Posted on
March 19, 2008 in
Kelly Siegler is behind 4-1 in the informal poll I’ve conducted down at the courthouse this week of people whose continued employment doesn’t depend on Kelly Siegler’s election.
• A former Harris County prosecutor (now a prosecutor elsewhere) who served in Judge Lykos’s court would vote for Pat Lykos over Kelly Siegler, whom he describes as “nasty.”
• A young defense lawyer is planning a fundraiser for Pat Lykos.
• A longtime Harris County district court judge would vote for Kelly Siegler over Pat Lykos, whom she describes as “cruel.” A staunch Republican, this judge would vote for C.O. Bradford, even, over Pat Lykos.
• A longtime defense lawyer, who has a “Jeffersonian view of democracy” is pulling for a Democratic victory and general bloodletting down at the courthouse (to refresh the tree of liberty), but would choose Pat Lykos over Kelly Siegler.
• Another longtime defense lawyer, generally held in high esteem, is encouraging anyone who didn’t vote in the Democratic primary to vote for Pat Lykos in the runoff.
Totally unscientific and worth what you paid for it, except that it debunks the myth fostered over at Life that Pat Lykos has no supporters who know their way around the courthouse.
Well, the “myth”, as you call it, that I am fostering was originally based on the fact that after looking through all of the official Lykos “endorsements” on her website that I only saw one name listed that had any involvement in criminal law. At the time, that only name was Robert Pelton, who was largely rumored to already be her “1st Assistant”, should she win.
Now that Jim has given Lykos his “vote” (as opposed to “endorsement”. Yeah right.), I see that she has Tom Zakes and Jack Lee on her list. There is a “Jon Paul” listed, but I don’t know if that is the same person as J.J. Paul, or not.
Now, your descriptions of the people in your list is ambiguous enough that I don’t know who you are talking about. I do know that there are more than a few defense attorneys that gave their support to Jim that are absolutely livid that he gave his support to Lykos.
You kind of surprise me, Mark. You have been on an anti-Kelly rant for some time now, but you’ve really turned it up a notch since Friday. It would seem to me that you are either: 1) just playing Devil’s Advocate (because, let’s face it Mark, it’s not like you voted in the Republican primary); or 2) the flagrant lies, arrogance, and civil rights violations that Lykos has committed in positions of power don’t concern you enough.
You can knock Kelly all you want to over your issues with her, but her actions haven’t come close to the things that Lykos has done. Lykos is the legal equivalent of the Anti-Christ, in my opinion. I mean, seriously, how could she have referred to Mary Bacon as “f*ck face”?!?!? (And yes, that rumor has now been confirmed).
You and I have debated a lot of issues, dude, but I can’t begin to tell you how wrong the idea of even CONSIDERING Lykos is.
Sure, I’m anti-Kelly. But I’m also anti-Pat and anti-Brad. This election is, in the words of one of the lawyers I’ve polled, “a clusterfuck.”
I haven’t yet decided who I’m most anti-. That’s why I’m seeking the input of lawyers who’ve been around a lot longer than I have or who know the candidates better or have different perspectives.
I’m fortunate not to have to choose the lesser of the two evils; I haven’t pulled punches on Lykos either. When I have grave concerns about any of the candidates, I’m not in a position where I need to or should conceal those concerns from my few remaining readers. Maybe something I say will make a difference to someone who will vote in the runoff.
Neither Kelly nor Pat has proven herself to be a model of honesty, humility, and respect for civil rights. I don’t think either lady should be accusing the other of “arrogance.”
And I think it’s fair for Kelly to pay as a candidate for the sins that she would like the voters to attribute only to Chuck.
Further, I hated to see Kelly buying Hotze’s support. That shifted me away from her a bit — ideally, Harris County elections will not be decided by Dr. Hotze’s bought endorsement anymore. I hope that we find in November that that’s a thing of the past.
Mark loves to play all sides. He’s so very enlightened, isn’t he? Such an “anarchist”, right?
Well, the fact that he can see and hear all of the evidence against Pat Lykos and still bash Kelly really shows his true colors.
He really showed his true colors at the very beginning…when he gave AHCL the option of telling him who he/she was and him keeping it a secret or him finding out on his own and NOT keeping it a secret. At the time, AHCL jokingly asked him if it were “blackmail”.
It seemed that way to me at the time and it still does.
After that, he only just now posted AHCL’s blog link, even though AHCL had his posted long ago.
And the lag time on posting Kelly’s Reasonable Doubt appearance was no accident.
Mark Bennett is a snake in the grass.
Anon C, welcome back.
As usual, you speak, out of ignorance, of things that you don’t understand.
I should keep my mouth shut about Kelly’s failings because Pat also has failings? That would make me a partisan for Kelly. Pat sucks. Kelly sucks. Who sucks less? That is the question.
