AVERY vs BRADDOCK

[WHITEY]

LET'S HAVE A DEBATE BETWEEN THE CANDIDATES

[Animal]

Now that will never happen Whitey,She knows very well that she couldn't hold water to Will. And she has no right to represent the people,can you imagine her trying to figure out how to even get there! Then when the others see her and talk to her it is all over but the crying. They will laugh there butts off and know that Paulding county is in poor shape.

[FreeBird]

I've always thought that the front runner never has anything to gain by a debate.

[feelip]

I've always thought that the front runner never has anything to gain by a debate.

 

 

I have always heard that someone with a shady past has to keep it out of the public eye.

[misterpolitics]

I've always thought that the front runner never has anything to gain by a debate.

 

Well I, for one, think Will has much to gain from a debate

[FreeBird]

hahaha, you have to remember that the voting public is comprised of 13 informed voters and the rest that vote for a registered trademark or demorat.

 

Out of 50,000+ registered voters, 10,000 will show up and it will be a 65/35 split.

 

I'd be happy to put some cash on the outcome of the race.

[misterpolitics]

hahaha, you have to remember that the voting public is comprised of 13 informed voters and the rest that vote for a registered trademark or demorat.

 

Out of 50,000+ registered voters, 10,000 will show up and it will be a 65/35 split.

 

I'd be happy to put some cash on the outcome of the race.

 

I'd put money down on the number of informed voters as well as the number of registered in D-19

[feelip]

hahaha, you have to remember that the voting public is comprised of 13 informed voters and the rest that vote for a registered trademark or demorat.

 

Out of 50,000+ registered voters, 10,000 will show up and it will be a 65/35 split.

 

I'd be happy to put some cash on the outcome of the race.

 

 

You were pretty sure Shearin was going to win too weren't you?

[halo 2]

i think it sucks that people vote for a D or R instead of the individual. I have voted probably 85% Republican but there is NO WAY i will vote for PB in this race... I truly think its SAD that people chose to vote party lines instead of being informed and voting for the right person. NO ONE would vote for PB if she ran on the Dem ticket because she is a "criminal"!!!! This would be BLOWN WAY THE HE** out of the water if she were a Dem.... Regardless a Moderate Democrat is better than the most concervative CROOKS/CRIMINAL on the ticket.

 

Please consider voting for the ONE CANDIDATE THAT DOES NOT HAVE A CRIMINAL RECORD.......

 

This REPUBLICAN will be voting for the NON CRIMINAL and up standing Paulding Resident WILL AVERY!!!!

 

Will AVERY... the Moderate/Old time Democrat WITH OUT a RAP SHEET....

[Guest Hi~ho Silver]

hahaha, you have to remember that the voting public is comprised of 13 informed voters and the rest that vote for a registered trademark or demorat.

 

Out of 50,000+ registered voters, 10,000 will show up and it will be a 65/35 split.

 

I'd be happy to put some cash on the outcome of the race.

I was thinking the exact same thing this morning. I can tell you who will win that split. I'll take some of that action.

[Hee Haw]

LET'S HAVE A DEBATE BETWEEN THE CANDIDATES

 

Why bother? You and everyone else reading this post already know who they are going to vote for between the two, if they vote for anyone at all.......

[feelip]

I was thinking the exact same thing this morning. I can tell you who will win that split. I'll take some of that action.

[marvinthemartian]

I am too lazy to do the research I admit it......if PB truly is a convicted criminal as some have at least implied, what exactly is she guilty of doing that broke the law? I am just curious because I honestly do not know.

[gpatt0n]

hahaha, you have to remember that the voting public is comprised of 13 informed voters and the rest that vote for a registered trademark or demorat.

 

Out of 50,000+ registered voters, 10,000 will show up and it will be a 65/35 split.

 

I'd be happy to put some cash on the outcome of the race.

 

I nominate this for the most cynical post of the year.

 

I don't buy that the public is this uninformed.

