Pubby Hate

[feelip]

Why? Should any voting decision be made lightly or be based on irrelevant issues such as personality? If we keep treating hometown decisions as popularity contests, we will keep screwing ourselves.

 

 

If I don't like you I will not vote for you. Obama, Nathan Deal, Glenn Richardson, Jerry Shearin and Dick are all good examples.

[lumak]

I replaced the video with a permalink. Can you read the rest now.

 

pubby

Whatever you did worked - I can see all the posts now -- Thank you

[Georgia Dawg]

I watched it. I detected a "tone" that I would consider "said in jest". Was it the right thing to say? No. But I do not believe it was said with malice. I do also believe that Pubby is already so biased against him, that it really wouldn't matter what he said.

What Madea said!

 

My family all voted for Donovan in the primary and we'll be voting for him in the run-off.

Reading pubby's rant on Donavan convinced my DW.

Edited July 25, 2010 by Georgia Dawg

[Beach Bum]

I don't always agree with Pubby; however, I am personally of the OPINION that Mr Donovan's comments were not made in a joking manner. And as for referring to anyone as a "wide load" - now how unprofessional and low could it possibly get? My OPINION and mine only but Donovan is NOT someone I want representing our county.

[hart408]

If I don't like you I will not vote for you.

 

At least you admit it. I think this way of voting is very common. That's why our elected officials are about as useful as Miss America. We often view campaigners as contestants and not the protectors of our rights and way of life that they should be.

 

I'm going to need to see DL and DD in a bikini before I can make my final decision.

 

I don't always agree with Pubby; however, I am personally of the OPINION that Mr Donovan's comments were not made in a joking manner. And as for referring to anyone as a "wide load" - now how unprofessional and low could it possibly get?

 

Would this be a bad time to list everything I've called Pubby that wasn't caught on camera?

[Cabe]

I'm going to need to see DL and DD in a bikini before I can make my final decision.

 

[gpatt0n]

When I look for a Lawyer the last thing I ever look for is if they are a "nice" person. I want someone who is going to kick ass. I am NOT looking for someone who is going to be buddy buddy with everyone. I want a shark.I want someone who knows what the hell they are doing and will go balls to the wall to get it.

 

I have seen what we have in a DA and I am not thrilled at all. I am not sure if DD is the answer but I do know that DL is not....I am getting very sick of never having a "GOOD" person to vote for. Seems a lot of people are left with voting for the lesser of two evils way too much.

 

Solo:

 

We do differ. what you call balls to the wall I call a propensity to be inconsiderate, inappropriate and constitutionally questionable in the persuit, in this case, of a good paying government job that he's not qualified for on so many levels.

 

If he were balls to the wall as a criminal defense attorney, he didn't make very big waves in his chosen profession - criminal defense attorney - for 30 years. And, if he were that good an attorney at his life work, he'd have a reputation more like Jimmy Berry.

 

pubby

[lotstodo]

People who vote based on personality should remember how charming Obama is.

It isn't personality, it's plain common sense not to berate a citizen, former client or not, and a journalist (Pubby, you can thank me later) and call them names in a public forum if you are running for public office, let alone threaten a suit. It tells me that this particular candidate certainly hasn't exercised good judgment here, and quite probably will not as a public official. Anybody who has shown the temperament and lack of self control and respect for others to act in this manner, has IN MY OPINION shown himself to not be worthy of my vote.

 

There may be a place and a time for self righteous indignation and petty bullying, but not now and not here. No Sir. Not at all. It is the political equivalent of dropping trau and requesting a smooch from the electorate. His statements here have shown very poor judgment in my opinion.

[Cabe]

What really stinks about this whole topic is that those that are most in the know about how bad Drew Lane really is are not really at liberty to discuss.

[lotstodo]

What really stinks about this whole topic is that those that are most in the know about how bad Drew Lane really is are not really at liberty to discuss.

Unfortunately, my guy lost, but I will most likely write him in this time anyway. I can not in good conscience vote in favor of either candidate still left in the race.

[BH87]

Your inexperience in that arena is showing. They rarely represent themselves.

 

 

Yep, It has long been known in the Legal Field that an Attorney representing him or herself has the worst client. I can say that after working for attorneys for 20 years. 9 times out of 10, they will get another attorney in a specific field to represent them in any litigation.

[Cathyhelms]

What really stinks about this whole topic is that those that are most in the know about how bad Drew Lane really is are not really at liberty to discuss.

 

I don't think Donovan is the answer, I too think he has used very poor judgment. A good indication of the "real" person. When you run for public office there are some things you just need to let go of, coming on a local public board and "showing your @ss" is not quite as professional as a District Attorney should be. What's he gonna do when the police have botched a surefire case, sue the criminal or the police dept.??

