• Printer friendly
• E-mail to a friend
• 37 comment(s)
• Recommend

  ( 0 )

• 

Subject:

Body:

Poster:

Enter text seen above:

Dudley doesn't seem to get it : 2/2/2010

I am shocked that Dudley is trying to diminish this information by stating it doesn't reflect her full record. Doesn't she get it that she should have no ethichal violations if she wants the top law enforcement post in the County. I am sure Mr. Inda, who had to face her misconduct, doesn't care that the way she acted in his trial was not the way that she always acts. Had it not been for the Judge in that case, she would have securred a conviction by very unethical means. Isn't one time enough whe you are dealing with someones freedom? Shamefull.
Then some 15 years later she is costing this county money to defend her actions of writing a book while on a case that closely tracks the book. She was ultimately found to not have a conflict, but at what expense to the DA's office to defend her. And she questions Stanley taking money while she is battling cancer. Anyone who is interested, should read the decision regardinng her book. The Court points out that this is a case of first impression, meaning, I guess, that no other D.A. in the history of this COUNTRY has been egotistical enough to write a book while working for the office.
This is not the actions of someone who should be top law enforcement officer in the County, these are the acts of someone who needs to stroke her own ego. That is a bad quality to have when you are making decisons about people's freedom.

S.B. oldtimer

Abraham Lincoln Quote : 2/2/2010

This was the quote the judge used about the Dudster, that Colby Frazier neglected to mention: “You may fool all the people some of the time, you can even fool some of the people all of the time, but you cannot fool all of the people all the time.” Great, we will not be well served by a DA that has a judge say something like that about her. Go to www.joycedudleymisconduct.com and read all about the past she doesn't want anyone to hold her to.

Kenny

Be very affraid : 2/2/2010

Someone who doesn't think it fair to be held accountable for their past PUBLIC, JOB PERFORMANCE, PROFESSIONAL RECORD, is not only someone who shouldn't be trusted; they should be feared. This happens in other countries...not the USA! We need debates and we need them now!

Scared to death

SB Oldtimer : 2/2/2010

Unfortunately, its small minded people like you, with knee-jerk reactionary aghast, who are unable to separate a work of fiction and a hobby from the career of a prosecuting attorney. As you yourself have to admit, upon further review and deliberation, the "conflict" was found to be COMPLETELY BASELESS BY THE SUPREME COURT OF CALIFORNIA. Reactionaries like you are responsible for any purported costs associated with the overreaction, not Ms Dudley who merely was exercising her talents to be a fiction author. Maybe people like you are jealous of people who have many talents and choose to pursue them in a proportional way. As a private citizen who has no affiliation with either candidate, I have become completely disgusted with Mr. Josh Lynn and his slippery and underhanded campaign over the last week. That LAME website they put out to discredit their opponent assumes that all voters are stupid, gullible, easily manipulate and lazy. Mr Lynn's campaign shows desperation and paranoia. You people and your attacks are weak. As I have demanded as a poster on this news site many times, neither candidate should accept an interim position as D.A. Only Ms. Dudley has show the maturity to recognize that this is the best way to proceed. Mr. Lynn has shown desperation and a sense of inevitable loss if he is evicted by the Board of Supervisors. Mr Lynn and Ms Stanley are bed mates (figure of speech) and their alliance smacks of personal vendetta and vengeance. They are petulant children.

SV

Agree : 2/2/2010

I agree with SV. Jos lynn and christy stanley also seem to feel they are entitled to tell us and the board of sup. who should run this public office. They think it belongs to them. if lynn had and sense of honor and integrity as his supporters say he would step down under the circumstanses and let the voters decide. All he wants is his power which was NOT givent to him by the people. he thinks he needs this to win the election. too bad

Armando Hernandez

Negative Smear Attacks? : 2/2/2010

With all this bovine fecal matter strewn about, this makes me wonder if Jeremy Lindamen is advising Josh Lynn.

Barry

: 2/2/2010

I have been reading and following this story the last week and I also see that Josh lynn has been trying to use this newspaper forum and comments to spread his campaign. There are people who keep demanding that we go to their website to read his campaing stuff about Dudley. Anyone who has lived in this county for a while already knows the stories and they really have already played out. There is not much there and these people are just trying to wrongly discredit Dudley. As the article and a previous commenter said, the California Supreme Court decided that there was no conflict of interest. Josh lynn does make himslef look desparate like SV said.

