A couple weeks ago she sent out a mailer attacking her opponent Cindy Stormer.  In the mailer she claimed to be endorsed by the Gainesville Police Association.  So far we can only find one member of the "association", Tim Green.  As best we can tell Tim Green doesn't even live in Cooke County.

 

In her mailer she touts her endorsement from the Gainesville Police Association.  Why didn't she put their pictures in her mailer?  Instead she posed with three on-duty jailers from the Cooke County Jail with their backs to the camera.  I would have thought the officers that endorsed her would have been happy to pose for her campaign flyer.   It seems strange that she had to go to the Sheriff and ask for him to loan her some jailers that we understand were on the clock to get a picture for her campaign flyer.  Was it legal for her to use sheriff deputies/jailers that were on the clock to pose for her picture?  Maybe that's why she wants to be DA so no one will prosecute her for using taxpayer resources for campaign purposes.

 

Judge Janelle Haverkamp has been very aggressive in defending her record as Judge and criticizing her opponent, Martin Peterson.  Unfortunately, she is using selective facts to try and discredit her opponent's assertions when the big picture and facts are that he is telling the truth about her growing backlog, at least until about the time she learned she had an opponent.

 

She talks about how she disposed of more cases in 2007 than came in.  She is correct in that analysis if she is talking about the calendar year vs. the fiscal year by a small margin.  However, her backlog has increased since she took office on January 1, 2005 by 221 cases.  In the three years ending on December 31, 2007, the number of pending cases in her court rose from 1389 to 1610. 

 

I'm pretty sure that is an increase in her backlog. 

 

That backlog increase is with the help of a visiting/retired judge who taxpayers paid tens of thousands of tax dollars to.  How many extra tens of thousands of tax dollars did the District Attorney get for extra staff to handle the extra workload.  If memory serves me, the answer is less than 1.

 

Yet she has publicly, repeatedly stated that Mr. Peterson is distorting her record and there is no backlog in her court.    She said at the League of Women voters to ask yourselves who is telling the truth.  It appears her statement that there is no backlog may not be accurate.   Click the following link to see the report I pulled from the State:

 

 

When I first pulled the standard reports from the Texas Office of Court Administration web site, Judge Haverkamp's backlog had increased for the fiscal year ending in September 2007.  Perhaps once she got an opponent that focused on the growth of her backlog, she started to work to reduce her backlog in the last three months of 2007 so she could find a time to emphasize where her backlog grew smaller.  I guess that is the problem with statistics, they can be manipulated if you pick a narrow sampling of data.

 

You don't have to take my word that her backlog has increased since she took office.  You can pull your own reports at the Texas Office of Court Administration Web Site:

 

 

I was invited and went to a Meet the Candidates Meeting hosted by Judge Haverkamp at Miss Olivia's on February 9, 2008.  Before I had gotten through the door, Judge Haverkamp's sister asked me if I had brought my check book with Judge Haverkamp close by.  I didn't bring my checkbook.  The invite said the purpose of the function was to "Please join us for a discussion of the issues and an opportunity to visit with Judge Haverkamp."

 

After I had been there about fifty minutes, Judge Haverkamp came up and told me that she saw that I had given Martin $100 and suggested I should do the same for her.  She did this in front of the other guests, perhaps in an effort to intimidate me into giving her money.  In fact one did jump in and recommended I give money to Judge Haverkamp.  Janice Warder had arrived 20-30 minutes prior to that. To her credit, she was not part of that discussion as best I can recall.  I found Judge Haverkamp's behavior most unfortunate and troubling for a sitting judge.  In her stump speech at the forums, she has repeatedly talked about how she treats everyone with respect in her courtroom.  Have you ever invited guests to your house and asked them for money the way she did?  Do you have to give her money to get her respect?