[hart408]

It isn't personality, it's plain common sense not to berate a citizen, former client or not, and a journalist (Pubby, you can thank me later) and call them names in a public forum if you are running for public office, let alone threaten a suit. It tells me that this particular candidate certainly hasn't exercised good judgment here, and quite probably will not as a public official. Anybody who has shown the temperament and lack of self control and respect for others to act in this manner, has IN MY OPINION shown himself to not be worthy of my vote.

 

There may be a place and a time for self righteous indignation and petty bullying, but not now and not here. No Sir. Not at all. It is the political equivalent of dropping trau and requesting a smooch from the electorate. His statements here have shown very poor judgment in my opinion.

 

What is Paulding's conviction rate? If you don't know this single piece of information, you are voting on personality and your opinion only, not on anything factual.

[solosoul]

Solo:

 

We do differ. what you call balls to the wall I call a propensity to be inconsiderate, inappropriate and constitutionally questionable in the persuit, in this case, of a good paying government job that he's not qualified for on so many levels.

 

If he were balls to the wall as a criminal defense attorney, he didn't make very big waves in his chosen profession - criminal defense attorney - for 30 years. And, if he were that good an attorney at his life work, he'd have a reputation more like Jimmy Berry.

 

pubby

Guess yu missed my point....never said I was FOR DD. As it stands I will not vote for either.But being you are going on about DD record I take it you know his win/Lose????

[treasure]

What really stinks about this whole topic is that those that are most in the know about how bad Drew Lane really is are not really at liberty to discuss.

WHY not?

And, I have not been following the debated between WFAL and DD until now. What kind of case was he representing for you, why was he fired and can I find anywhere on here what you said that was so bad that he threatened suit?

Thanks

[MaineGal]

I refuse to vote for anyone that spent years in college, and still doesnt have a better vocabulary than a 1st grader. Plain and simple. Call me crazy, but in order to be a professional...um...you have to be professional. Thats the first step. Hugging the babies, and shaking hands comes later.

Edited July 25, 2010 by EJ78

[lotstodo]

What is Paulding's conviction rate? If you don't know this single piece of information, you are voting on personality and your opinion only, not on anything factual.

Is there any part of "in my opinion" that you didn't understand? IN MY OPINION, any candidate for office that berates a citizen and a journalist in a public forum while running for office does not have the temperament or self control to serve the public in any capacity. That would include anything from President of the United States through District Attorney, and right on down to Dog Catcher (no offense to dog catchers). Therefore I do not need to know the conviction rate to come to that conclusion.

 

Please feel free to base your vote on whatever you wish. Vote for Mr, Donovan because he's a snappy dresser. Vote for Mr. Lane because he kissed your baby or threw your lousy ex husband or brother in law in jail. Vote for for or against the (I) behind a name. Makes no difference to me.

[Beach Bum]

I refuse to vote for anyone that spent years in college, and still doesnt have a better vocabulary than a 1st grader. Plain and simple. Call me crazy, but in order to be a professional...um...you have to be professional. Thats the first step. Hugging the babies, and shaking hands comes later.

 

I very much agree! Professional is professional and unprofessional....well it is simply unprofessional - no excuses.

[hart408]

Is there any part of "in my opinion" that you didn't understand? IN MY OPINION, any candidate for office that berates a citizen and a journalist in a public forum while running for office does not have the temperament or self control to serve the public in any capacity. That would include anything from President of the United States through District Attorney, and right on down to Dog Catcher (no offense to dog catchers). Therefore I do not need to know the conviction rate to come to that conclusion.

 

Please feel free to base your vote on whatever you wish. Vote for Mr, Donovan because he's a snappy dresser. Vote for Mr. Lane because he kissed your baby or threw your lousy ex husband or brother in law in jail. Vote for for or against the (I) behind a name. Makes no difference to me.

 

You are certainly prone to hyperbole and emotional outbursts. You should run.

[lotstodo]

You are certainly prone to hyperbole and emotional outbursts. You should run.

I have too many skeletons in my closet and prefer to hide behind a screen name.

[feelip]

I find this whole thing amusing. My better half has been with a "REAL" law firm for the last 15 years. What we have learned is the guys that worked their way through law school are usually pretty good folks. The ones that daddy got through law school are about as worthless as tits on a boar hog. And then there are some that just plain think more of themselves than anyone else does.

 

The ones that have earned what they have and are comfortable in their own skin are actually good folks. Luckily, she works for one of the nicest (and wealthiest) attorneys in Atlanta. So Dick and Drew pale miserably when compared to this guy, but then again, what attorney worth his weight in cow sh*t would want a job as Paulding County DA?

 

Sorry CeeJay if you think I should vote for someone that I think is a miserable piece of sh*t, but it just ain't happening. I seriously doubt that you do either. Your just trying to justify your Donovan vote. If you would be honest you would just say that both of them suck and be done with it.

 

I have too many skeletons in my closet and prefer to hide behind a screen name.

 

 

Amen brother. Me too.