 

pubby

[JohnnyJ]

hahaha, you have to remember that the voting public is comprised of 13 informed voters and the rest that vote for a registered trademark or demorat.

 

Out of 50,000+ registered voters, 10,000 will show up and it will be a 65/35 split.

 

I'd be happy to put some cash on the outcome of the race.

 

I expect a closer race, probably 51/49.

 

The key to who wins is whoever can get their supporters to the polls.

 

And NO, the public is not un-informed.

[gpatt0n]

I am too lazy to do the research I admit it......if PB truly is a convicted criminal as some have at least implied, what exactly is she guilty of doing that broke the law? I am just curious because I honestly do not know.

 

Marvinthemartian:

 

She is not a convicted criminal.

 

She committed a criminal act - she doctored some receipts and sought insurance payment on the basis of those doctored documents. She was indicted and arrested for felony insurance fraud. Because she did not have a prior criminal record, she was allowed to enter a pre-trial diversion program that, provided she admitted her guilt publicly, would allow her to plea nolo (no contest) and avoid a guilty verdict. Still, paid a fine and was required to provide 100 hours of public service.

 

There is a pcom story here. If you scroll to the bottom of the article you'll see a link to a pdf that contains copies of the court papers in this case.

 

To help you understand the legalism of the nolo, remember that if you've got a good attorney and get caught driving drunk - say a .15 BAC - and it is your first offense and you didn't have a wreck and you take the drunk driving course and agree to attend AA and put on an orange uniform and pick up garbage on the side of the road you can plea nolo on your first offense.

 

It goes on your record as a nolo and about the way it helps you is you don't have to say you've been convicted of being a drunk driver. That is the good news. The bad news is that even with a nolo, you're a drunk driver and everyone knows that you admitted to driving drunk. You had to in order for a judge to accept your nolo plea.

 

Oh, and in the case of a nolo for a crime like felony insurance fraud you don't lose your civil rights (the right to vote and the ability to hold public office.)

 

pubby

[+North of the Border]

Dont like either one...but I can almost assure you no Democrat in the 19th district will get near 49%. Even with Braddock you are looking at 43-44% at best. Especially with the National anti-Democratic furor.

I expect a closer race, probably 51/49.

 

The key to who wins is whoever can get their supporters to the polls.

 

And NO, the public is not un-informed.

[Cabe]

Marvinthemartian:

 

She is not a convicted criminal.

 

She committed a criminal act - she doctored some receipts and sought insurance payment on the basis of those doctored documents. She was indicted and arrested for felony insurance fraud. Because she did not have a prior criminal record, she was allowed to enter a pre-trial diversion program that, provided she admitted her guilt publicly, would allow her to plea nolo (no contest) and avoid a guilty verdict. Still, paid a fine and was required to provide 100 hours of public service.

 

There is a pcom story here. If you scroll to the bottom of the article you'll see a link to a pdf that contains copies of the court papers in this case.

 

To help you understand the legalism of the nolo, remember that if you've got a good attorney and get caught driving drunk - say a .15 BAC - and it is your first offense and you didn't have a wreck and you take the drunk driving course and agree to attend AA and put on an orange uniform and pick up garbage on the side of the road you can plea nolo on your first offense.

 

It goes on your record as a nolo and about the way it helps you is you don't have to say you've been convicted of being a drunk driver. That is the good news. The bad news is that even with a nolo, you're a drunk driver and everyone knows that you admitted to driving drunk. You had to in order for a judge to accept your nolo plea.

 

Oh, and in the case of a nolo for a crime like felony insurance fraud you don't lose your civil rights (the right to vote and the ability to hold public office.)

 

pubby

 

Martian, PLEASE read it for yourself. There's way too much misinformation in this post to be credible. Pubby, a good reporter would get their legal terms, and what they mean, straight.

[Guest Hi~ho Silver]

I don't buy that the public is this uninformed.

 

Sure they are. If most of the voting public was informed at all, we wouldn't have the progressive regime we have now.