 

When I see a receptionist and several legal assistants giving her the legal limit of $1,000 for her campaign, I have to wonder what tactics she employed to get it.  How many places pay receptionists the kind of money that they could contribute $1,000 to a candidate?  Why haven't these same three people given similar amounts of money to other candidates if they are that fortunate and inclined to get involved in the political process?  I haven't found any record of them doing so in the Candidate's Treasurer reports at the courthouse.  Up until ten days before the election, she had received only $250 in total in political contributions, none of which were over $50 according to her filing documents.  Have you ever heard the saying "You Scratch My Back, I'll Scratch Yours?"

 

Four years ago the wife of one of those attorneys ran for office as an incumbent in a contested election and lost.  I went back and checked the records to see if the three receptionists / legal assistants from her husbands law firm gave her $1000 each.  I couldn't find anything close in her campaign finance reports.  What would cause them to give so much to a judge but not to the spouse of one of the two attorneys when she ran for office in 2004?

 

Judge Haverkamp and Janice Warder, (defeated District Judge from Dallas who lost in 2006 and is now a candidate for Cooke County District Attorney), say they haven't campaigned together, per the Gainesville Register.  I saw them do what looked a little like campaigning together twice in Valley View. 

 

In December, they both came to the Chamber of Commerce luncheon for the Senior Citizens.  It appeared that they arrived together and Judge Haverkamp seemed to be walking Janice Warder around the room, introducing her to people.  Maybe that's not campaigning to some but it looked a little like it, especially when Janice Warder was circulating her petition to get on the ballot at that function.

 

They came back to Valley View in late January or early February to have lunch with the seniors.  I was frankly surprised to see Janice Warder arrive without Judge Haverkamp.  I wasn't disappointed for long.  Judge Warder had sat down for lunch with the seniors.  She was sitting with a friend it looked like she had brought along.  When Judge Haverkamp arrived, her friend that had sat next to her first, promptly got up and moved over so Judge Haverkamp could sit in her seat, next to Judge Warder.  Maybe that's not campaigning together but it gave some resemblance of doing so.  I've seen and heard reports from other citizens that have seen them together as well doing things that looked like campaigning.  Why do they deny it?  I believe it is because it may be against the Judicial Code of Ethics for a sitting judge to be endorsing other candidates.

 

Are these the types of behaviors we expect from a Judge and Prosecutor whose job is to pursue criminals and make sure everyone in the court room tells the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth? 

 

According to the Dallas Morning News and Dallas Observer, Janice Warder as prosecutor may have already sent at least one man to jail for murder and rape while letting the actual perpetrator effectively go free, based on the perpetrator serving as the star witness for the prosecution.  Could that happen in Cooke County if these two are elected? 

 

Are there any Cooke County Volunteers to be the first person convicted of murder and rape based on testimony from the real perpetrator and then see them go free?

 

If these two are elected/re-elected this year to the District Judge and District Attorney position, do you feel they will be independent?  Do you think they are telling the truth?  Will there be any secret deals that are denied as Janice Warder has been accused of in Dallas County when she was the prosecutor?

 

Do you feel safe that if these two are in office together that we will have the necessary checks and balances to make sure no innocent people are convicted and sent to prison?  Do you feel comfortable that you will be treated equally and fairly if you have to appear in the District Court and you are up against a law firm that gave Judge Haverkamp $6,000 while you and your attorney gave her nothing?  It makes me wonder a little and I know I'd be nervous.

 

I know some people that have been interrogated by Judge Haverkamp because she thought they were supporting her opponent.  Do you think they feel like they will get a fair shake if they have to appear before her in District Court?  I'd be a little nervous based on how she attacks her opponent in the candidate forums.

 

In the end, we all have to decide who we are comfortable with for District Judge and District Attorney.  I can honestly say while Cindy Stormer and Martin Peterson have each come to Valley View that I've never seen them down here together in the past three months.  While I'm a little nervous as well about maintaining independence between the District Attorney and a District Judge who used to work for her, my impression is Martin Peterson is his own man and not beholden to anyone. 

 

I would strongly recommend a vote to re-elect Cindy Stormer as District Attorney and elect Martin Peterson as District Judge.  I believe they have the strong ethical backbone we need in Cooke County.