[hart408]

 

Sorry CeeJay if you think I should vote for someone that I think is a miserable piece of sh*t, but it just ain't happening. I seriously doubt that you do either. Your just trying to justify your Donovan vote. If you would be honest you would just say that both of them suck and be done with it.

 

 

It's not WHO everybody votes for, it's WHY people vote for someone. I don't know DD or DL. I try to stay as far away from criminal prosecution as I possibly can. You are right that I honestly don't really care either way, my sense of fair play just kicked in. I can't believe people would cast a vote just because someone got called a name. It wasn't even that bad of a name and I can think of five worse ways of saying "wide load" right off the top of my head.

 

I feel the candidate is getting screwed by this situation. If he says anything in his own defense, he is a bully. If he doesn't say anything, he only has a video and one side of a story to represent him. I truly think people are stupid enough to vote just based soley by what they read in this thread. Then our one-horse county is stuck with an elected official who is in office because he was "nicer."

 

People need to THINK about what they do because I'm stuck with the results, too. Don't vote for whomever shows up at your church to eat hotdogs. Don't vote for your cousins neighbor. Don't vote for the good ole' boy. Vote for who will do the best job. If someone has the job and hasn't done very well, vote in someone else. Jeez, people.

 

I have too many skeletons in my closet and prefer to hide behind a screen name.

 

Haha. An exciting youth keeps many good people out of office. Didn't stop Stout, though.

[feelip]

It's not WHO everybody votes for, it's WHY people vote for someone. I don't know DD or DL. I try to stay as far away from criminal prosecution as I possibly can. You are right that I honestly don't really care either way, my sense of fair play just kicked in. I can't believe people would cast a vote just because someone got called a name. It wasn't even that bad of a name and I can think of five worse ways of saying "wide load" right off the top of my head.

 

I feel the candidate is getting screwed by this situation. If he says anything in his own defense, he is a bully. If he doesn't say anything, he only has a video and one side of a story to represent him. I truly think people are stupid enough to vote just based soley by what they read in this thread. Then our one-horse county is stuck with an elected official who is in office because he was "nicer."

 

People need to THINK about what they do because I'm stuck with the results, too. Don't vote for whomever shows up at your church to eat hotdogs. Don't vote for your cousins neighbor. Don't vote for the good ole' boy. Vote for who will do the best job. If someone has the job and hasn't done very well, vote in someone else. Jeez, people.

 

 

 

Haha. An exciting youth keeps many good people out of office. Didn't stop Stout, though.

 

I don't do church or hotdogs. But if there is a politician that craps on someone I don't vote for them. I figure if given the opportunity that same politician will crap on me.

 

I have been around long enough to know that a good, hard working person makes a better employee than a cocky, highly educated person. And these politicians are our employees.

[hart408]

But if there is a politician that craps on someone I don't vote for them.

 

Hahahaha

 

You don't even need to go to the polls then.

 

We saw 2 minutes of video and heard one side of a personal story. Did Pubby kick DD in the nuts right before the video? Did WFAL heed all her attorney's advice? Who knows (and honestly, who cares)?

 

Please stop making me defend an attorney. Lord knows if this situation were reversed he would be sending me a bill.

[Gray_Wolf]

I don't do church or hotdogs. But if there is a politician that craps on someone I don't vote for them. I figure if given the opportunity that same politician will crap on me.

 

I have been around long enough to know that a good, hard working person makes a better employee than a cocky, highly educated person. And these politicians are our employees.

 

Then I guess you have never voted. Because I really see that none of the feds, state or local politicians really remember they work for us.

 

G. Wolf

[gpatt0n]

ON the topic of the conviction rate - and this would include guilty pleas - Drew Lane told me his was either 97.5 or 98.5 percent as we were standing out side the courthouse looking at the votes around midnight last Tuesday.

 

One might assume that the majority of cases are plea bargain agreements and we all know that only a percentage of the cases drawn actually go to trial. I would assume you're asking what percentage of cases that have been brought to trial have resulted in a not-guilty verdict.

 

I don't know the rate of cases that went to trial but my gut tells me anything above 80 percent is acceptable. Not everyone prosecuted is guilty and I'm a believer in the 80-20 rule in most things. You've got to remember, also, that the state I would expect that the conviction rate at trial would be comparable to most other jurisdictions.

 

Notably, the national DA's association suggests that these base statistics have little relevance to the actual performance of district attorney's offices. I've only begun reading their report but it is obvious to me we really have no real solid way of assessing the performance of the office. Frankly, I would have been more impressed by a challenger who presented something other than the blatantly false 'courtrooms are dark' fabrication (there are more than enough cases in the civil division to keep all Paulding's three superior court judges in work even if they didn't have one criminal charge to adjudicate.)

 

I do think that we should have a positive way to assess the performance and would encourage the DA's office to cooperate with some colleges or universities working to develop and assess uniform assessments for this function of government. Literally, the straight conviction rate may be too simplistic to be an appropriate measure.

