Time for us to move forward
Time for us to move forward
view story
Tags:
Tue Oct 7, 2008 22:19:53 CDT
Viewed 1824 times
0 responses 115 comments
| Reply or Comment | Send to a Friend | Report a Violation |
Sun Oct 19, 2008 19:51:12 CDT
Before my post gets deleted again and the thread locked. Let me say this again. I believe State Senator Hagar and St Rep Morrison needs to get involve here. They need to ask the Senate and House Justice committee to investigate this. Both of them represent Victoria in their district and one of them even lives in Victoria.I also say that Jackson County need to be investigated as well.
If these two (Hager and Morrison) refuse to investgate, then in election 2010, they need to be voted out as well.
Sun Oct 19, 2008 19:38:50 CDT
I smell a thread locking and major deletion coming on.I hope CJ takes a good look at what's been going on and leaves things as they are. Everyone deserves to see what has really been going on. Besides, it may sell a few papers.
Sun Oct 19, 2008 19:34:40 CDT
rukiddingme, not only are they working hard, long hours, they are paid very little compared to what they can make in the private sector. We really need to appreciate all the lawyers in the DAs office, they are sacrificing more than we realize, to keep us safe.Didn't Eaves let that LE officer that raped at least one woman off with little more than a slap on the wrist? Something like probation & he had to give up his Law Enforcement license? I don't remember many people getting hot & bothered about that.1
Sun Oct 19, 2008 19:27:36 CDT
I read the story and all of the posts. Living in this town has always been interesting, from way back. Now that we have people posting their opinions of everything, it makes the printed word even more intersting.There are posters here who seem to want to bash the DA's office. You need to sit in the courtroom and watch the dedication of the lawyers who prepare and present the cases against people who have broken the law. I was honored to observe the end results of the months of preparation. So, when people bash the DA's office, for whatever reason, please remember that these lawyers are in the courtroom fighting for justice in these very difficult times.
One last thing, I won't argue with anyone about how hard these lawyers work, because I've witnessed it, firsthand. I have nothing to prove to anyone...just know that there are some dynamite lawyers working for our rights to be safe.
Sun Oct 19, 2008 19:20:14 CDT
I wonder if 1 of them would have been deleted if I hadn't responded to it. There seems to be some bias on the Advocates part as far as who gets deleted & who does not. Silence speaks a 1,000 words, guess I know who the unsolicited person is.
Sun Oct 19, 2008 19:06:27 CDT
There have been at least two or three post deleted. Thank you for the advice, Dig.
Sun Oct 19, 2008 18:50:12 CDT
"That's all I've asked from this forum; that informed people make informed decisions".We've made an informed decision. When you made your case and it was posted it became very clear what you and your crew were up to and yet you and your buds continue to harass and belittle those who decided your evidence plus your opinions weren't a true a accurate account of what happened.
"That's your opinion - unless you've taken a poll"
No, I just follow the comments and it's pretty obvious what's happening. Oh, that and the emails I receive.
"You're forgiven. Now go and sin no more"
Now you're showing your true colors. A little full of yourself thinking you can actually take over a position that's already been filled.
"Not necessay. Now that you've admitted what I suspected, my original assessment stands. I know that story. I have email and have heard from both parties involved. I also am pretty aware of what you seem to assume"
Just what did I admit to?
One party wasn't too pleased and expressed so. Are you saying she made it all up?
How do you know what I think? Oh wait, when you kicked the Almighty out of his job you also became all-knowing???
Sun Oct 19, 2008 13:51:50 CDT
"Ernie, you put forth evidence in the court and in this forum to persuade the court's and peoples' opinions. The court made it's determination of your case."I can't deny those facts. It's a matter of public record.
"The people following the comments section have made their determination as well."
That's all I've asked from this forum; that informed people make informed decisions.
"You've won a few people over to your view of what you have put forth and at the same time you have lost in that effort as well."
That's your opinion - unless you've taken a poll. If so, contact Mike, he's big into those.
"I didn't know I had to get your blessing before posting in the blog section."
Ovbiously you don't. The Advocate sets and administers the rules for that section.
"Please forgive me oh great one."
You're forgiven. Now go and sin no more.
Oy...
"Call your buddy and let him tell you what he did."
Not necessay. Now that you've admitted what I suspected, my original assessment stands. I know that story. I have email and have heard from both parties involved. I also am pretty aware of what you seem to assume.
Ernie
Sun Oct 19, 2008 12:51:24 CDT
Ernie, you put forth evidence in the court and in this forum to persuade the court's and peoples' opinions. The court made it's determination of your case. The people following the comments section have made their determination as well. You've won a few people over to your view of what you have put forth and at the same time you have lost in that effort as well.I didn't know I had to get your blessing before posting in the blog section. Please forgive me oh great one.
Call your buddy and let him tell you what he did.
Sun Oct 19, 2008 12:22:17 CDT
"What is questionable is your opinion of the circumstances concerning the documentation."
Opinions are, by nature, questionable. Both mine and yours. I produced the evidence to support mine. Not all of it simply because not all of it is "legal." I've seen nothing to support yours.
"Even the sworn statements were opinions showing only a onsided view."
No. Signed affidavits attesting to actual events are facts unless they can be proven to be untrue in which case they become perjury. The interpretation of those facts as applied to the law is a question for the courts to determine, not you or I. Even if you or I were on the jury, it would only be our responsibility to ascertain the veracity of evidence presented as fact. It is the court's responsibility to interpret how those facts apply under the law.
"When you put claims from all sides and factor in the other events surrounding all the issues it becomes pretty clear what was and still is really going."
