Frisco Enterprise > Opinion
(Editorial) Unjust Treatment: DA should see victim's father
By ACN Staff
Elected judges are in a somewhat unusual political position in that they must campaign just like any other office-seeker, but, once in office, we rarely hear from them.
Their position is, in some substantial respects, unlike that of say, members of city councils, county commissions or other legislative bodies.
While the latter are called upon to cast votes, propose ideas, defend them publicly and court the media, members of the bench are largely forgotten about once elected - how many district judges can you name?
Part of this is political, part structural. In general, we usually do not hear from judges unless someone raises a ruckus about their conduct in or out of court or they happen to face some unusual political situation when they run for re-election.
That is what happened last November when straight-ticket Democrat voters ousted dozens of incumbent judges in Dallas County, many of whom were - somewhat justifiably, perhaps - shocked by their defeats.
They had thought that they were quietly and effectively running their courts and dispensing justice the right way, and so what was the big deal? Why did they kick us out?
John Roach was a judge for 20 years before he ran successfully for Collin County district attorney in 2002. Having the advantage of serving as judge, he did not have much of a record that could be examined for voters' benefit when he ran, so we really don't know much about that. This is a persistent problem in trying to evaluate judges' performance.
But at the time he said he had definite ideas about how the office would operate during his four-year term and that he planned to adjust some policies in the interest of seeing the system work "adequately, efficiently and fairly" as an "advocate for victims of criminal offenses."
In this respect, he said he considered flexibility important. "I'm not too fond of rules without exceptions," he told our readers at the time.
The problem that he has run into is that the offices, actions and prerogatives of district attorneys differ sharply from those of judges. DAs, for better or worse, are forced into the public eye at a much higher level, usually as a result of high-profile prosecutions.
It is not clear whether Roach has made this transition successfully.
In his prosecution of what was probably Collin County highest-profile crime last year, at least in terms of media exposure, Roach has decided to seek the death penalty against the 26-year-old Dallas man accused of murdering 40-year-old Frisco Realtor Sarah Anne Walker in McKinney last year.
But Roach has committed a major error in his handling of this case - not from a legal standpoint, but from a human one.
Roach has informed Walker's father, Joe Walker, that he would seek the death penalty in this case.
The first part of problem with this is that the suspect, Kosoul Chanthakoummane, has not even had a trial yet; he has not even been convicted.
We must question why sentencing is even being discussed at this point since the state has yet to make its case for capital murder in a public trial. Perhaps the jury will decide it was manslaughter or even that the defendant is not guilty - we really don't know at this point.
If Roach is confident of a conviction of capital murder, that is fine. But let's give the jury its say first.
It's this seeming rush to execute that helps explain why Texas ends up as the butt of so many late-night comedians' jokes on this topic.
The second part of the problem is that Roach declined to discuss the possible sentencing with Joe Walker, a death-penalty opponent who wanted prosecutors to allow the defendant to plead guilty and accept a sentence of life without parole, which is now permissible for a capital murder conviction under a law passed by the 2003 legislature.
One of Roach's assistants, Greg Davis, told the McKinney Courier-Gazette, a publication of Star Community Newspapers of Texas, that while prosecutors respected Walker's feelings, they felt compelled to take into account "the needs of the entire community."
Our question would be: How did they determine those needs and what are those needs? Did they conduct a poll?
The legislature's action in 2003 and U.S. Supreme Court criticisms of a number of Texas death-penalty convictions in recent years, as recounted in a New York Times analysis, suggested many people in the community may have grown a bit tired of Texas' nation-leading execution rate.
All victims, through their survivors, must have their say. And when Roach rejected Joe Walker's justifiable and understandable importunities, he forgot about the person for whom Walker was speaking.
DAs are coming under increasing scrutiny in this country. Take the example of Mike Nifong and allegations made in connection with his handling of the Duke University lacrosse case.
Judges may retreat to their chambers and decide cases for reasons that they may never have to explain publicly.