 

pubby

 

Oh and Madea ... if there is a person or persons who have a specific case that they feel the DA's office has flubbed, you might want to discuss it with me as I feel I am pretty much an expert on how to get screw ups on the public record.

[hart408]

Plumley's literature says there is a low conviction rate for jury trials. 98% is not low, so I don't think those are the correct numbers. Does anybody actually know (as in not hearsay)?

 

From Donovan's site (just now looked, see, he's not my best friend): The Circuit Public Defender’s Office, which is mostly young lawyers right out of law school, has a 70% success rate against the DA.

 

I really hope this isn't the case (unless we are wasting time trying to prosecute innocent people).

Edited July 26, 2010 by CeeJay

[Gray_Wolf]

CeeJay:

 

I know that he wasn't ticked off because the video was taken at the GOP picnic on June 18th - a week before WFAL made her comments and before there were any negative comments on paulding.com.

 

It was taken when I was wandering around the GOP picnic and he just came out with that in his typically arrogant "I'm the only person that counts" demeanor. I was going to walk up and interview him and give him a little earned media, as they say, but he decided to insult me instead.

 

Obviously, I turned off the camera. I blew it off and forgot about it because that is just the way he is and has always been. (His personality is one of the reasons I've never supported his candidacy any time he has run. I've never openly opposed him or suggested he is the wrong guy for this office ... until he threatened WFAL ... which is what tells me this guy is not just not my personal pick, but would be a disaster in office.)

 

I know his 'resume' of experiences, including law enforcement, etc. would seem to be a good fit for that post. But that little snipped of video, which shows his true personality, does sum up why he never won an election and why he shouldn't win.

 

The greater reality of politics is that a lot of folks don't know the candidates very well. And so when someone calls them a pompous ass they figure it is because the person calling names is the ass because they've never seen that side of the guy.

 

It wasn't until last Thursday that I went back to see if I could find the clip. It just occurred to me then that this little bit of video may clue folks to who Dick Donovan really is, without having to call names. I mean, I'm no glutton for punishment and I sure am not eager to be known as wideload, but hey, I figure by failing to use my name (he knows it), he just insulted every fat person in Paulding.

 

pubby

 

Pubby,

 

Seeing this comment was in the Poll dated May 26, 2010.

 

Ceejay : "I'm sure he was pissy then, this is from May 26, 2010: http://paulding.com/...ost__p__3170534"

 

Blows this statement out of the water.

 

Pubby : "the video was taken at the GOP picnic on June 18th - a week before WFAL made her comments and before there were any negative comments on paulding.com. "

 

I wish you were this aggressive on the property tax increases, the airport, the new courthouse, what reservoir, school tax, builders not helping with the infrastructure or the case of the county spending loads of money to keep Surepip from seeing his day (according to Surepip).

 

I mean there are bigger fish to fry in this "good ole boy" county. But it seems that an outsider is worth going after. So are you part of the problem or part of the solution?

 

I am a native Georgian from the country. But I vote based deeds not words.

 

How well do you know Dick Donavon? Been to lunch with him (I have)? Gone to his church (I have)? He does have a very dry sense of humor (mine is dryer and I do it real well with a straight face)(I also have been on the receiving end of his humor. I does not bother me.) Think Groucho Marx. Have you been in court and saw him in action? (I have, He was great and kept a 14 year old boy from being tried as an Adult.) I am sorry that you would take a small snippet and use. It seems to me you are bias this time.

 

Mr Donovan is a good man and is the man for the job.

 

So I guess in my opinion, you are part of the problem.

 

There are at least 3 links that W4AL keeps bringing up DD. The first I saw was a thread for a bankruptcy help. DD does not do bankruptcy but W4AL gave her two cents on DD. Then again in the pole that Ceejay listed above. Then there was the thread about signs and W4AL "Observation" stated that Dick Donovan had multitudes of signs. I drove the length of Ridge Road yesterday. Chad had one sign, Drew had 6 signs and Dick had 11 signs. But not the five to one signs that W4AL eluded too.

 

I bet if I started a thread about homemade pies W4AL would post something negative about DD.

 

I really have to ask any of you negative folks out there have you really met Dick Donovan? Or as CeeJay pointed out just make up your minds based on what Pubby and W4AL posts?

 

Makes me wonder why we keep getting the same results...

 

My 2 cents.

 

G. Wolf

Edited July 26, 2010 by Gray_Wolf

[gpatt0n]

Hahahaha

 

You don't even need to go to the polls then.

 

We saw 2 minutes of video and heard one side of a personal story. Did Pubby kick DD in the nuts right before the video? Did WFAL heed all her attorney's advice? Who knows (and honestly, who cares)?

 

Please stop making me defend an attorney. Lord knows if this situation were reversed he would be sending me a bill.

 

I can say with certainty that I did not kick him in the balls and indeed, that was the furthest thing from my mind.