What is going on, in my opinion, is a whizzing match between local LE groups. I happen to believe such nonsense has no place in LE. These people are supposed to be professionals and I think they should be above such elementary school ego trips. That is opinion. Whether actual events occurred as a result of that conflict is illegal is, once again, not for me or you to determine. I know too that legal or not, it's enough to dissuade me from voting to repeat the same situation for the next term.
"The recent actions by the players in these matters further support the conclusions that people who don't have a direct or indirect interest in have come to."
Huh? I'm not sure what you're talking about here but if you're inferring that a certain event which prompted your genesis as a "blogger" somehow affects this issue, you're trying to convince the occassional passer-by here that it'd be perfectly acceptable to toss out the baby along with the bath water.
"I'd love to enlighten you to the recent events but that will only be deleted AGAIN.., "
I have email.
Ernie
Sun Oct 19, 2008 11:48:13 CDT
Ernie, I'm not ignoring the documentation you presented. What is questionable is your opinion of the circumstances concerning the documentation. Even the sworn statements were opinions showing only a onsided view. When you put claims from all sides and factor in the other events surrounding all the issues it becomes pretty clear what was and still is really going. The recent actions by the players in these matters further support the conclusions that people who don't have a direct or indirect interest in have come to.I'd love to enlighten you to the recent events but that will only be deleted AGAIN..,
Sun Oct 19, 2008 11:11:18 CDT
I either didn't see or don't remember any post that was deleted so I don't know what all the fuss is about.Would one of you who did see it care to enlighten me?
Ernie
Sun Oct 19, 2008 11:03:44 CDT
BigJ, you have to be careful when stating your opinion in these forums. If you don't share the opinion of certain posters, you will become their target. If you poke holes in what some people report here as fact, you better be prepared for an organized attack.This particular thread is about Mayor Will Armstrong's article entitled "Time for us to Move Forward". From the title one would expect a genuine plea to let the past die out and a call to move forward in the best interest of Victoria. Instead, it was simply another swipe at the Criminal Justice System for daring to question his actions in office. Whether he likes it or not, this is how government by the people works. Mr. Mayor, you are being called to the carpet by "we the people".
Sun Oct 19, 2008 11:02:03 CDT
The documentation substantiating my evidence was presented in the petition to oust Tyler. Obviously, Dig, you chose either to ignore it or to disbelieve it. The former is your choice, the latter your prerogative.Ernie
Sun Oct 19, 2008 03:13:47 CDT
It is funny, that some people can not have an opinion.
Sun Oct 19, 2008 01:23:24 CDT
Since you keep *pointing out by starring consecutive* cases would this be the cases that VPD refused to swear that the information was accurate? VPD cut off access to it's databases alleging it would tip off Ratcliff that he was being investigated even though Tyler was already being accused of telling Ratcliff of the investigation and protecting him. What a farce. Once again you state things to be fact without proof and the Advocate allows it. Then you have the nerve to press people who question you to go to the trouble of disputing something you refuse to substantiate.
At the same time what has transpired in plain site is deleted.
Sun Oct 19, 2008 00:47:41 CDT
I have no need nor desire to look up statistics on other counties. If you believe it's standard practice to summarily refuse to review or act on 300 *consecutive* cases, you're welcome to dig up the stats. Again, it's Tyler's job to review ALL cases. He's more than welcome to dismiss or plead out those he deems unworthy of the court's time and resources. That too, though, is subject to public scrutiny. Tyler's stated refusal to even *consider* ALL cases (which would seem more appropriate than the actual number of cases since I'm sure Houston's DA's office is proferred many more cases in total) constituted a refusal to do the job he was elected to do.
I don't vote for Harris or Ft. Bend county DA's. Their stats, while of interest, don't directly affect my safety - nor my satisfaction with the one DA that *does*.
Ernie
Sun Oct 19, 2008 00:18:59 CDT
Ernie, you daresay, now show proof that other DA's haven't turned down 300 cases in 6 months. What are Eaves' stats? How many of the 300 cases you espouse were cases boxed and dumped by Eaves? What is the number of rejected cases by counties statewise over a 6 month period? What is the average of Tyler vs the rest of the state and nation under similar circumstances?The citizens of Victoria are taking notes and the recent actions in the online comments forum and the way the Advocate has handled them are being scrutinized by all of us. In my opinion it's not a pretty picture for the Tyler bashers.
Moving on??? From the article and the recent actions by you guys it appears that you and the Advocate have dug in deeper for another assault on our District Attorney. JMO
Sat Oct 18, 2008 23:33:03 CDT
Yes, DAs do turn cases down. I daresay however there are none who have turned down some 300 consecutive cases in a six month time span without so much as a review. Tyler did according to the documentation presented in our petition.It would be the business of the court to determine if that was illegal, immoral or fattening but for that to happen it has to *get* to court. The same goes for your accusation of "false charges." (Nice spin, by the way.) If Tyler (or you for that matter) feel those allegations were unfounded I suppose you or he would be within your rights to countersue.
Until or unless an investigation is undertaken and a court makes a determination however, I will continue to state my opinion that his actions were an egregious pursuit of a personal vendetta and contrary to the best interests of Victoria County and justice and we'll just have to let the public decide for themselves.
Ernie
Sat Oct 18, 2008 23:22:03 CDT
Ernie, here's your post:So, there are some facts that are quite evident. How about a straight answer to one you can't ignore - Tyler's refusal to review and accept cases. I'll ask you the same questions we attempted to ask the courts: Was that action professional? Was it in pursuance of the DA's mandate to seek justice? Was it *legal*? And here's your answer: Tyler's job is to review cases submitted by the various law agencies. He as well as DA's across the nation turned some cases down. Yes it's legal. Filing false charges, withholding information, lying under oath, perjury, and leaking information of ongoing cases is against the law.