William Jenner

Negative Campaigning : 2/2/2010

Just took a look at the www.joycedudleymisconduct.com website and I am disappointed in Lynn's campaigning tactics.
How about promoting why Lynn is better than Dudley as opposed to why she is bad. I can only imagine she has prosecuted thousands of cases over her career that they cannot find fault with.
There are two sides to every case and if I were a victim would want Dudley on my side.
Accepting the job as interim DA shows a lack of judgment on your behalf and I would imagine there are defendants who would question your tactics in the courtroom from time to time. There is a reason why they are called legal battles.
Take the high road Mr Lynn and have that sight removed.
I had been an undecided voter until today. Dudley for DA in 2010!

Abbott

Vacation and sick pay : 2/2/2010

Hey Christie Stanley.. I hope you enjoy all that cash you are to receive for never, ever once claiming a sick day while you were absent for 3 years. What does that come to $15,000 to $20,000 dollars? I don't know, so If I am incorrect in my guess, maybe you or the County Controller or Josh Lynn can let us know. Tragic is your sickness but absolutely amazing that you never once had to claim a sick day and are now entitled to "cash out" all those days. Hmmmm.... And you want us to consider your hand picked successor, Josh Lynn? Do you have an agreement with him not to pursue you or others for fraud in this matter?

Tax payer

Tired of these two already : 2/2/2010

The dirty campaign tactics by Lynn can only hurt him, it also calls his judgement into question. I almost hope someone else would get into the race at this point. Gordon Auchincloss might be a better choice than either of these two for the office at this point. I was moderately excited by Josh with him being a life long local but his campaign up to this point is one I can support.

Marcus

correction : 2/2/2010

meant to say "one I can not support"

Marcus

: 2/2/2010

Josh Lynn and the Controller (Geiss? I think that is his name), are not going to follow up on this issue because they are participating in the same scam. They would be indicting themselves as well.

Bring on the negative campaigning! : 2/2/2010

I'm for the be-atch who prosecuted the sex offenders and pissed off the judge while she was at it! And then who was vindicated when the higher court reviewed the case. I also like how Lynn and his supporters defend everything Christie Stanley has done, especially for being paid a very high salary for many months not to work.

Special Victims Unit

The Real Josh Lynn : 2/2/2010

Josh Lynn has revealed himself as a desperate, self-serving, fact-distorting candidate, who is already baring his teeth to win the DA's election at any cost. This is NOT the person we deserve to assure that justice will prevail in Santa Barbara. If I had not been paying much attention to this race before, I certainly will now, and I will let Joyce Dudley know that she has my wholehearted support.

Won't Be Fooled by Lynn

Ms. Dudley's documented record : 2/2/2010

Informing the public about Ms. Dudley’s missteps and lack of judgment is not a smear tactic. The public needs to be aware of the information to better judge who should hold this office.
The very fact that Ms Dudley’s courtroom performance has been called into question is telling. It is one thing for one of many prosecutor in an office to have had their performance called into question. It is another thing for the top prosecutor to have had such a record. This is one issue which separates the two candidates and a big issue to consider. Ms. Dudley’s supporters are clearly trying their best to denigrate people who simply have stated what is in the public record and gloss over the issue.

Lynn supporter

"Lynn supporter" : 2/2/2010

It is only people like you and Josh Lynns campane that spin the facts and tell half-truths who need to be "told". I went to Josh Lynn's website that he put up to talk trash about Dudley and I just laughed at him. Why do you think that you can convice people based on not telling the entire sories? You do not try to inform the public you try to trick the public. Most us already know what happend and you trying to bring it back just so you can be sleezy and win your election is bad. You homeys are whak. Get out.

edgar

: 2/2/2010

To Abbott: If Josh Lynn tried to promote why he is better than Dudley rather than just why she is bad, he wouldn't have a case. His only chance is to attempt to defile and defame as we are clearly seeing now.

Ronald T

Sorry for endorsers : 2/2/2010

I'll bet Joyce Dudley is doing a whole bunch of explaining right now to the people that endorsed her and gave her money. If she hadn't told them about her past before securing their support, she should do the right thing, apologize, give them back their money and withdraw her name from the race. To have thought that a record like Joyce Dudley's was going to stay secret was a fatal mistake for her campaign. I don't like negative politics at all, but being judged by the voters on your work record isn't a smear job. Thank goodness Josh Lynn had the guts to call her on this record. For her to even attempt to explain this away is further proof that she should not be the elected DA. Joyce Dudley, just apologize and bow out gracefully. Or, provide evidence that none of this public record information occurred and has nothing to do you with you. Saying how mean and nasty it is that someone would actually bring up your work record doesn't make the facts go away.

