Thursday, April 1, 2010

Hill County - where crime goes unpunished

What’s going on in the Hill County attorney’s office? Every case they bring to trial seems to end in a mistrial or the defendant walks. Maybe we should save the taxpayers a few bucks and just turn everybody loose from the get go?

A 41 year old guy is charged with sexual intercourse without consent with a young girl and also with supplying meth and alcohol to the girl and her friend. Deputy county attorney Lorang took the case to trial, spent two days in court and the guy gets off with a hung jury after 5 hours of so of deliberation. By the way, Randy Randolph was the defense attorney

Last week, a guy that was arrested for a DUI that actually blew a .13 pleads not guilty and a jury of 6 people selected by the defense attorney Jeremy Yellin and deputy county attorney Lorang found him not guilty. Not only was the county attorney’s office poorly prepared they also left a tavern owner that had a couple of prior DUI’s himself on the jury. The jury on that open and shut case deliberated 8 minutes and came back to let the guy go. What the?? After making a few inquiries we have learned that Lorang’s win record in district court for the past year is a dismal 30%. Why are we spending tax money to take these cases to court if everyone is going to be set free?

Earlier this summer the Hill County Attorney’s office charged a young man with a felony because he and a cousin were shooting each other with BB guns and a BB pierced through a tent that was pitched in the yard striking another cousin, a 10 year old boy, in the side of the head. The boy’s father called the police and the County attorney jumped all over this big case, charged the kid with felony assault with a weapon and set his bail at $75,000. The family couldn’t get a bond to get their son out so he sat in jail for 6 days until his bail was reduced to $5,000. County Attorney Gina Dahl finally offered a deferred prosecution with a big laundry list of –to do’s, such as having the kid pay the court cost incurred thus far, go to anger management counseling, pay for a psychological evaluation and on and on. The family turned down Gina’s kind offer and plead not guilty. This happened back in august and the case was finally settled a couple of weeks ago.

What is up with prosecuting all these cases and not being prepared to make any charges stick? Or on the other hand, why are they even bringing charges in some of these cases?

It is you and I that are paying taxes to fund this nightmare.  County Attorney Gina Dahl is up for re-election this year and is being challenged by deputy county attorney Lindsey Lorang and also by private attorney, Randy Randolph.

55 comments:

  1. 6 days in jail for shooting someone with a BB gun? We used to have regular BB gun wars when we were kids

    I'd still have about 20 years to serve if I got 6 days in jail for every time I shot one of my brothers

    It appears that we need some help in the CA office but is Randolph the answer? Can't be any worse it seems

    ReplyDelete
  2. As long as a young man sits in jail after being a victim of domestic violence Gena Dahl and Judge Rice do not deserve the support of community they serve. When we vote against Dahl we need to be constant and leave the Judge Rice box unchecked.

    ReplyDelete
  3. We need to vote against both Gina and Lindsey. What kind of lawyer can let an obvious DUI person get off because they did a poor job in court. What kind of thinking went into leaving a barowner with prior tickets himself on the jury? The boys at work are all laughing aboout how our bud got off and we thought he was stupid for even pleading not guilty.

    I guess he knew how bad the prosecuter lorang really was and I do know that anyone I know that gets a DUI from here on will be pleading not guilty.

    That only leaves Randy other choice and I notice in your story he did win in his case

    ReplyDelete
  4. Joe Morgan - What, exactly, does Judge Rice have to do with poor prosecution?

    ReplyDelete
  5. Excuse me corrector,,,,but what in this article is "NEWS"...everything you stated is already "NEWS" that has been read by folks,,,What is your "PURPOSE" for the Article?
    If you want to be fair and feel the need to "VENT"....why dont you research the Felony cases of ALL the Candidates and compare them side-by-side in order to see the actual "Expierience" at trial...instead of nit-picking!

    ReplyDelete
  6. There is also the idea that these individuals may have been INNOCENT of the crimes they were accused of.

    In the case of the alleged DUI, perhaps people have had ENOUGH of local law enforement profiling nighttime drivers and doing shoddy investigations.

    If that is the case, I am hopeful that more juries will DEMAND that peoples rights be recognized, and nullify alleged "open and shut evidence"

    It should never be forgotten that juries, like taxpayers are the OWNERS of this country, and these public servants are EMPLOYED by the people.

    ReplyDelete
  7. People, people, people--get a grip! The County Attorneys office is a complete joke. Anybody serve on a jury of late? I can tell you it is an event not to miss. Other than the fireworks arsonists who would have been convicted in nearly any County, can you think of any other case that has not ended in some kind of mess? I can't. Anyway I am not sure who deserves blame here, for me it is just more embarassment at out County Attorney's office as a whole. Is it Lindsay? Is it Gina? Well she is the boss, so I guess she should be having a little talk with her subordinate opponent about the realities of her position. Oh and Captain Morgan it is not the judges job to clean up the spilled milk after a poor prosecution, that would be unfair to the defense!