 

As far as the WFAL episode, her speech is protected whether she was factually absolutely correct or not. To be judged to have committed libel with malice she would have probably had to have suggested he was found in bed with a dead woman (other than his wife) or a live boy - and both those charges being a total, unsubstantiated lies put out with reckless disregard for the truth because you want to hurt the person - and maybe then there would be a libel case. A former client complaining about the service they received would not even come close.

 

To give you an example of the high bar for libel is for a public figure, I saw one of the supermarket tabloids on the news stand now published a story that Oprah was a paid sex worker when she was a teenager ... I would tend to think the story is untrue but the limit on libel for celebrities, for public officials, for people seeking public office is so high that it is difficult to mount a successful suit for libel. It is one of the downsides of being a celebrity or public official - people can pretty much say what they want about you.

 

The point is that in terms of first amendment protection, her comments were absolutely protected and his choice to write a threatening letter is just the act of a bully who has no respect for the rights of others under the law.

 

pubby

[halo 2]

I have too many skeletons in my closet and prefer to hide behind a screen name.

 

Lmao this comment is FABULOUS!!!!!!!!! I have said this same line many many times. Lol

[hart408]

I can say with certainty that I did not kick him in the balls and indeed, that was the furthest thing from my mind.

 

As far as the WFAL episode, her speech is protected whether she was factually absolutely correct or not. To be judged to have committed libel with malice she would have probably had to have suggested he was found in bed with a dead woman (other than his wife) or a live boy - and both those charges being a total, unsubstantiated lies put out with reckless disregard for the truth because you want to hurt the person - and maybe then there would be a libel case. A former client complaining about the service they received would not even come close.

 

To give you an example of the high bar for libel is for a public figure, I saw one of the supermarket tabloids on the news stand now published a story that Oprah was a paid sex worker when she was a teenager ... I would tend to think the story is untrue but the limit on libel for celebrities, for public officials, for people seeking public office is so high that it is difficult to mount a successful suit for libel. It is one of the downsides of being a celebrity or public official - people can pretty much say what they want about you.

 

The point is that in terms of first amendment protection, her comments were absolutely protected and his choice to write a threatening letter is just the act of a bully who has no respect for the rights of others under the law.

 

pubby

 

Haha. You'd have to reach his balls first (can't believe we are discussing this, lol). He looks tall.

 

I know you are on the free speech side. I know he irked you with his unkind comment and warning one of your board members, BUT you kinda went into all-out warfare against him (and honestly, y'all started it). If you are the press, you can't do that in good conscience. I felt bad for the guy and stepped in to defend him because I think media should encourage people to make good decisions based on the issues and not inflammatory, gossipy stuff like child custody battles and dry humor.

 

WFAL did jab at him several times publicly. As much as I like her personally, I don't care what happened with her personal case. That was a personal matter and has no bearing on his ability to do the job. I want to know if somebody out there can actually bring cases to trial and prosecute them successfully instead of letting them sit so long they have to be dismissed.

 

I want to hear from someone out there who was a victim of a crime and never got their day in court. I bet they don't care about his personality. They never got justice. What do they say? Justice delayed is justice denied. How many drug dealers have been released or violent cases dismissed or cheaters/thieves/liars released without any consequences? How many will reoffend because they have time to rape and pillage before their case even hits the docket? How many innocent people are sitting in jail (I know, everybody is innocent in jail) waiting for their day?

 

What you are pushing really has nothing to do with anything that matters to the rest of us regarding the DA. It is a personal fight, like WFAL's. Yes, I know free speech is a cornerstone and all that, but you are using it as a diversionary tactic when we should be focusing on fixing what is broken in Paulding.

[gpatt0n]

Pubby,

 

Seeing this comment was in the Poll dated May 26, 2010.

 

Ceejay : "I'm sure he was pissy then, this is from May 26, 2010: http://paulding.com/...ost__p__3170534"

 

Blows this statement out of the water.

 

Pubby : "the video was taken at the GOP picnic on June 18th - a week before WFAL made her comments and before there were any negative comments on paulding.com. "

 

I wish you were this aggressive on the property tax increases, the airport, the new courthouse, what reservoir, school tax, builders not helping with the infrastructure or the case of the county spending loads of money to keep Surepip from seeing his day (according to Surepip).

 

I mean there are bigger fish to fry in this "good ole boy" county. But it seems that an outsider is worth going after. So are you part of the problem or part of the solution?

 

I am a native Georgian from the country. But I vote based deeds not words.

 

How well do you know Dick Donavon? Been to lunch with him (I have)? Gone to his church (I have)? He does have a very dry sense of humor (mine is dryer and I do it real well with a straight face)(I also have been on the receiving end of his humor. I does not bother me.) Think Groucho Marx. Have you been in court and saw him in action? (I have, He was great and kept a 14 year old boy from being tried as an Adult.) I am sorry that you would take a small snippet and use. It seems to me you are bias this time.

 

Mr Donovan is a good man and is the man for the job.

 

So I guess in my opinion, you are part of the problem.