Exasperated

Interesting : 2/2/2010

I've noticed that the Dudley camp has repeatedly mentioned that criminals and defense attorneys will say anything to win their case. In looking at the website the Lynn campaign put up I actually see a lot of quotes from judges saying negative things about her. I agree with Exasperated, if they can't prove that these documents are a fake then its clearly "game over". Its time for Joyce Dudley to disprove the things judges said (looks to be impossible as they are part of the public record and fact) or fold up and pack it in.

Informed Voter

Not a shock : 2/2/2010

Josh Lynn is the GOP's choice, look at his endorsements. The classic if you dont have anything to stand on then try to cast stones at your opponent. I wonder what higher office besides DA the local GOP are grooming Josh for?

Typical

Separate Web Site : 2/2/2010

I think it is cheap that Lynn created a separate web site to attack Dudley. If all the allegations are factual then why not put them on his own site and be man enough to own them. I know that the very end of the page says who the sponsor is but that is not good enough.
I think the Supes should appoint a caretaker for the DA position. In the meantime, I'll be looking for someone other than these two clowns to vote for.

SezMe

You people are so obvious : 2/2/2010

To: Exasperated, SB Oldtimer, Lynn Supporter, Informed Voter, and whatever other alias you want to come up with......errrrrrr, I MEAN JOSH LYNN FOR D.A. CAMPAIGN STAFF. You guys are so obvious. What a bunch of stooges you people are. You really think that we can't smell you? Your trite and redundant posts are revealing of you, not to mention that you never actually put your name or initials for fear of exposure and accountability. You people are like a bunch of high school kids trying to get your buddy elected to class president. Ridiculous. Try to be a little more sophisticated. Maybe then you will more easily fool the electorate that you consider so gullible. Once again, get your propaganda and advertisements off this post.

SV

Dudley : 2/2/2010

SB Old Timer: To be fair, the CA supreme court may have decided there wasn't a conflict, but if you read the opinion, Dudley hardly comes across as admirable. More like laughable. Also, people keep saying this website is "smearing her character" but only facts are presented. Why doesn't she sue for libel if what's published there is a lie? She scares me. I would not want to be a defendant facing her, because I'm pretty sure no matter what the circumstances or evidence, she would do whatever was necessary to lock me up forever if it could prove politically exigent for her. And this is a democrat. Hmmm.

Mercy w/ justice

: 2/2/2010

perhaps you meant politically "expedient", not "exigent"? Exigent means something that is emerging immediately. Anyway, I understand what you are trying to say.

Karma : 2/2/2010

Check yourself!!!

BOS audience member

Dudley : 2/2/2010

Corrections: I meant to address my comments not to S.B. old timer but to S.V. Needless to say (dinner hour), I was rushing. I also acknowledge that expedient would have been a better word choice than exigent. Again...rushing. But I stand by my overall point.

mercy w/justice

To mercy/justice : 2/3/2010

Thanks for your insight. I am sure there were some irregularities concerning Ms Dudley in the decision. I have not read it and I do not know. I will accept what you say. However, as far as not smear, I disagree. If you look at the article in this newspaper titled "Police Union Backs Dudley for DA" and see the posts of the organized campaign staffers of Josh Lynn, specifically "Concerned Citizen", you will see where he posts a pdf file of a pre-trial proceeding involving a case that Ms. Dudley had. You can follow the thread and see that "concerned citizen" uses implication, innuendo and allusions to imply that there is some egregious misconduct and conspiracy involving both the Defense Attorney and Ms Dudley. When I press him to be very specific about what he is charging, he does not answer my questions for fear of implicating the campaign of Mr. Lynn to libel. When someone has no evidence to support an assertion of misconduct but uses innuendo and allusion to try to slander someone, I think that is smear. Anyway, I would be interested to hear your thoughts on this. I hope you read the thread. Peace p.s. Please now that I really am not a big supporter of Dudley. All I want is for Josh Lynn's organized campaign staff to get off these boards. If they want to advertise, they should purchase and advertisment and have it properly labeled.