[WHITEY]

Sure they are. If most of the voting public was informed at all, we wouldn't have the progressive regime we have now.

This is all the more reason to have a debate

 

 

LET'S HAVE A DEBATE

[SoldbyShawna]

Can a dead horse die again? and again? and again?

 

Good golly Miss Molly!

[Georgia Dawg]

This is all the more reason to have a debate

 

 

LET'S HAVE A DEBATE

 

A debate won't change anyone's mind except for the few undecided.

[Cathyhelms]

Can a dead horse die again? and again? and again?

 

Good golly Miss Molly!

 

I guess until it's buried it still raises a stink. Now where did I put that shovel I offered the other day.

[Mason Rountree]

Marvinthemartian:

 

She is not a convicted criminal.

 

She committed a criminal act - she doctored some receipts and sought insurance payment on the basis of those doctored documents. She was indicted and arrested for felony insurance fraud. Because she did not have a prior criminal record, she was allowed to enter a pre-trial diversion program that, provided she admitted her guilt publicly, would allow her to plea nolo (no contest) and avoid a guilty verdict. Still, paid a fine and was required to provide 100 hours of public service.

 

There is a pcom story here. If you scroll to the bottom of the article you'll see a link to a pdf that contains copies of the court papers in this case.

 

To help you understand the legalism of the nolo, remember that if you've got a good attorney and get caught driving drunk - say a .15 BAC - and it is your first offense and you didn't have a wreck and you take the drunk driving course and agree to attend AA and put on an orange uniform and pick up garbage on the side of the road you can plea nolo on your first offense.

 

It goes on your record as a nolo and about the way it helps you is you don't have to say you've been convicted of being a drunk driver. That is the good news. The bad news is that even with a nolo, you're a drunk driver and everyone knows that you admitted to driving drunk. You had to in order for a judge to accept your nolo plea.

 

Oh, and in the case of a nolo for a crime like felony insurance fraud you don't lose your civil rights (the right to vote and the ability to hold public office.)

 

pubby

 

Pubby:

 

Your statements above are grossly inaccurate. It is true that Ms. Braddock was indicted for a felony crime. However, she did not enter any plea in the case other than a NOT GUILTY plea. She certainly did not enter a nolo contendere plea, which requires a plea in front of a judge. As a side note, Georgia generally does NOT use nolo pleas on DUI cases because the consequences are the same whether or not you plead nolo. In fact, a defendant cannot as a matter of law enter a nolo plea where the BAC level is .15 or more. It is possible to do a nolo plea to DUI, but it is extremely rare and judges generally do not permit them.

 

As for Ms. Braddock, the charge was DISMISSED against her, as indicated in the link you cited. It does not matter whether someone has a prior record or not in qualifying for pre-trial diversion, although it certainly helps. Pre-trial diversion is typically used for minors in posession of alcohol (to avoid a conviction earlier in life), possession of less than an ounce of marijuana (sometimes considered victimless crime), domestic disputes between family members (to preserve family unity), and where cases are WEAK and it is best for all parties to resolve without the time and expense of proceeding to a trial. In Ms. Braddock's case, my suspicion is that the case was weak, coupled with the lack of a prior criminal history.

 

It is factually wrong for some to claim she pleaded guilty or had to admit her guilt or even committed a crime (which implies that a conviction was obtained). To the contrary, she pleaded NOT GUILTY and, following the completion of the pre-trial diversion program, the charge was nolle prossed, meaning the State can never pursue the case again. She also did not pay a fine as suggested, which can only be imposed where a party is convicted or pleads nolo. There is a fee, though, to participate in the pre-trial diversion program.

 

I realize most folks are unfamiliar with the pre-trial diversion program (which, quite frankly, is probably a good thing since it means you have not enrolled in it before). However, I think we need to be cautious in making assumptions and accusations about criminal behavior by individuals, whether they are running for office or not.