Waging a grey area of war against Tyler has made the City of Victoria look pretty bad. Intimidating individuals makes certain people look even worse.
Sat Oct 18, 2008 23:11:09 CDT
Sorry... "for those in the cheap *seats*..."
Sat Oct 18, 2008 23:10:11 CDT
...and one more time for those in the cheap sears....We did what we felt we could legally do. It didn't work. No doubt some attorney somewhere would have taken our case and perhaps gotten our petition past the judge. We were offered donations and financial help but didn't accept any because we were not aware what legalities might have been involved.
And that, as they say, is that.
As for my continued discussions against Tyler, having failed in the court system we still have that singular American right to free speech. I, and others who're not afraid of Tyler, nor of his supporters' tirades, are free to campaign against him just as he's free to run again. And I will continue to do so.
So, there are some facts that are quite evident. How about a straight answer to one you can't ignore - Tyler's refusal to review and accept cases. I'll ask you the same questions we attempted to ask the courts: Was that action professional? Was it in pursuance of the DA's mandate to seek justice? Was it *legal*?
Now, at the risk of being called a self-proclaimed expert on Texas (and Federal?) law, exercise your right and give us your opinion.
Ernie
Sat Oct 18, 2008 22:46:27 CDT
It's funny how quick facts about certain posters get deleted, but those watching this thread know what happened. Sailorboi, I'll answer you and Ernie one more time since the Advocate's deletion of sailor's actions have once more emboldened you to continue your war against Tyler.You had your chance in court. You had opportunity to hire an attorney that would have prevented the technical error that stopped your attempt to oust Tyler. It's not that expensive and if you collected money from the multitude of supporters you claim to have, it would have been a minimal expense. It's been easier to play this smear game that rides on the edge so the facts you claim are not exposed as the sour opinions of those who didn't get their way.. File for a clarification of Judge Williams' order and post it.Still waiting for someone to post FACTS and not opinions of how the DA's office should be run by the City of Victoria.
Sat Oct 18, 2008 21:52:38 CDT
lol
Sat Oct 18, 2008 20:04:30 CDT
"oh on tv they get lab results back the same day"Even better 'n that; they get 'em back the same *hour*!
Course I'm sure if any lab in the state of TX had all the fancy gizmos and Flux Capictors those guys have no criminal would ever go free.
:-)
Ernie
Sat Oct 18, 2008 19:56:00 CDT
No Problem Ernie,It just seems to me if it was worded that way it's no big deal.
As far as the Law and Order comment, come on, everyone ( we'll maybe not) knows that's a bunch of bs, CSI is worse,"oh on tv they get lab results back the same day".
Give me a break, and No i'm not talking about Auto Zone.
lol
Sat Oct 18, 2008 19:16:29 CDT
Jbar: "Man, I am amazed that there are so many experts on Texas Law living in Victoria. I mean, some of you have an answer to everything, of course it's a one sided answer to "proove" your case against Tyler."Play it again, Maestro! One more time, I do not profess and never have, to be "an expert on Texas Law." I can read and while wading through Texas statutes is enough to befuddle most anyone, if you can show where any of the statements I've made are directly contrary to the law I'll be more than happy to retract them.
Of course the information I present, "true and correct to the best of my knowledge and belief" is designed to prove what I think is true. Saying that I believe Tyler is wrong and then posting all the reasons why he's right would be just a bit counterproductive, don't you think? Your disingenuous comment is self-defeating. Would a prosecutor enter a courtroom and argue all the reasons the defendant is *innocent*?
Oy...
Ernie
Sat Oct 18, 2008 19:07:43 CDT
Sorry, Legion. I don't have a copy of the affidavit at hand. I have seen it however and could, if necessary, dig up a copy of it but "to the best of my knowledge" was not the vein in which it was presented. I'm not an attorney but to my eye it appeared, as Mr. Smith stated at the time, that it was worded in such a way that anyone signing it could have been held personally and professionally liable if information they had not uncovered were disclosed at trial.Similarly, I don't have a copy of the arrest record form (or whatever it's called) that officers submit to the DA with cases. But I've also seen copies of those forms and they ARE stated just as you mention. "I swear the events on this form are true and correct...etc. etc...to the best of my knowledge and belief." or something similar.
Ernie
Sat Oct 18, 2008 18:55:45 CDT
Man, I am amazed that there are so many experts on Texas Law living in Victoria. I mean, some of you have an answer to everything, of course it's a one sided answer to "proove" your case against Tyler. But, at the end of the day, Tyler is the elected Law Professional you all picked and all he is doing is trying to "Rid the Law Enforcement community of undesireable Officers", sound familiar Mr Ure. I believe that quote came straight from a letter you wrote to the TMPA in which you went on to say you were withdrawing your membership because you believed the TMPA was just out to give legal protection to bad Officers, no matter what the details of that Officers supposed wrongdoing were. Funny how the very same man who sent that letter to the TMPA (which I have a copy of) now has a TMPA lawyer representing him. Mr Ure, do you still think the TMPA has a "win at all cost" mentality, and that they are putting undesireable Officers back on the streets? That must be why you have them, representing you huh? Makes sense!!
Sat Oct 18, 2008 18:40:56 CDT
Kind of a catch 22 then Ernie.What exactly did the affidavits state?
If they where worded " At this time, to the best of my knowledge, all information is true and correct"
What would the problem be?