 

There are at least 3 links that W4AL keeps bringing up DD. The first I saw was a thread for a bankruptcy help. DD does not do bankruptcy but W4AL gave her two cents on DD. Then again in the pole that Ceejay listed above. Then there was the thread about signs and W4AL "Observation" stated that Dick Donovan had multitudes of signs. I drove the length of Ridge Road yesterday. Chad had one sign, Drew had 6 signs and Dick had 11 signs. But not the five to one signs that W4AL eluded too.

 

I bet if I started a thread about homemade pies W4AL would post something negative about DD.

 

I really have to ask any of you negative folks out there have you really met Dick Donovan? Or as CeeJay pointed out just make up your minds based on what Pubby and W4AL posts?

 

Makes me wonder why we keep getting the same results...

 

My 2 cents.

 

G. Wolf

 

G. Wolf:

 

Okay, so Dick Donovan was pissed at WFAL and that is why he called me wideload out of the blue. If you read that entire thread you'd know that no one - me included - either endorsed or rejected WFAL's initial comment. It stood on its own.

 

Now, I think you know - I certainly know - that I'm not responsible for what you say, what COWA says, what Deadeye says, what anyone other than I say on the open forums of this board.

 

So why are you saying that Dick was justified at calling me wideload because, three weeks earlier WFAL wrote what she did. That is a stretch, you know.

 

Frankly, I was not 'against' Dick until WFAL came to me with notice she was considering providing a retraction and apology for her comments because Donovan wrote her the threatening letter.

 

Until then, I was okay with Donovan. I knew he was arrogant - the video was taken on June 18th and you didn't see it then, you note - because I wasn't for or against anyone in the DA's race until I got the PM from WFAL relating the threat. That was a bad move on his part. To me it trashing the first amendment

 

That bit of bullying of a member her pissed me off and led me to the conclusion that this guy has no respect for the first amendment.

 

I've not seen anything since that would change my opinion.

 

As far as the other issues you raised...

 

I wish you were this aggressive on the property tax increases, the airport, the new courthouse, what reservoir, school tax, builders not helping with the infrastructure or the case of the county spending loads of money to keep Surepip from seeing his day (according to Surepip).

 

... how often did you read about them in the AJC, Neighbor, Sentinel or New Era. You know about them because of paulding.com and because of my commitment to the first amendment's protections of free speech.

 

The reason I came down on Dick Donovan is because I am aggressively protecting those freedoms from an attorney who thinks he can invoke libel to bully people into being quite. Do you think I would have been any less aggressive had the county attorney threatened surepip? Do you not think I've encouraged those who want to talk about schools to insist that they be given the information they are entitled?

 

Let me just say, I glad you had lunch with Dick Donovan and that your reading of his dry sense of humor excuses his being plainly rude to me in your mind. And you know, we may even be on the same page with the Groucho analogy ... Dick could well be a joke.

 

pubby

[workingforaliving]

WFAL did jab at him several times publicly. As much as I like her personally, I don't care what happened with her personal case. That was a personal matter and has no bearing on his ability to do the job. I want to know if somebody out there can actually bring cases to trial and prosecute them successfully instead of letting them sit so long they have to be dismissed.

Dudes, I left for the day and you guys exploded this thread....which, FTR, was started by a Donovan supporter.

 

CeeJay---I acknowledge that I made the first comments. It wasn't a "jab at him" statement, it was a "this guy was my attorney and I fired him" statement. I believe it has a direct bearing on his abities to be DA. MY case, that he was paid to defend, was not important to him. As I've said in other threads about the topics, if he doesn't care about someone PAYING him to do a job, what the hell is going to happen to someone he doesn't feel like deserves his full attention....I don't know how the money part of the DA job works, but I suspect salary instead of billable hours.

 

My opinion of Donovan is that he uses fear as a controling mechinism. You know as well as I do that any man who uses fear to control a woman is a coward and not worthy of the balls discussed in the part of your comment I deleted. THIS is what it has become about for me. I don't even care about the case anymore, I've got a new guy who is kicking ass, taking names, and not making me feel like everything that goes wrong is MY fault.

[Cabe]

pubby

 

Oh and Madea ... if there is a person or persons who have a specific case that they feel the DA's office has flubbed, you might want to discuss it with me as I feel I am pretty much an expert on how to get screw ups on the public record.

 

Thanks, but I'll pass. I have a 20 year reputation to protect.

[hart408]

Dudes, I left for the day and you guys exploded this thread....which, FTR, was started by a Donovan supporter.

 

CeeJay---I acknowledge that I made the first comments. It wasn't a "jab at him" statement, it was a "this guy was my attorney and I fired him" statement. I believe it has a direct bearing on his abities to be DA. MY case, that he was paid to defend, was not important to him. As I've said in other threads about the topics, if he doesn't care about someone PAYING him to do a job, what the hell is going to happen to someone he doesn't feel like deserves his full attention....I don't know how the money part of the DA job works, but I suspect salary instead of billable hours.