[Cathyhelms]

Pubby:

 

Your statements above are grossly inaccurate. It is true that Ms. Braddock was indicted for a felony crime. However, she did not enter any plea in the case other than a NOT GUILTY plea. She certainly did not enter a nolo contendere plea, which requires a plea in front of a judge. As a side note, Georgia generally does NOT use nolo pleas on DUI cases because the consequences are the same whether or not you plead nolo. In fact, a defendant cannot as a matter of law enter a nolo plea where the BAC level is .15 or more. It is possible to do a nolo plea to DUI, but it is extremely rare and judges generally do not permit them.

 

As for Ms. Braddock, the charge was DISMISSED against her, as indicated in the link you cited. It does not matter whether someone has a prior record or not in qualifying for pre-trial diversion, although it certainly helps. Pre-trial diversion is typically used for minors in posession of alcohol (to avoid a conviction earlier in life), possession of less than an ounce of marijuana (sometimes considered victimless crime), domestic disputes between family members (to preserve family unity), and where cases are WEAK and it is best for all parties to resolve without the time and expense of proceeding to a trial. In Ms. Braddock's case, my suspicion is that the case was weak, coupled with the lack of a prior criminal history.

 

It is factually wrong for some to claim she pleaded guilty or had to admit her guilt or even committed a crime (which implies that a conviction was obtained). To the contrary, she pleaded NOT GUILTY and, following the completion of the pre-trial diversion program, the charge was nolle prossed, meaning the State can never pursue the case again. She also did not pay a fine as suggested, which can only be imposed where a party is convicted or pleads nolo. There is a fee, though, to participate in the pre-trial diversion program.

 

I realize most folks are unfamiliar with the pre-trial diversion program (which, quite frankly, is probably a good thing since it means you have not enrolled in it before). However, I think we need to be cautious in making assumptions and accusations about criminal behavior by individuals, whether they are running for office or not.

 

:clapping: :clapping: Thank you!!

[Beach Bum]

Pubby:

 

Your statements above are grossly inaccurate. It is true that Ms. Braddock was indicted for a felony crime. However, she did not enter any plea in the case other than a NOT GUILTY plea. She certainly did not enter a nolo contendere plea, which requires a plea in front of a judge. As a side note, Georgia generally does NOT use nolo pleas on DUI cases because the consequences are the same whether or not you plead nolo. In fact, a defendant cannot as a matter of law enter a nolo plea where the BAC level is .15 or more. It is possible to do a nolo plea to DUI, but it is extremely rare and judges generally do not permit them.

 

As for Ms. Braddock, the charge was DISMISSED against her, as indicated in the link you cited. It does not matter whether someone has a prior record or not in qualifying for pre-trial diversion, although it certainly helps. Pre-trial diversion is typically used for minors in posession of alcohol (to avoid a conviction earlier in life), possession of less than an ounce of marijuana (sometimes considered victimless crime), domestic disputes between family members (to preserve family unity), and where cases are WEAK and it is best for all parties to resolve without the time and expense of proceeding to a trial. In Ms. Braddock's case, my suspicion is that the case was weak, coupled with the lack of a prior criminal history.

 

It is factually wrong for some to claim she pleaded guilty or had to admit her guilt or even committed a crime (which implies that a conviction was obtained). To the contrary, she pleaded NOT GUILTY and, following the completion of the pre-trial diversion program, the charge was nolle prossed, meaning the State can never pursue the case again. She also did not pay a fine as suggested, which can only be imposed where a party is convicted or pleads nolo. There is a fee, though, to participate in the pre-trial diversion program.

 

I realize most folks are unfamiliar with the pre-trial diversion program (which, quite frankly, is probably a good thing since it means you have not enrolled in it before). However, I think we need to be cautious in making assumptions and accusations about criminal behavior by individuals, whether they are running for office or not.

 

Thank you for setting the record straight Pigpen. Thank God for REAL attorneys and not those that just play the part on paulding.com!

[bigocobb]

This Will Avery fellow...he's just 29 years old and still in college, correct?

