Comments on: District Attorney candidates in the media

By: Pablo Escogageggista

Pablo Escogageggista — Sat, 03 Apr 2010 18:34:56 +0000

What’s his address?

*that’s a joke*

By: Probably Caused

Probably Caused — Sat, 03 Apr 2010 16:22:20 +0000

My neighbor looked at me today and said “hi.” Something about the way he looked at me makes me suspicious that he’s guilty of something. I want his house searched!

By: Eric Kirk

Eric Kirk — Sat, 03 Apr 2010 05:41:07 +0000

Erik, are you seriously suggesting that an attorney who has, to all appearances, attempted a fraud upon the court, should get the benefit of the doubt

I will ask one more time. What evidence do you see that Ed committed any fraud? What are the “all appearances?” Because if you don’t have any evidence, then stop it!

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Sat, 03 Apr 2010 05:30:00 +0000

I’m going to vote for Bryson. The other three are egomaniacs.

By: exasperamus

exasperamus — Sat, 03 Apr 2010 05:15:21 +0000

Erik, are you seriously suggesting that an attorney who has, to all appearances, attempted a fraud upon the court, should get the benefit of the doubt, whilst the attorney who exposed same should be pilloried? And wait, before you answer, remember that the next question is what would you say about a prosecutor who did something similar after an
“altered” criminal record was offered, then pocketed with the comment
“pretty slick”.

By: Eric Kirk

Eric Kirk — Sat, 03 Apr 2010 04:35:15 +0000

Cap – the whole point is that there was no matter to pursue. No basis for anything. And I realize that Ed isn’t on trial. He was merely collateral damage.

What makes it particularly eggregious is that there was no way Ed could defend himself.

By: ruark

ruark — Sat, 03 Apr 2010 03:41:39 +0000

4th ?

Wow. So much for logic and rational thought

By: Bystander

Bystander — Sat, 03 Apr 2010 02:16:58 +0000

DA office has been gutted, along with the DA ran child program

There are plenty of things to criticize Gallegos about, but Capdiamont stupidly listens to Rose, so he attacks Gallegos for the wrong things.

By: capdiamont

capdiamont — Sat, 03 Apr 2010 01:14:47 +0000

Those looking for meaning in silence, need to consider jobs, and general life.

I mean Cap, seriously. Tell me why you agree that checking over Jackson’s claims about the documents and complimenting her for the find in any way points to guilt on Ed’s part. I would love to hear a rational argument.

Completely wrong take, Ed isn’t on trial here. It is Gags, deliberate, or incompetence in pursuing the matter.

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Fri, 02 Apr 2010 20:41:12 +0000

woooooshhh. That’s the sound of gentle wind passing through the trees made audible by the relative silence.