Sat Oct 18, 2008 18:36:00 CDT
Legion: "What is so wrong with a DA or ADA wanting to know everything a LE investigator learned in any investigation?"Not a thing. That is, after all, the DA's job just as it is LE's job to investigate cases.
"...what would happen if say one of "people with money" in this town hired a hot shot defense attorney?"
I don't know the stats for Victoria Co. regarding how many cases submitted by LE actually make it to trial. I've heard that the national average is less than 10% and assume our county isn't far off that mark. But for the cases that do go to trial - and indeed for almost all cases - the investigation is far from completed when an arrest is made. Often the investigation is still continuing after indictments have been issued by the GJ.
It appeared to us, and evidently to the then city attorney, that Tyler's affidavit demanded that LE have completed, air-tight investigative results before ever handing the case to his office. That's expectation is neither realistic nor practical under the current system.
"The ADA or Da would walk into court , Put the LE investigator on the stand, then on cross the defense attorney would bring up things the DA or ADA had no idea happened? The Da or ADA would look like a fool or be on the hot seat for failure to disclose exculpatory evidence to the defense."
Your scenario is more reminiscent of a decent Law and Order script than reality. These things *do* happen perhaps but certainly are not the norm. In my estimation though, in such an instance either one or the other of the attorneys didn't do his job. A DA would be a fool to go to court without having fully interviewed any involved LE personell. That's not to say though that he needs all the information before even deciding whether to pursue the case or not - information that, at the time, may not have even been discovered yet.
A DA or ADA cannot be "on the hook" for failing to disclose evidence, exculpatory or otherwise, that he or she is not aware of. If the LE officer is interviewed by the DA or ADA such a situation couldn't happen.
"Meanwhile there is no conseqences to the investigator, without signing a affidavit about what he learned during the investigation."
Prior to the genesis of Tyler's affidavit officers sign arrest reports attesting statements that they are disclosing what they know about the case. The affidavit wanted the officers to sign would have them attesting that they knew *everything* about a case - or they could concievably have been held liable for information they did not have. The premise was and remains ludicrous.
"Think about it, would anyone want to take someones word for something ( not in writing) that could potentially have adverse career ramifications?"
Which is exactly why the officers were advised NOT to sign the affidavits. Thanks for making our case. :-)
Ernie
Sat Oct 18, 2008 18:09:27 CDT
very true Ernie.One thing about the affidavits that has bothered me...
What is so wrong with a DA or ADA wanting to know everything a LE investigator learned in any investigation?
IMO a majority of cases in the county and district court in Victoria are either a plea bargain or handled by a court appointed attorney.
That being said, what would happen if say one of "people with money" in this town hired a hot shot defense attorney?
The ADA or Da would walk into court , Put the LE investigator on the stand, then on cross the defense attorney would bring up things the DA or ADA had no idea happened?
The Da or ADA would look like a fool or be on the hot seat for failure to disclose exculpatory evidence to the defense.
Meanwhile there is no conseqences to the investigator, without signing a affidavit about what he learned during the investigation.
Think about it, would anyone want to take someones word for something ( not in writing) that could potentially have adverse career ramifications?
Sat Oct 18, 2008 17:41:25 CDT
Okay let me see if i can explain this without naming ppl.First a friend of mine brother was arrested during the time the DA was refusing to take cases. The family was told the case had been dropped by the DA's office. In that time period the Victoria 10 presented their petition. I believe that Tyler tried to cover his *** because he issued a re-indictment on my friends brother. The way I see it he may finish out his term but i bet he will not be re-elect.
Sat Oct 18, 2008 16:56:23 CDT
Legion: "Actually BigJ , Tylers indictments where refused by the judge for the same reason Sailor petition was, call it what you will."Exactly so. The difference is that I have no "J.D" after my name.
I know and admit that *I'm* not competent to be a Criminal District Attorney.
Ernie
Sat Oct 18, 2008 16:51:17 CDT
Dig, yes, sorry about being so long getting back to you. I too have a job and other interests and apparently have missed a lot of the conversations here over the past week.But I see Sailor addressed your concerns. Actually I hadn't deemed a reply necessary; I think most who have been following this are aware of both the chronology of events and well aware of the "Affidavit" brouhaha between the VPD and DA. Since I have neither the file containing the VA articles nor the inclination to go back and look them all up, these approximate dates will just have to do.
Early to mid 2007: Tyler complained of poorly constructed cases being handed to his office and proposed his affidavit.
August 2007: VPD and VCSO refuse, on advise from the city attorney, to sign and submit the affidavits. In response, as reported in the VA, the DA stops accepting and flatly refuses to review any case presented to his office by VPD and VCSO. This situation continues until Feb. 2008 when a compromise is reached through mediation.
Also in August 2007: The VA makes application for the release of records through the FOIA and Texas statute. Since the VPD in particular and local LE in general were pretty vocal about the DA's refusal to review their cases, it would seem their request to release documents pertaining to that issue was, again, simple common sense. This effort struggles through several months and repeated attempts by Tyler to thwart disclosure to the public of several records pertaining to case disposal.
I think it was in March or April 2008 that the documents were ordered released as public information by the state AG.
It's no secret either that the group seeking Tyler's ouster were gathering information in support of their petition during this time. Once the records were ruled public info as a result of the VA's efforts, we simply went to the VPD and requested the info. Pretty much a no-brainer.
While I often don't agree with Sailor's positions and usually don't agree with his manner of presenting them, I think he did hit this one on the head: Your continued characterizations are an effort at misdirection and obfuscation intended to confuse the public into believing your spin as fact.