[kcarlsonlpn]

Pubby:

 

Your statements above are grossly inaccurate. It is true that Ms. Braddock was indicted for a felony crime. However, she did not enter any plea in the case other than a NOT GUILTY plea. She certainly did not enter a nolo contendere plea, which requires a plea in front of a judge. As a side note, Georgia generally does NOT use nolo pleas on DUI cases because the consequences are the same whether or not you plead nolo. In fact, a defendant cannot as a matter of law enter a nolo plea where the BAC level is .15 or more. It is possible to do a nolo plea to DUI, but it is extremely rare and judges generally do not permit them.

 

As for Ms. Braddock, the charge was DISMISSED against her, as indicated in the link you cited. It does not matter whether someone has a prior record or not in qualifying for pre-trial diversion, although it certainly helps. Pre-trial diversion is typically used for minors in posession of alcohol (to avoid a conviction earlier in life), possession of less than an ounce of marijuana (sometimes considered victimless crime), domestic disputes between family members (to preserve family unity), and where cases are WEAK and it is best for all parties to resolve without the time and expense of proceeding to a trial. In Ms. Braddock's case, my suspicion is that the case was weak, coupled with the lack of a prior criminal history.

 

It is factually wrong for some to claim she pleaded guilty or had to admit her guilt or even committed a crime (which implies that a conviction was obtained). To the contrary, she pleaded NOT GUILTY and, following the completion of the pre-trial diversion program, the charge was nolle prossed, meaning the State can never pursue the case again. She also did not pay a fine as suggested, which can only be imposed where a party is convicted or pleads nolo. There is a fee, though, to participate in the pre-trial diversion program.

 

I realize most folks are unfamiliar with the pre-trial diversion program (which, quite frankly, is probably a good thing since it means you have not enrolled in it before). However, I think we need to be cautious in making assumptions and accusations about criminal behavior by individuals, whether they are running for office or not.

 

 

So 1000 hours of community service or whatever the duration was, that was just for kicks? Are you denying that a diversion program is intended for individuals who are guilty of a crime but, in the court's eyes, not worthy of a mark on their permanent record? Is it not a compromise?

 

 

mrnn

[Cathyhelms]

This Will Avery fellow...he's just 29 years old and still in college, correct?

 

Well......... he was in college, but now he's not because he wants the District 19 seat. BTW, he really doesn't have a clue his campaign manager was posting on pcom, there are a bunch of other things he doesn't know about him either. And the campaign manager had in his profile he lived in East Paulding and was posting from Dallas, GA. Funny he's never even been a resident of Paulding County. That has recently been changed to reflect that he is actually out of the county.

 

It appears they have not been forthright in a lot of what they have shared with us.

[Cathyhelms]

So 1000 hours of community service or whatever the duration was, that was just for kicks? Are you denying that a diversion program is intended for individuals who are guilty of a crime but, in the court's eyes, not worthy of a mark on their permanent record? Is it not a compromise?

 

 

mrnn

 

Let me guess, you have never been to law school but you did stay in a Holiday Inn once.

[misterpolitics]

Well he was in college, but now he's not because he wants the District 19 seat. BTW, he really doesn't have a clue his campaign manager was posting on pcom, there are a bunch of other things he doesn't know about him either. And the campaign manager had in his profile he lived in East Paulding and was posting from Dallas, GA. Funny he's never even been a resident of Paulding County. That has recently been changed to reflect that he is actually out of the county.

 

It appears they have not been forthright in a lot of what they have shared with us.

 

You are mischaracterizing many things in this post. For one, Will worked for a number of years out of college, both as a land surveyor and as an archaeologist. Just like Paulette has done, and at the same time, Will took some classes (in his case, to obtain a Master's Degree) while also working as a Professor (and a land surveyor). As I understand it, in this economy, many people have returned to colleges to improve their education. Will and I have never exactly talked about this subject, however it is something I presume you can broach with him.

 

Characterizing him as a "college student" is not accurate. There are bona fide college students running in other districts, however Will is hardly one of them.