 

My opinion of Donovan is that he uses fear as a controlling mechinism. You know as well as I do that any man who uses fear to control a woman is a coward and not worthy of the balls discussed in the part of your comment I deleted. THIS is what it has become about for me. I don't even care about the case anymore, I've got a new guy who is kicking ass, taking names, and not making me feel like everything that goes wrong is MY fault.

 

I was OK with it when the thread was started in the political forum. It was presented as a personal matter. But Pubby brought this to the front page and included a video that had apocalyptic, subliminal messages included and made it political. He made it seem like Donovan's comment was a political attack and not just a snide comment. He is purposely confusing people with his personal vendetta. I just don't think it is fair to smear a campaign based on two individual's grudges. I don't even have a problem with you posting your opinion, you are an individual. Pubby is playing journalist and attacker. I take issue with that. He is turning into Rush Dembaugh.

[hart408]

I changed my name and I am still the same person. It is a non-issue.

 

I have one personal concern regarding how the DA's office is lagging. I have a friend that was arrested for something and then wasn't charged (it was several years ago). He applied to have his arrest record expunged over a year ago. He is still waiting. Why does this matter? He can't find a job because they run his record and see that arrest. It isn't in the public's interest to be so far behind.

[Cabe]

I changed my name and I am still the same person. It is a non-issue.

 

I have one personal concern regarding how the DA's office is lagging. I have a friend that was arrested for something and then wasn't charged (it was several years ago). He applied to have his arrest record expunged over a year ago. He is still waiting. Why does this matter? He can't find a job because they run his record and see that arrest. It isn't in the public's interest to be so far behind.

 

And it's happening more than Drew Lane would want you to know.

[gpatt0n]

CeeJay:

 

Pardon me, I wouldn't call anyone wideload, even if they want me to.

 

You were talking about things not moving through the local courts in a timely manner.

 

Well, there is some truth to this. I actually did a story on that in Friday's news as well.

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Zj58DQhusu8

 

Basically, if you want to point a finger at someone about the case of your friend that was not prosecuted, recognize that Georgia General Assembly has been cutting back the funds it expends on the state's judicial system from almost 1 percent of the state's budget in recent years to less than .8 percent currently.

 

This is causing the types of issues across the state that are alleged to be the fault of the DA here. They are not although I have no doubt that Mr. Donovan's $12,750 'special negative ad' was designed to specifically to engender that idea in the minds of voters.

 

The idea that Paulding courts are dark, for instance, is just absurd. There are more cases - civil cases - than can be adjudicated by the three judge district even if they were not duty bound to hear the first criminal case. when I did the math using the formula for assessing the number of judges the Paulding circuit's caseload justified - they assign minutes of judicial time to each type of case - the result was that Paulding could justify eight superior court judges. We have three.

 

This is a larger statewide issue.

 

Here are comments from Georgia Chief Justice Carol Hunstein to the General Assembly last session in her state of the courts address.

 

I saw in a later publication that our general assembly continued cutting court based programs and certainly didn't increase the number of judges serving out justice for state residents.

 

Here are some comments:

 

Ladies and gentlemen, the state of Georgia’s judiciary stands at a crossroads. There is no question that we all have to do our fair share to help balance our state’s budget. However, it has become increasingly difficult to do our constitutionally mandated duties. And that is due to budget reductions. In 2009, the judicial branch received less than eight-tenths of one percent of the total state appropriations. That represents the judiciary’s smallest share of state appropriations in recent history, even as we have watched our state’s population and needs grow.

 

We have not resisted sharing the burden of bad economic times. Our judges have volunteered to take furloughs. We have eliminated positions and laid off people whose livelihoods depended on them. We have stopped hiring and giving salary increases. We have closed down law libraries. At the state’s highest court, our operating budget has shrunk so low that we had to return a copy machine that we desperately needed.

 

Just as Georgia’s courts have received national praise, today we are receiving national attention of a different sort. A recent article in the Wall Street Journal began like this: “The wheels of justice in Georgia are grinding more slowly each day.”

 

Cuts in state courts, the article says, have led to a growing backlog of cases, with months-long delays for many civil and domestic cases. Those hit hardest are already our most vulnerable citizens – abused children, battered women, the elderly, and others who turn to us for justice. The consequences of these cuts, though, hit everyone, threatening the basic constitutional rights of civil litigants and criminal defendants as core court functions go by the wayside.

 

And, according to the Wall Street Journal article, while judiciaries are being squeezed nationwide, “Georgia’s situation appears particularly severe.”

 

With cuts in county budgets, the crisis is compounded across the state, putting some court systems on the edge of an abyss.

Gwinnett County District Attorney Danny Porter recently said that a 9 percent funding cut his county commission was considering, would require his office to stop prosecuting cases for five weeks this year. He asked: “Which 9 percent of these victims do you want me to tell, ‘I can’t prosecute your case’?”