I hope the people of Victoria are, mostly, more intelligent than that.
Ernie
Sat Oct 18, 2008 16:35:46 CDT
Actually BigJ , Tylers indictments where refused by the judge for the same reason Sailor petition was, call it what you will. AND not every count of Tylers indictments where sent back for "re-wording" just some of them.
Sat Oct 18, 2008 16:22:43 CDT
Do some posters recognize that the District Attorney out of Victoria, and the one in Jackson County are two different ELECTED offices?Run against, or support someone running against each one. As I suggest we all do for Victoria Mayor, City Council, and the School Board.
Sat Oct 18, 2008 10:10:28 CDT
Dig: "Bigj, please don't bore us with the same accusations as that laundry list was brought before the courts and handed back to the accusers. Please keep in mind Vicad's policy and do not state opinion, rumor, or unproven information as fact."Yet obviously it is perfectly ok for YOU to state opinion rumor or unproven information as fact.
As in your above comment. The petition was kicked out on technical errors... NOT on the evidence contained.
You however keep repeating that it was the evidence, hoping to sway people to thinking that by repeating the lie often enough.
And by the way. opinion is perfectly acceptable on Vicad, otherwise NO ONE EVER could EVER POST ANYTHING.
Opinion stated as FACT however (which you do ALL THE TIME)
is not
Sat Oct 18, 2008 09:51:02 CDT
Jbar, thanks for the correction and my apologies. I edited the post.Bigj, please don't bore us with the same accusations as that laundry list was brought before the courts and handed back to the accusers. Please keep in mind Vicad's policy and do not state opinion, rumor, or unproven information as fact.
Sat Oct 18, 2008 08:42:21 CDT
Bigj, please state specifically the incident or incidents where Tyler has misused the criminal justice system.
Thu Oct 16, 2008 21:47:55 CDT
Ernie, sorry it took awhile to respond but I have a job and more importantly other interests than Tyler and your crew's attempts to cya after losing in court. How did Vicad find out about the 300 cases?
Keep trying but it all boils down to the same thing. VPD wasn't happy about not being able to control the DA's office and did everything in their power to oust Tyler. The public opened their minds to the accusations you and your gang brought to the courts and you lost.
They lost.
Time to move forward.
Thu Oct 16, 2008 16:32:05 CDT
Sorry BigJ...I haven't been to this site in a few days...I may be retired but I do more than just sit at the computer. I have no urge to play jeopardy with you and besides right now I don't have the time to type the long answer you are demanding....
The state can intercede but they are not going to mess with this small time scandal. Again....They do not have the time, the money, nor the inclination to waste on a non-case when the victim has a rap sheet as long as Hwy 59 and is in prison. Besides Tyler has done nothing wrong or illegal...if anything L.E. might be called on the carpet in a real investigation.
Thu Oct 16, 2008 12:15:01 CDT
Humming the theme of “Jeopardy “. Too late South Texas, you just chicken out.
Wed Oct 15, 2008 19:03:34 CDT
South Texas.I can wait. I can wait until hell frezzes over.
Wed Oct 15, 2008 17:15:24 CDT
South Texas.How come you are NOT answering the question. The reason why because the State Leg. would find Tyler and Bobby Bell guilty.
I am beliving you are one of Tyler's cronies.
Tue Oct 14, 2008 12:28:31 CDT
I am waiting, South Texas?
Mon Oct 13, 2008 18:15:17 CDT
South Texas (& Bighorn too).Ok South Texas tell me something. Can you list me the duties of the House Committee on Criminal Jurisprudence, and Law Enforcement? Can you also list down the duties for Senate committee of Criminal Justice?
BTW, our State Senator Glenn Hegar is member of the Criminal Justice committee.
Sun Oct 12, 2008 22:37:47 CDT
Com'n you guys....do you REALLY believe the State legislature is going to get involved in Victoria's dirty laundry? They have neither the time, the money, or the inclination. Our garbage is minute in comparison to other scandals in other towns throughout the state. Texas is a big place.
If you read the Houston paper you know that Houston makes Victoria look like the local nunnery when it comes to dirty politicians and scandals among the elite. It's a sad state of affairs, but is a fact.
Sun Oct 12, 2008 22:29:33 CDT
The investigative branch of the Tx DPS, The Texas Rangers would/should be called in if charges against Tyler are true. Political hacks would serve no purpose except to muddy the already browned waters.
Sun Oct 12, 2008 21:51:52 CDT
"How did anyone know to request information on 300 plus cases? Keys to the city.Keep trying."
You're kidding.
The Advocate printed the story re. the DA's refusal to review cases long before any petition was filed. The Advocate made the FOIA request to release records to them regarding any such cases.
Common sense.
Keep trying.
Ernie
Sun Oct 12, 2008 21:05:26 CDT
Chris Cobler.Thank you for considering my suggestion. Rep. Morrison is running for another term and Sen. Hegar is our state Senator, they must intervene in this not only in Victoria county , but other nearby counties. For example DA Bobby Bell of Jackson county.
Sun Oct 12, 2008 20:40:08 CDT
Big J,I'd personally be in favor of any independent investigation that would report the full and complete information surrounding this case back to when Sheriff Ratcliff was in office a decade ago and through to today.Our editorial board hasn't considered with Rep. Morrison or Sen. Hagar would be the ones to lead this. They certainly, though, must know all about the controversy and can judge for themselves whether their intervention would be appropriate. I'll bring your suggestion to the editorial board for consideration.
Sun Oct 12, 2008 20:12:25 CDT
How did anyone know to request information on 300 plus cases? Keys to the city.Keep trying.