[kcarlsonlpn]

Let me guess, you have never been to law school but you did stay in a Holiday Inn once.

 

 

Pot meet kettle.

 

 

My questions were for the lawyer, not you.

 

 

mrnn

[Mason Rountree]

So 1000 hours of community service or whatever the duration was, that was just for kicks? Are you denying that a diversion program is intended for individuals who are guilty of a crime but, in the court's eyes, not worthy of a mark on their permanent record? Is it not a compromise?

 

 

mrnn

 

 

It is abundantly clear from your questions that you did not take the time to read my post.

[kcarlsonlpn]

It is abundantly clear from your questions that you did not take the time to read my post.

 

 

I absolutely read your post. Perhaps you could answer the questions I've asked?

 

A diversion program is an admission of guilt without being recorded as such in one's record. This prevents deportations, employment concerns, etc., while still handing a punishment down to the defendant. It is essentially the prosecutor saying that they will not press charges AT THIS TIME if the defendant performs something such as community service.

 

Is it not true that if Braddock convicted another crime within one year of the diversion program, the prosecutor then has the right to TRY and CONVICT her on the arrest?

 

 

mrnn

[bigocobb]

Was he a real college professor or a teaching assistant while a graduate student?

[willavery]

Was he a real college professor or a teaching assistant while a graduate student?

 

I'll answer this one. While I do not have a PhD, I have been teaching survey level history classes at UWG for the last year while working on my graduate degree. A "real" professor usually has a PhD. However, I have been responsible for all aspects of teaching at the college level. I took this semester off from both teaching and classes to work on the campaign full time.

 

I have worked around the southeast as an archaeologist and land surveyor since I graduated from UGA and went back to school 2 years ago to pursue my graduate degree. I hope this clears up any confusion.

 

WA

[Mason Rountree]

I absolutely read your post. Perhaps you could answer the questions I've asked?

 

A diversion program is an admission of guilt without being recorded as such in one's record. This prevents deportations, employment concerns, etc., while still handing a punishment down to the defendant. It is essentially the prosecutor saying that they will not press charges AT THIS TIME if the defendant performs something such as community service.

 

Is it not true that if Braddock convicted another crime within one year of the diversion program, the prosecutor then has the right to TRY and CONVICT her on the arrest?

 

 

mrnn

 

With all due respect, you have no idea what you are talking about when you make statements like "a diversion program is an admission of guilt without being recorded as such." Please re-read my post. As for your second question, it depends; however, if a person is withdrawn from the program (ie violating the terms of the program), the State could attempt to prosecute, just as the accused has the right to defend the case. A nolle prosequi is not entered until the person completes the program.

[kcarlsonlpn]

With all due respect, you have no idea what you are talking about when you make statements like "a diversion program is an admission of guilt without being recorded as such." Please re-read my post. As for your second question, it depends; however, if a person is withdrawn from the program (ie violating the terms of the program), the State could attempt to prosecute, just as the accused has the right to defend the case. A nolle prosequi is not entered until the person completes the program.

 

If an employer or the INS either found out about a pretrial diversion, it is up to their interpretation whether it is an admission of guilt or not...just as a voter, it is up to my interpretation whether her pre-trial diversion was an admission of guilt. So yes, in fact, imo it is an admission of guilt without being recorded as such.

 

Secondly, you never answered why she chose to do the community service if she was innocent?

 

Thirdly, and perhaps most importantly, have you or your firm served as legal counsel for Braddock in her bankruptcy proceedings? If so, does that not mean that everything you've said in this thread has been said in regards to a client who pays you to represent her innocence?

 

 

mrnn

[Cabe]

Characterizing him as a "college student" is not accurate. There are bona fide college students running in other districts, however Will is hardly one of them.

 

Well, except for the fact that Will himself listed his profession as "student" when he initially entered this race.

[Coppertop's Pop]

Will, I voted for ya, but honestly, I think the national democrats (Obama, Pelosi, Reid, etc) have hurt your chances of winning.