 

The unthinkable has already begun in Hall County, where the courts now close one day a month.

 

One superior court judge recently told me she had 16 death penalty cases pending. That backup can be blamed in part on the elimination of funding for senior judges. Senior judges were one of the best bargains this state ever had. They helped process cases through the system, and they enabled elected judges to spend time on critical cases.

 

We cannot talk about our court system without acknowledging the Judicial Council – our policy-making body, which is made up of leaders of every class of court. The Judicial Council includes the Administrative Office of the Courts, which provides critical research, technical and administrative support to our state’s courts. In the last five years, the Council’s budget has decreased by more than 20 percent.

 

Our Constitution guarantees the right to a speedy trial in criminal cases. That means that if the demand for a speedy trial is not met, that criminal defendant could go free. Due to the speedy trial requirement in criminal cases, some judges have been forced to put civil cases on hold. One judge had to suspend all civil jury trials for six months. In some parts of the state, it now takes up to two months to get a hearing in a temporary child custody case, when it used to take a couple of weeks. The precedence that criminal cases must take threatens the civil justice system – one that is critical to the health of our businesses, which depend on the courts to enforce contracts.

 

The reality is this: Our state’s largest court system – Fulton County’s – said earlier this year that it could face the surreal prospect of having to shut its doors some days of the month. Right now in Fulton County, there are 183 murder cases waiting to be tried; half are more than a year old. That county’s three domestic judges each gets 160 cases a month. Chief Judge Dee Downs put it this way: “This isn’t justice,” she said. “We’re losing the rule of law.”

We cannot afford in Georgia to lose the rule of law.

 

Aristotle said: “It is in justice that the ordering of society is centered.” The courts are the core of the nation’s legal system, the administrators of justice, the arbiters of right and wrong, guilt and innocence. In Georgia, it is the judicial branch’s allegiance to the letter of the law, our commitment to follow the laws that you write and pass, that safeguard our citizens’ freedom and security. The need for justice does not diminish with a shrinking economy. Indeed as our caseloads attest, it grows. But our citizens suffer when business and personal disputes are not heard and resolved. Our public safety is at risk when crimes are not prosecuted, and criminals are not punished. As the legendary jurist Learned Hand said: “If we are to keep our democracy, there must be one commandment: Thou shalt not ration justice.”

 

As I have said here today, Georgia’s judiciary is at an historic juncture. But with your help, it will survive.

 

I am confident that just as we in the judiciary care deeply about the laws you pass and have taken an oath to uphold them, you care deeply about maintaining our courts and ensuring that they thrive. Although we are three separate co-equal branches of government, we share a common mission: We are all public servants here to serve the people of Georgia. We are all bound to conserve taxpayer dollars. And we are all committed to providing our citizens with the best government possible.

 

The local complaints are a state legislative issue as much as anything.

 

pubby

[Cabe]

In the example from "WideLoad", the DAs office has two years to seek an indictment after someone is arrested. Two years! Arraignments aren't nearly as hard to get in front of judge as your friend Drew would have you believe.

[gpatt0n]

In the example from "WideLoad", the DAs office has two years to seek an indictment after someone is arrested. Two years! Arraignments aren't nearly as hard to get in front of judge as your friend Drew would have you believe.

 

Madea: Arraingments are automatic and must occur within a day or so - maybe 72 hours - of the arrest.

 

It is the first appearance after an arrest.

 

I'm sure the person was arraigned since he is out of jail and seeking to have the arrest record expunged.

 

Indeed, it would appear the person is fortunate as the DA does not appear to be pursuing prosecution. I wonder if they've allowed him out on his own recognizance or whether he/she still has a bond posted.

 

What I think you're suggesting is that the DA didn't have the person indicted by the grand jury. That is usually the first act that the District Attorney does if they plan to prosecute a case.

 

For the record, a person can be arrested on the suspicion of committing a crime. This is done usually on the oath of the arresting officer who may or may not have all the evidence in hand necessary to win a case. They will have a first appearance - an arraignment - where typically bond is set and assuming the person makes bond, gets him out of jail until trial. Law enforcement (The SO) continues to collect evidence and the DA begins putting the case together for the grand jury where they will ask for an indictment.

 

Typically the DA will present evidence to a grand jury (including the officers testimony). The grand jury will review the evidence collected and then enter a true bill of indictment. They may ask that bond be increased or revoked at this stage but often it is not.

 

At the GOP meeting the Saturday before the election the foreman of the last grand jury asked to speak on behalf of Drew Lane.

 

I didn't include video from that event at the time because the SD card I had with me was not large enough to hold the presentations of all the DA candidates in their entirety. I chose, given the short time frame and potential that I would be considered to be showing favoritism, not to show any of them. (I missed most of Mr. Plumley's presentation.)

 

Anyway, would you like to hear the presentation of the grand jury foreman? I'll do it in the morning assuming I still have that video on hand.

 

pubby