The Dallas Observer has an interview with the only serious, announced Republican in the 2010 Dallas District Attorney's race who will apparently be the guy competing with Craig Watkins for the slot next year: Meet Phillip Linder.
Espeically after rookie DA Pat Lykos in Harris County held serve for Republicans while Democrats took judgships countywide in the 2008 elections, the GOP will likely see this race in Dallas and the 2010 county judge contest as their last, best chance for a countywide pushback in Big D. Though recent electoral trends favor Watkins, I wouldn't be surprised to see this become a hotly contested race.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
.jpg)
6 comments:
"the GOP will likely see this race in Dallas and the 2010 county judge contest as their last, best chance for a countywide pushback in Big D."
What a shame. Here is man who is making an impact.
It's always been about the democratic or republican party and not the will of the people, well maybe not because us teapartiers, mob crowds, non-patriots, unAmericans and everything else we have been called are starting to fight back.
I long for the day when people run on their name and principals and not on party labels and affiliations.
There is no place for politics when it comes to Mr. Watkins position or the county sheriff. As far as that goes, let's get rid of party labels in our local elections and run on what the person stands for.
Good luck Mr. Watkins, here's to four more years of your service.
Amen. What does being a Republican or Democrat have to do with being the Sheriff? Or District Attorney? Or Judge? Or Constable? Or Justice of the Peace? It should be about qualifications, not dogma.
I disagree with Anon 12:31. I think party does lay a part in being a judge to some extent. During the guilt-innocence phase of a criminal trial, you're correct. Hearsay is hearsay regardless of party affiliation. However, during punishment, I believe party is important. Republicans tend to support incarceration while Demcorats support rehabilitation. Republicans focus on the "quality" of the victim while Democrats focus on the "quality" of the defendant. You can have Law and Order in both parties, they just have different definitions.
3:13 Most Texas judges in state and county court do not impose punishment unless it is a non-jury trial or if the defendant opts for a jury to assess guily and the judge to assess punishment.
When a jury does not impose punishment, judges usually assess punishment based on a plea agreement beteween the state and the defense.
You may have a valid point as it relates to federal court but I disagree with you as it relates to state courts in Texas.
Anon 3:31, that is not the case in Dallas County. The judge will assess punishment on an "open plea" where there is no plea bargain upon a plea of guilty, on trials before the court, and on jury trials where the defendant elects to go to the judge. Besides, plea bargains are not binding on the court. The judge may choose to accept or reject any offer brought before her. If she feels the recommendation is too harsh or too lenient, she may use her discretion and reject the offer.
Phillip Linder will lose. He is not the best that the GOP has. He is just an ego-maniac. Toby Shook was the best but he is too smart to run again. Phillip is full of himself but he does have a point about getting better training for the young prosecutors.
Post a Comment