But district attorneys must always sit down with the families of murder victims, regardless of their personal beliefs of what they may think the entire community believes.
Their position is, in some substantial respects, unlike that of say, members of city councils, county commissions or other legislative bodies.
While the latter are called upon to cast votes, propose ideas, defend them publicly and court the media, members of the bench are largely forgotten about once elected - how many district judges can you name?
Part of this is political, part structural. In general, we usually do not hear from judges unless someone raises a ruckus about their conduct in or out of court or they happen to face some unusual political situation when they run for re-election.
That is what happened last November when straight-ticket Democrat voters ousted dozens of incumbent judges in Dallas County, many of whom were - somewhat justifiably, perhaps - shocked by their defeats.
They had thought that they were quietly and effectively running their courts and dispensing justice the right way, and so what was the big deal? Why did they kick us out?
John Roach was a judge for 20 years before he ran successfully for Collin County district attorney in 2002. Having the advantage of serving as judge, he did not have much of a record that could be examined for voters' benefit when he ran, so we really don't know much about that. This is a persistent problem in trying to evaluate judges' performance.
But at the time he said he had definite ideas about how the office would operate during his four-year term and that he planned to adjust some policies in the interest of seeing the system work "adequately, efficiently and fairly" as an "advocate for victims of criminal offenses."
In this respect, he said he considered flexibility important. "I'm not too fond of rules without exceptions," he told our readers at the time.
The problem that he has run into is that the offices, actions and prerogatives of district attorneys differ sharply from those of judges. DAs, for better or worse, are forced into the public eye at a much higher level, usually as a result of high-profile prosecutions.
It is not clear whether Roach has made this transition successfully.
In his prosecution of what was probably Collin County highest-profile crime last year, at least in terms of media exposure, Roach has decided to seek the death penalty against the 26-year-old Dallas man accused of murdering 40-year-old Frisco Realtor Sarah Anne Walker in McKinney last year.
But Roach has committed a major error in his handling of this case - not from a legal standpoint, but from a human one.
Roach has informed Walker's father, Joe Walker, that he would seek the death penalty in this case.
The first part of problem with this is that the suspect, Kosoul Chanthakoummane, has not even had a trial yet; he has not even been convicted.
We must question why sentencing is even being discussed at this point since the state has yet to make its case for capital murder in a public trial. Perhaps the jury will decide it was manslaughter or even that the defendant is not guilty - we really don't know at this point.
If Roach is confident of a conviction of capital murder, that is fine. But let's give the jury its say first.
It's this seeming rush to execute that helps explain why Texas ends up as the butt of so many late-night comedians' jokes on this topic.
The second part of the problem is that Roach declined to discuss the possible sentencing with Joe Walker, a death-penalty opponent who wanted prosecutors to allow the defendant to plead guilty and accept a sentence of life without parole, which is now permissible for a capital murder conviction under a law passed by the 2003 legislature.
One of Roach's assistants, Greg Davis, told the McKinney Courier-Gazette, a publication of Star Community Newspapers of Texas, that while prosecutors respected Walker's feelings, they felt compelled to take into account "the needs of the entire community."
Our question would be: How did they determine those needs and what are those needs? Did they conduct a poll?
The legislature's action in 2003 and U.S. Supreme Court criticisms of a number of Texas death-penalty convictions in recent years, as recounted in a New York Times analysis, suggested many people in the community may have grown a bit tired of Texas' nation-leading execution rate.
All victims, through their survivors, must have their say. And when Roach rejected Joe Walker's justifiable and understandable importunities, he forgot about the person for whom Walker was speaking.
DAs are coming under increasing scrutiny in this country. Take the example of Mike Nifong and allegations made in connection with his handling of the Duke University lacrosse case.
Judges may retreat to their chambers and decide cases for reasons that they may never have to explain publicly.
But district attorneys must always sit down with the families of murder victims, regardless of their personal beliefs of what they may think the entire community believes.
Copyright © 2013 - Star Local News