Local News: Turner, Davis Debate on KEOS
DA Race Debate Low-Key
By Matthew Watkins
From the Bryan-College Station Eagle
District attorney candidates Rick Davis and Bill Turner stuck mainly to their campaign platforms in a low-key radio debate held six days before the election.
As they had in interviews before Wednesday night's discussion hosted by KEOS-FM, Turner focused on his nearly 25 years of experience as Brazos County's top prosecutor while Davis pushed for a change in leadership.
"I had to be a prosecutor for five years before I became district attorney," Turner said, stressing that all of his opponent's experience was as a judge or a defense lawyer. "I had to learn the ropes, and I made some mistakes before I could ever think about supervising a group of prosecutors in those serious crimes."
Davis said that he had legal experience and that he could lean on the knowledge of career prosecutors in the District Attorney's Office for help. He said that Turner rarely prosecuted cases himself and that experience was not as important as Turner suggested.
"You have a lot of good assistants there that do the day-in and day-out prosecutions," he said. "I think that this race is more about the leadership of the office."
The KEOS studios are in a small, old house on Carson Street in Bryan, and the candidates sat about a foot apart in what appeared to be a former living room. It was the first time the political adversaries debated in a public forum during the campaign.
The room had about a half-dozen chairs for the public to watch, and they were filled exclusively by Davis supporters -- most of whom wore shirts bearing his name.
Srikanth Sastry and Danny Yeager, hosts of the show Biased Transmission, moderated the event. Sastry began by asking questions about the candidates' platforms. Then Yeager pressed them about their heated past.
Davis, a Republican former judge, received a public reprimand from the State Commission on Judicial Conduct for angry comments he made publicly and privately about Turner, a Democrat, and one of his assistants.
After taking the bench in 2001, Davis filed two failed courts of inquiry into Turner's office. One alleged that Turner had dragged his feet in an investigation involving embezzlement by a longtime employee; the other accused Turner's top assistant of intimidating a grand jury that was meeting outside the courthouse without assistance from the DA's office. Both inquiries were promptly dismissed for lack of evidence.
Yeager asked both candidates whether they thought Davis was running for the office because of a personal vendetta against Turner.
Davis said that wasn't the case and maintained that his courts of inquiry against Turner's office were justified. He said he had apologized for the comments that led to his public reprimand, learned from the experience and put it behind him.
"People are going to believe what they want, and the newspaper is going to print what it wants," he said. "I think that I can bring a positive change to that office."
Turner pointed out that both district judges brought in from outside the Brazos Valley to oversee the courts of inquiry separately found that Davis' complaints were the result of a personal vendetta against Turner's office.
Yeager also questioned Turner about the $200,000 stolen from his office's victims' restitution fund by a former employee, Queen Walker, over a 19-year period. Walker's case was handed over to the Texas Rangers soon after Turner's office discovered the theft, and she was convicted in 2006.
Davis suggested that Turner deserved part of the blame for the stolen money because of a lapse of leadership.
"They started losing money back in about 1983 -- shortly after Mr. Turner took office," Davis said. "He didn't balance the checkbook in 20 years, and I think that is very irresponsible."
Turner said that Walker was a trusted employee, that he was devastated when he found out that she had been stealing and that any business owner who had had a trusted employee steal would understand. He said his office reorganized the administration of the fund as soon as the crimes were brought to light.
Davis said that some victims, including a restaurant that closed in the 1980s, still had not received their restitution.
District attorneys' offices frequently have trouble finding victims who are owed restitution because of the length of investigations and the judicial process, Turner said.
"What happens is you start the date of the crime and it takes awhile for law enforcement to solve the crime," Turner said, adding that the trial can take even longer and that the criminal may not be able to begin restitution before completing a sentence. "If a business is no longer in business by that time, then it can be very difficult to find."
