their chosen field based on ability and merit; whether in the private sector or in government, must actively decide to make a difference in the governing process.
Entrepreneurs, plant managers, small business owners, doctors, teachers and others should be encouraged and supported to take the time and make the sacrifice---not to enhance their careers or portfolios; but because it is the right thing to do for their community.
Giving back, for those that have been blessed with so much, is a privilege.
So if you're tired of inept professional politicians like Pat Lykos----get involved in the process and promote quality leadership for Harris County.
You have no right to complain if you don't vote and you should not vote if you are not informed.
In Harris County, WHAT an individual knows, too often takes a back seat to WHO he knows, literally. When a candidate succumbs to the brothel mentality that lures him into the political elite's backseat; we're the ones getting screwed at the end of the day.
The Harris County "King Makers" (as these skanks like to be called), not the voters, elect our local politicians.
I am not sure who is more vile and disgusting: the vermin of the political endorsement industry or the apathetic uninformed citizenry of Harris County who have,by proxy, conceded and acquiesced the process.
What coffee or luncheon a politician attends and who is outright paid off is more significant to a successful campaign than what qualifications or experience a candidate has.
Unf*ckingbelievable!
The average citizen lives in an oblivious fog to this reality; while those of us informed as to the actual qualifications, ability and experience of the candidates in a particular race are self righteously appalled.
But lest we be hypocrites; most of us that truly are well informed on a particular race, are so for personal reasons; proclamations to exclusively serve the best interests of the community, notwithstanding.
One of the things I hope this new movement to awaken America achieves is that people of character become more informed and involved in the political process generally and not limit involvement to narrow personal needs. That not only do they become fed up with this corrupt way of pre-selecting our candidates based on payoffs and political extremism; but also that some of them decide to stand up and replace the self serving professional politicians.
President John F. Kennedy was profoundly prophetic when he implored Americans to: "....Ask not what your country can do for you; but what you can do for your country..."
Men and women in our communities with real life experience who have excelled in their chosen field based on ability and merit; whether in the private sector or in government, must actively decide to make a difference in the governing process.
Entrepreneurs, plant managers, small business owners, doctors, teachers and others should be encouraged and supported to take the time and make the sacrifice---not to enhance their careers or portfolios; but because it is the right thing to do for their community.
Giving back, for those that have been blessed with so much, is a privilege.
So if you're tired of inept professional politicians like Pat Lykos----get involved in the process and promote quality leadership for Harris County.
You have no right to complain if you don't vote and you should not vote if you are not informed.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