Sun Oct 12, 2008 19:59:05 CDT
I'm confused, Dig. Specifically what information have we presented that is material to any then-current case that you take exception to?The case disposition logs were ruled by the state AG to be public information under the Advocate's FOIA request. Those logs state simply that the DA refused to review 300+ cases from August '07 through Feb. of this year. There is nothing germaine to the actual cases in the logs.
All of the DA's interoffice memos over Ratcliff's signature were also included in the AG's order to be released as public information.
Once again, we requested in our petition that the portions of that petition pertaining to a then-open case and to the Ratcliff investigation be filed under seal. Judge Williams did not heed that request. Our intent was to protect innocent people from public scrutiny, not because any of the information had been illegally obtained.
No one handed us any keys to the city or asked any of us to peruse their records at our leisure or discretion. We had to request several times for some of it even that had been ruled by the state AG to be public information.
The information is out there. At this point I'm content to let the public put two and two together and make up its own mind. I have to tell you, I'm getting mighty tired of trying to fight city hall without the aid of a high priced attorney *I* simply can't afford.
Ernie
Sun Oct 12, 2008 19:53:50 CDT
I want to ask Chris Cobber and the Victoria Advocate how come yall are not asking the state (ie Rep. Morrison and Sen. Hagar) for investgating this matter?
Sun Oct 12, 2008 19:24:36 CDT
Ernie, let any citizen go to the city and request information concerning ongoing cases. They will hit a stone wall. The keys to the city were handed to those attempting to oust Tyler. JMO
Sun Oct 12, 2008 19:15:33 CDT
Did anyone of ya'll bother to read the link I posted?http://laws.lp.findlaw.com/...
Yes the guy was a pervert, he was going to lose his appeal anyway, however Bruce Ure's testimony, contridicted what his immediate supervisor testified too.
The case was won, but yet Mr. Ure decided to spice it up a lil, to make sure.
The appelates court decision, even goes as far as to point out Mr. Ure testimony in there decision.
Sun Oct 12, 2008 19:08:59 CDT
"If it's up to LE's discretion to release information, why did the City Attorney's office issue myself and others a denial for information concerning ongoing cases with the excuse it would require the DA's approval to release information?"Since I have no idea what information you requested, I have no answer to your question.
"How did regular citizens get all the information they claimed to have?"
FOIA and TX statutes regarding the public's right to know.
"Why didn't the City Attornies file petitions to stop the "regular citizens" from making public, information concerning ongoing cases?"
That would have been their (or his) perogative. We asked in our petition that certain information regarding the one open case we cited be filed under seal. Evidently the judge didn't find that necessary. Ask him. We didn't file the petition with the public, we filed it with the court.
"Which officers discussed ongoing cases outside of their official duties that led to the "regular citizens'" conclusions?"
To the best of my knowledge, none of them. Again, the information we have and relied on was in the public arena (printed in te Advocate), common knowledge, or ruled by the state AG to be public information. The one VPD member I had contact with prior to filing the petition would say nothing about any on-going case and precious little about anything else.
"Why are those officers still employeed?"
Because those officers meeting your criteria for firing don't exist.
"Yes, I do agree an outside investigation should be done but I don't think the cronies of Victoria really want that."
File a petition to get one cranked up. We didn't manage to get that done. Hopefully you'll have better luck.
Ernie
Sun Oct 12, 2008 18:58:53 CDT
Ernie, that's how all this bull got started. Just call me and what's done under the covers is fine. If you want clarification you have to follow legal process. Not responding with a casual phonecall or meeting is the right thing to do, however you and your crew insist your way is the right way.
Sun Oct 12, 2008 18:57:13 CDT
Victoria, the disgrace of the gulf coast.Why can't this city elect competent leaders ?
Sun Oct 12, 2008 18:54:04 CDT
If it's up to LE's discretion to release information, why did the City Attorney's office issue myself and others a denial for information concerning ongoing cases with the excuse it would require the DA's approval to release information?How did regular citizens get all the information they claimed to have?
Why didn't the City Attornies file petitions to stop the "regular citizens" from making public, information concerning ongoing cases?
Which officers discussed ongoing cases outside of their official duties that led to the "regular citizens'" conclusions?
Why are those officers still employeed?
Yes, I do agree an outside investigation should be done but I don't think the cronies of Victoria really want that.
Sun Oct 12, 2008 18:46:51 CDT
Only one point is your thesis bears response - at least from me:"Coming on this forum implying poor performance is an insult to an Honorable District Judge. For the record, I don’t agree with all his findings, but your smear is disgusting."
The only smear here is the one you perceive. I simply stated the facts. The judge's orders do not address the validity of the claims in the petition; I called his office for clarification and talked to his clerk, he was not available and though I left my name, number and a request for a call back, I was not contacted.
If you desire me sworn testimony to those facts, send me an affidavit.
Ernie
Sun Oct 12, 2008 18:39:23 CDT
I do not know about yall, but I think the State should get involved in this.
There are too many problems within Victoria County and in Jackson. Where is Rep Morrison and Senator Hegar on this?
Sun Oct 12, 2008 18:27:43 CDT
I’ll open with Chris Cobler’s admonition to jbar24; “You've made a claim that you know what testimony was given to a grand jury. Please provide evidence of that, or we'll need to remove that post as an unsubstantiated claim.”Building on that statement alone, unsubstantiated claims have repeatedly been made concerning Tyler, Ratcliff, DPS, posters, citizens, and on, and on, and on. Is the advocate going to expose and delete those claims as well?
In this thread alone;
1) He seems to spend so much time fighting against everyone around him. Too bad he can't channel that energy into something good.
