Election 2014: The District Attorney race, 9th Judicial District, which includes Franklin, Vance and Granville counties, is a single party Democrat Primary event. There is no Republican challenger in the November general election.
The person that wins the primary in May will be your District Attorney for the next four years.
Only Democrats and nonaffiliated voters have the option of voting in this race
There are two candidates on the ballot. They are Cindy Bostic and Michael Waters.
I have followed the political scene for many years and found most voters know little about those that seek the office of District Attorney.
The office is one of the most important and powerful office’s in our local government. In large part, it is the gate keeper of justice.
It is where the decisions are made if a criminal will be prosecuted. It is also where the decisions are made to initiate investigations against corrupt public officials.
Unfortunately, unlike judicial elections, the district attorney election is not nonpartisan. For this reason, we have to be ever diligent to guard against political influence with this important process.
Those that would take advantage of their political office for personal gain, or are pursuing a personal agenda have a vested interest in asserting political pressure to have a candidate elected.
The political influence I am speaking of is at play in this election. I cannot say what the specific reason for it is, only that I know it is playing out. My guess is if someone is taking the time to do it, they are looking to benefit from it.
What I am talking about is a deliberate effort to label Bostic as being supported and endorsed by some type of “Tea Party” organization, thus inferring she harbors a philosophy that is contrary to the Democratic Party and voters should not vote for her.
I have researched this and can tell you unequivocally and without qualification it is a bold-faced lie.
The intent is clear; people are trying to influence the outcome of the election. I believe the effort rises to the definition of voter fraud, as it is a deliberate attempt to misinform voters.
I have email and or messages from both Mike Waters and Shelley Dickerson; candidate for Clerk of Court, that support what I am saying on this. The same tactic is being used to unfairly malign Patricia Brunette Chastain in her bid to retain the office as Clerk of Court.
I have also talked to other candidates within the Democratic Party that are aware of all of this. They have told me so, and agree it is very wrong.
Let me be clear. I do not feel, nor am I saying either Waters or Dickerson initiated the misinformation I am addressing.
However, I know both Dickerson and Waters are aware of what is being done. I personally informed them of it, and called upon both to renounce it.
As of this date, neither has responded to my written request to do so, or answered other questions I have posed to them.
I have reason to believe members of the Franklin County Democratic Party are behind this effort.
This now begs the question: who is really behind all of this? They are in the shadows, like most things grounded in deceit, they are not done in the open.
I am throwing a “flag” on this, and calling them out.
You, whoever you are, olly, olly oxen-free. You have been tagged, you are it. Advance and be recognized.
Now would be a good time for Mr. Marciniak, the chairman of the Franklin County Democratic Party, to comment on this.
It is obvious from the text I have received from both Waters and Dickerson that what is being done is party politics. The responses are all but mirror images of one another, although Waters reply was much more cordial and professional.
In defense of both Mrs. Dickerson and Mr. Waters, I want to say I think both are being manipulated by people with a party line agenda.
This said, if you get on the bus then you go for the ride. Now is the time for them to renounce what is being done. If they don’t, then they are part of it, and own it.
Now remember, I am a confessed Republican conservative and cannot vote in a Democratic primary. One might say I do not have a dog in this fight.
Well, I disagree.
Here is one of my dogs in the fight. I have a message from Mrs. Dickerson that says I may be happier if she were not elected as Clerk of Court.
I guess her words could mean a number of things. To me it reads like some kind of threat as to how I may be treated if I had need of the Clerk of Courts office.
This should bother you as well. If an official discriminates based on their perception of your beliefs, what happens to you when the official learns you disagree with them on something?
As it relates to the Clerk of Court, does this mean your estate documents, or other matters, get moved to the bottom of the pile?
If it does, how will you ever know for sure? Perception can be reality, and the reality is I have been told by a candidate for the office of Clerk of Court I may be happier if she were not elected. Not my words, Mrs. Dickerson’s exact words.
Experience matters, particularly if it is your daughter that is raped, your husband that is shot to death when someone kicks in your door in the middle of the night to rob you, or it is your home being foreclosed on.
A little note on experience: Cindy Bostic has 18 years as a prosecutor. A few days ago, she won another murder conviction.
My understanding is Mr. Waters, while a good lawyer, has only tried one jury case, which he lost. In fairness to Mr. Waters, I emailed him to ask if this is true. He has yet to reply to me.
With the election only a few weeks away, I thought you may like to know this.
Like I said earlier, often voters know little of those that seek office.
Vote for who you think is best and most qualified. For your reference here are website URLs for the candidates:
http://electchastain.net/ , http://bosticforda.com/ , http://www.shelleydickerson.com/dedicated.php , http://electmikewaters.com/