I should point out to our readers that I haven’t revealed your identity, though I have no obligation to you. Of course, I had no curiosity about your identity (you revealed it to me freely). I gave AHCL fair warning that I could determine his/her identity; in fact I did before he/she told me who he/she was, but we’re better served by his/her anonymity.
The blogroll isn’t worth a damn. What brings traffic is links within posts. I’d bet that AHCL has gotten more traffic from the 27 times I’ve linked to his blog within blog posts in the last sixty days (far more than I’ve linked to anyone else in that time) than I have gotten from having my blog’s name on his front page.
The lag time on posting Kelly’s RD appearance was attributable to the producer having to edit out Todd’s blurted curseword. In fact, when the DVD was ready, I told AHCL and gave him/her the opportunity to pick it up when I didn’t have the opportunity to go get it. You are a deeply paranoid person if you think I stalled it intentionally.
Finally, this is my blog. You will be respectful toward everyone here, or go lurk at Life where you belong. I shouldn’t let the “snake in the grass” comment stand, but it’s far enough off base that it doesn’t bother me much.
Be more civil in the future, and try to stick to topics that you actually know something about, and I’ll consider permitting you to comment here again.
But Mark, did you really only ask four people at the courthouse, and report that very small sampling? Did you simply elect to blog about four you found interesting without pointing out that the courthouse opinion, with regard to those likely to vote in the Republican primary, is more like 99% Kelly?
A young defense lawyer is going to have a fund raiser for her? Well, if (s)he is young – a relative term young is, but I assume that means they didn’t practice in Lykos’s court, and are basing their decision on who to support on the “I don’t like that prosecutor Kelly” point of view. Hardly not the informed courthouse lawyer, but understandably not excited about the most effective ADA in the county becoming the DA. I can understand that point of view and thus resulting political support.
A long time defense lawyer, Jeffersonian, who by your comments wants a Democratic ticket, and politically speaking isn’t inclined to support any Republican, any way, any how.
An ex-prosecutor, now prosecuting elsewhere – well, there are those who left Harris County because they weren’t cutting it, and there are those who left in good stead, for other life style reasons. Without knowing who you are citing, it’s hard to know whether they have sour grapes.
I think we all recognize that there are individuals who don’t want to see Kelly as the DA. But to imply you 75% of people at the courthouse were anti Kelly – man, isn’t that a little weak? You are down there every day, so you know more than four people who would talk to you about it. So, assuming you’ve picked a representative body of folks, that are interesting for the reader’s consumption, it just reads like a suspect list.
You acknowledge it’s totally unscientific and worth what we paid for it, but, man, don’t dump your credibility by saying “hey it isn’t worth alot, but for what it’s worth, word around the courthouse is . . . .” Four people? Out of three or four hundred lawyers or more? Clerks? Court staff? Really? Haven’t you talked to droves who’ve said otherwise? Why not at least acknowledge that while many other have a different view about Lykos as DA, there are some interesting voices out there who say they actually DO support Lykos. The REAL word around the courthouse is, if you had to pick a Republican out of Lykos and Kelly, Lykos is a disaster, even if you aren’t a Kelly fan. And than there’s all those folks who REALLY are Kelly fans. For good reason, too.
Even if you personally don’t agree with the assessment, at least recognize that the view exists. As one Leitner supporter told me recently – even the defense bar (alot of them who are politically aligned to the right/conservative ticket, and that is no insubstantial number by the way) who supported Jim feels like Kelly is the better choice. “If I’d have known he’d (Jim) do this (publicly say he’d vote for Lykos over Kelly), I’d have never supported him in the first place.”
It’s cool to point out individuals who have certain views. It’s uncool to make it seem like they are the overwhelming majority, when you know otherwise.
Pro.v, thanks for the comment. Calling it a “poll” was a bit tongue-in-cheek; my readers are generally fairly savvy (except for those coming over here from AHCL’s blog; some of them seem a bit dim). Most recognize, without being told, that a “poll” with a sample size of five (or four, by your count) has a margin of error of +/- 99+%.
One of AHCL’s commenters, some anonymous person pretending to be a defense lawyer, claimed that no defense lawyers support Pat. That was a blatant lie. The truth is that the defense bar seems to be heavily split over the two republican candidates. Every prosecutor (even the Democratic one) supports Kelly, of course; I probably would too if I thought my job might depend on it.
I would guess that more defense lawyers who support Kelly share that fact with you than defense lawyers who support Pat. I think you would be surprised at who supports Pat. The second longtime defense lawyer I mentioned was Craig Washington. The prosecutor started at the office before Kelly, and left before I was even practicing law.
I hope to interview the anti-Lykos judge more completely in the next week, and I’ll report back on the results.
Fairly and equilibrially yours,
Mark.