2) Sounds like Tyler does have an anger issue ? I believe in past articles he has shook his finger and have done all the talking and not allowed the other people that have been called to his office talk
3) Podunk. The VPD was INVITED into this investigation until they began uncovering too much of the truth. Then the "'ole buddy" system kicked in and Ratcliff's "friends in right places" wanted the VPD out of the investigation.
4) Actually Podunk, it's pretty much up to the Law Officers to decide how much information to release to the public during an ongoing investigation.
5) Tyler has issues with anger. Just ask those that have left and moved on from working at the DA's office! Tyler's irrational behaviour, bullying and rage appears to have been demonsrtated to not only to Armstrong, but in front of Smith and two unidentified council members who can confirm the finger pointing, ranting and raving that Tyler displayed to the Mayor that day. Tyler has mega behavioural/personality issues. . . those of a grown bully.
6) I too have gone to the City Council meetings. Your boy, Hagan protests pretty much everything but I have rarely seen a true solution from him. I wonder if Hagan isn't posturing for something bigger later on.
7) I have proof that you are really Tyler's uncle! I'll show you my proof if you'll show me yours about the bad cops/criminals, okay?
Jeez, will you please get off the koolade?
8) And if there were any details given out from VPD's investigation... it would be up to VPD to decide what to release and what NOT to release.
9) Definition of a Internet troll
see: PodunkTx
10) Tyler, in persuing a personal vendeta against the indicted four, was not acting in the best interests of the county/state. Therefore he is PERSONALLY sued for the reimbursement of the Four's attorney's fees.
11) They will never see things the way they are because they are incompetent. Now they can go apply at the DA's office.
12) dictionary results for: politician
a seeker or holder of public office, who is more concerned about winning favor or retaining power than about maintaining principles.
13) why didn't you make up some excuse to not hire Ratcliff giving him direct access to cases when he was guilty.
14) For you people that just dont get it. Rat cliff is garbage like trash. He is a pervert who loves prowling the net thats what gets him off
15) While the Mayor, city attorney, police chief and a VPD officer may well be unhappy that they're the target of Tyler's bruised ego
16) Tyler wasn't doing the job he'd been elected to do
17) our illustrious DA's third grade attitude that if the VPD didn't want to play by his rules he'd simply take his ball and go home
18) not only we but others who were and some who were not directly involved in those situations saw as being egregiously ignored by the man we elected on his campaign promises of being tough on crime.
19) We do believe that case was another, and possibly the first, in which Tyler didn't get his way and was, in large part, the beginning of the rift between Tyler and LE agencies in Victoria Co. That's opinion and while we believe there's sufficient evidence available to anyone with the interest to look into it to be convincing, it was not a part of our efforts. We also feel it's yet another indication of Tyler's propensity to pursue the people within LE who don't play by his rules to the ends of the earth
20) just as Tyler's "stalling" this issue with the four indicted city officials, he was just as capable of intervening in that case. We do believe Tyler was material in delaying that prosecution
21) DPS wasn't performing the investigation either apparently as nearly a year had passed with no progress in evidence.
22) Suffice it to say that had we been successful in getting an unbiased investigation begun we think additional factors might have been discovered - evidence we don't necessarily have access to - that would have shed some light on that fact.
23) Again, had we been successful in our attempt to initiate an investigation DPS might well have had some cause for concern.
24) If you're privy to information from Judge Williams regarding the truth of the allegations I'd appreciate your calling me. His office sure wouldn't return mine.
Where’s the evidence?
Ernie, if you want clarification of Judge Williams’ order, then file a petition for it. He will be happy to comply. Coming on this forum implying poor performance is an insult to an Honorable District Judge. For the record, I don’t agree with all his findings, but your smear is disgusting.
texasmom, it was in an email from Ernie the arguement was made defending cutting the DA's office off from information. The information cutoff is discussed in the open forum and reported by the Advocate. The accusatiions against Tyler (he alerted Ratcliff to the investigation) and the defense for cutting off information story don't jive. That's why Tyler had to request the signed affadavits.
Sun Oct 12, 2008 17:28:24 CDT
ohfercryinoutloud, Luminary. "Ignorance is bliss." Heard that one?What I or others perceive may or not be "fact." Something appears to be, to us, not on the up-and-up. Whether it is not, to your utter amazement probably, is what we'd like to find out. It appears that's not going to happen any more than we were made privy to the "facts" in Ratcliff's situation.
If you're happy and complacent with that, more power to you. Evidently you deserve the leadership you're getting.
Your frequent cryptic quotations appear, to me at least, to infer you're somehow privy to some inside information to which the rest of us are blissfully ignorant. Give it up. We're all waiting with bated breath.
Otherwise, produce those GJ transcripts, prove your case and oust the mayor, the police chief and the whole crooked lot and let's indeed move on.
Ernie
Sun Oct 12, 2008 17:26:42 CDT
Jbar,Thank you for clarifying. Your source then is the indictment, which is an accusation and not proof. If you phrase your statements as opinions in support of this accusation, that would be in keeping with forum policy. If you state it as fact, that would be violation.
Sun Oct 12, 2008 16:02:12 CDT
Yup... and you're three down with two t' play.:-)
Ernie
Sun Oct 12, 2008 15:30:40 CDT
Thanks, Chris. I hate to add more fuel to the fire here but I take the quoted post below as a personal affront both to myself and to the other citizens who have a desire to see justice done fairly in our county.
"For months, the online forums were used to promote a movement to oust Tyler."