SV

The Question is? : 2/3/2010

If former acting DA felt Ms. Dudleys transgressions, misconduct, and unethical behavior rose to the level he needed to put up a website detailing that what steps did he take. He was the acting DA why was she not suspended, what steps did he take to monitor her caseload and or reprimand her. If it was really so serious his judgement comes into question as why he did not take action, unless its all just b.s. he is selling.
So Josh is it just a smear campaign, or do we need to question your judgement in allowing her to continue in office?

Wanting Answers

Good question : 2/3/2010

Good question. I wonder too.

Armando Hernandez

Dudley : 2/3/2010

He probably was advised to foreground these issues of hers because they are serious and most people don't seem to get it. Anyone running a campaign would bring up the fact that an opposing candidate had been accused more than once of misconduct, right? I'm not a politician, but that seems pretty typical. To SV: You know what bothers me more than anything? Like I said, yes, the CA supreme court did rule that the defendent could still get a fair trial despite Dudley's publication of the novel (overturning the previous court of appeals decision). However, if you read the opinion, a large part of their argument hinges on the fact that the novel was self published, poorly written and sold very few copies. Therefore, according to their argument, the jury pool was unlikely to be infected and if they were the problem could be solved in voir dire. How I see it, the conduct was unethical--Dudley just happened to be a weak writer. The self published novel really bothers me, because it presents the prosector as a kind of "superhero" and the defendant as an animalistic brute. It reeks of narcissism and arrogance--and those are the scariest human flaws in my opinion. I don't know much about Josh Lynn, other than that those who work with him like him and find him fair, on both sides of the aisle.

Mercy w/justice

personnal issues : 2/3/2010

Mercy w/justice mentioned narcissism and arrogance. Is that a pattern in the complaints against Ms Dudley? Too bad the judges can't give their perspective. Maybe we could ask the bailiffs or other court workers. Do we want people with these kind of issues making important decisions?

Beagle

Work of fiction : 2/4/2010

Thanks Mercy, for your thoughts. However, I can't say that Ms Dudley writing a book of fiction in any way makes me feel that she has compromised her professional integrity. It is, after all, just a novel. Anyway, it is what it is. Also, since you appear to be a rational voice of reason with some insight, can you expand on the innuendo that "Concerned Citizen" is making about some kind of secret deal with a defense attorney and egregious misconduct of Ms Dudley there of. If you read his posts that I alluded to in my previous post you will see to what I am referring.

SV

Just Luv Josh : 2/4/2010

he is a dreamboat and I dig his politics, but why the hate on women writing books?

Sarah Palin

To SV speculation : 2/4/2010

To SV: I read through the motion, the previous misconduct stuff, and the transcript with judge, Dudley and defense atty. I have to agree that probably some deal was made; it's the only thing that makes sense. That's hardly scandalous; DA's and defense attorneys make deals all the time. Here's how I see the narrative based on what I read (I could be wrong though):
Defense attorney, researching his case, sees past history of Dudley's misconduct in this expert witness area (she brings the witness on but promises not to ask question Z or hypothetical question Y. Then she indeed asks it. Read the case on Battered Women's Syndrome ) He gets worried, files the motion to make it clear he's aware of such tactics and to make the judge aware. What happens next? That's kind of hard to figure. Maybe she gets pissed, says I was prepared to make a deal with you but now I want to withdraw it and he says he'll withdraw the motion? Or maybe she says if you withdraw the motion I'll make a deal? I don't know that part. But he obviously had something to gain, and it can only have been a better deal for his client, I'm assuming, from trying to drop the motion. She had something to gain, obviously--she didn't want her name associated again with this issue (misconduct in the area of the expert witness and hypotheticals, etc.) I still think writing a novel that closely resembles a case you haven't yet prosecuted is worse--you aren't even supposed to talk to people about it--let alone try to taint a jury and gain financially from it! It's egotism, narcissism--whatever.

Mercy w/justice

Thanks : 2/5/2010

Thanks, Mercy, for your comments.

SV

Character : 2/7/2010

What kind of person would advance her career by burying her boss when she's gravely ill? As a military vereran, I have seen many who wanted to be leaders but did not want to lead. Ms. Dudley's conduct puts her in that category. In combat, they don't last long.

Captain Al

nothing to say : 2/7/2010

To "captain al"... Please have something of substance to say before you open your pie hole. Thank you.

LMAO