In case you haven't noticed, dig, this *is* a public forum. Even you have the right to enter and discuss events affecting the public including this one.
'We were led to believe there was concrete evidence Tyler was breaking the law, abusing his authority, and so on."
We still believe that evidence exists.
"In reality, what came out of all this was a group of people including the Mayor, City Attorney, Police Chief,"
While the Mayor, city attorney, police chief and a VPD officer may well be unhappy that they're the target of Tyler's bruised ego, let it be clear that these individuals were and are not part and parcel of the group of citizens promoting the ouster of Tyler. It's my educated guess however, that they're sympathetic to that end.
"were simply angry that Tyler wasn't doing things the way they wanted them done."
If that means we were (and are) angry that Tyler wasn't doing the job he'd been elected to do, that would be correct.
"They wanted to tell the D.A. which cases to prosecute, with or without the evidence necessary to convict."
An affidavit proposed by the DA to suit his fancy isn't "required evidence necessary to convict." Not under local, Texas or Federal statute Our point was and is that our illustrious DA's third grade attitude that if the VPD didn't want to play by his rules he'd simply take his ball and go home was (and is) immature, dangerous and, arguably, illegal.
"They wanted to decide who was a criminal and who wasn't."
Not true at all. We wanted the man who was elected to find out who was guilty and who wasn't to do just that. We cited and we believe, documented, cases that not only we but others who were and some who were not directly involved in those situations saw as being egregiously ignored by the man we elected on his campaign promises of being tough on crime.
"They became angrier that Tyler dared to prosecute a fellow officer. (Sidenote; it's been reported Tyler ignores victims. The victim in the Echervy case was not ignored.)"
The Echevery case was not a factor cited in the petition to oust Tyler. We do believe that case was another, and possibly the first, in which Tyler didn't get his way and was, in large part, the beginning of the rift between Tyler and LE agencies in Victoria Co. That's opinion and while we believe there's sufficient evidence available to anyone with the interest to look into it to be convincing, it was not a part of our efforts. We also feel it's yet another indication of Tyler's propensity to pursue the people within LE who don't play by his rules to the ends of the earth - even when the court has decreed there's nothing to pursue. (Sound familiar?)
"The accusation has been made over and over that Tyler stalled the Ratcliff investigation."
Neither was I nor were you but just as Tyler's "stalling" this issue with the four indicted city officials, he was just as capable of intervening in that case. We do believe Tyler was material in delaying that prosecution and have stated our reasons for that belief many times. You choose not to accept that and to deny it happened - based on what evidence or events I have no idea, but it is certain that just because you and Tyler say so, doesn't make it fact.
"Tyler wasn't performing the investigation, it was DPS."
DPS wasn't performing the investigation either apparently as nearly a year had passed with no progress in evidence. Although I certainly want to state my opinion about that stuation, I don't think that would be prudent in this forum. Suffice it to say that had we been successful in getting an unbiased investigation begun we think additional factors might have been discovered - evidence we don't necessarily have access to - that would have shed some light on that fact.
"Not a single suit has been filed against DPS to my knowledge, only against the prosecutor."
That's true. Again, had we been successful in our attempt to initiate an investigation DPS might well have had some cause for concern. It bears noting at this point that DPS has remained not just notably silent but absolutely mute on this issue.
"The people who pressed against Tyler lost their suit and those instigating the problem are now angry their operational tacticts are coming under fire."
"Lost" seems to be a rather harsh and final analysis, but I'm not interested in arguing semantics with you. It does not anger me (can't say about the others) that our efforts aren't accepted by everyone. We knew that would be the case going in. You can't please all the people all the time. That is, however, your right to disagree just as it is ours to attempt to have our concerns addressed.
"It has been their standard practice to intimidate, harass, and more, anyone that they take aim at."
I admit that some of our number have been more adamant than I would have liked in furthering this effort outside the legal system. I'd also like to point out that that tactic is *exactly* Tyler's *modus operandi.*
"It may be political or even a simple favor for friends of the powerful."
It's political, no doubt. The office of DA is a political one decided by an election. That spells politics any way you cut it. It's certainly no partisan as I and all but one of the "original V-10" are Republicans I believe. As far as being a favor for the rich and powerful, I'm sorry, but I have to guffaw in your general direction over that one.
In one of your other enlightening posts you stated that our allegations were proved to be lies. With that I do take offense. Read the judges dismissal orders. Neither has a word about our allegations being either untrue, fabricated, fallacious, etc. If you're privy to information from Judge Williams regarding the truth of the allegations I'd appreciate your calling me. His office sure wouldn't return mine.
"It's past time to move on."
Indeed it is. But try preaching that to your folk hero, Tyler.
Ernie
Sun Oct 12, 2008 15:28:46 CDT
Chris Cobler, frist of all I never claimed I was there and heard the testimony that was given. I do know how to read however, and I was smart enough to read the indictments which were available on this website, and I did read that Ure gave sworn (Sworn meaning he took an oath and swore to tell the truth, just in case you dont understand what sworn means) statement in which he said he never discussed the details of the Ratcliff investigation with anyone but his staff. He later admitted that he participated in a meeting with Advocate reporters in which the Ratcliff investigation was discussed. I didnt have to be there to know his testimony, the offical copies of the indictment were on this website. I myself have personally watched Bruce Ure lie under oath, he does it all the time. Look at his track record, heck ask any Officers from any department he has ever worked for, or shall I say destroyed!! Here is an idea, question the guy yourself on something he has done and let me know how long it takes before he comes after you. See for yourself, or just keep him in office, how proud you must be to have a Chief running your city who doesnt even follow the very laws he is sworn to protect!!