    Now, you say this is not news? Are you not embarassed by this spectacle? Call the Clerk of Court yourself and check out these cases. Believe me it is worth the time before deciding who to vote for in the June primary for County Attorney. The record is dismal.

    And DeConstructor. . .I've read so many of your inane comments on this blog about our police and their gestapo tacticts and how we should give people the benefit of the doubt. You also take this blog to task for details and facts. I guess you didn't check your facts on this one did you? The DUI guy you so quickly want to find innocent? He was originally tried in City Court and was convicted because he was in fact DRUNK!!!! That is why he blew nearly twice the legal limit. He also admitted he was drinking, just not impaired. This case was on appeal to District Court and Lieutenant Lindsay botched up the jury by leaving a bar owner on the 6 person jury. Maybe she didn't know who he was during Voir Dire, but I guarantee she did 8 minutes after jury instructions!!! Gina andf Lindsay both need to go, Randy you've earned my vote by default because you are not part of the three stooges three ring circus.

    ReplyDelete
  8. I for one am absolutely amazed that Mr.The Boy got off on the rape charges. Its obviously a case that she (Lorang) didn't take interest in the case or do her job very well. The people on the Jury I think wanted a conviction but there wasn't enough evidence provided to them to get the job done, hung jury. Can the county afford these types of rulings I think not. I thought she was voted prosecuter of the year in 2008 I guess she is blowing that award right out of the water. She hasn't won a case, an open and shut case since her marriage. Maybe she is more interested in other things right now than doing her job efficiently and professionally. I am just astonished that Lorang is keeping her name on the ballot. Maybe she should spend more time working on her cases than beatig the streets campaining for the position of county attorney, she is making quite a name for herself!

    ReplyDelete
  9. Once again we see the gnarling of teeth at elected officials and the demand for their removal from office. While I am certainly not one to advocate for the retention of any elected official, neither am I one to call for their ouster simply because they are one.
    The Corrector has only put forth one side of the situation and yet is able to recommend the solution. Vote the bums out.
    In defense of the prosecutors involved, they can only prosecute sound, procedurally correct arrests. Many cases are lost(not only in Havre) by civil rights violations,sloppy handling of evidence, procedural violations and finally, arrogance displayed by our city's finest.
    If a HAVRE lawyer can tear apart these cases, a good lawyer could put our fair city in a "crime free" status.
    But I guess there is no reason for the corrector to look at that side of the equation since they are not up for election.

    ReplyDelete
  10. I am going to stand up for Rice!...he is a Fair and Common-sense Judge! He DOES his JOB! He is not in control of the Arrest or the Prosecution Tactics! He is there to Interpret the LAW & make sure that Procedure is followed!
    If convicted then its his RESPONSIBILITY to enact Fair JUSTICE! and I believe he does that!

    ReplyDelete
  11. Willy said: "If a HAVRE lawyer can tear apart these cases, a good lawyer could put our fair city in a "crime free" status."

    As one who knows and has observed most of the defense attorneys in Havre I would suggest that there are many EXCELLENT lawyers in Havre. Jeremy Yellin would be one of the 1st people I would recommend for a criminal case. Carl White was certainly in that class as well until his untimely death.

    ReplyDelete
  12. There is nothing wrong with Judge Rice. He is fair and competent.

    ReplyDelete
  13. There is something, however, wrong with Gina Dahl.

    As I and have others have pointed out on this blog many times, we live in a country that has the best crime and punishment system in the world. But it is flawed and always will be. But we can take steps to ensure it is as close to perfection as humanly possible by electing leaders with common sense, who have no axes to grind with any group or individual, and who are interesed in carrying out the spirit of the law. Leaders who are interested not in personal glory or personal numbers but leaders who want the best for our community.

    Gina Dahl is most certainly NOT such an individual. I am not advocating either Miss Lorang or Mr. Randolph (though I am voting for Mr. Randolph). I am not sure about either of them. And neither am I related to any of them.

    But I do that Gina Dahl is a complete and utter mess. Her office is a mess. She is a miserable woman who needs to be removed from office. Serious felony cases go by because she is busy going after 12-year olds and teens who make youth mistakes.

    She is not wise enough to remove herself from the Long Soldier investigation because she has no common sense. She tries to attach felonies to young first-time offenders (including non-violent) ones because she wants to rack up her record. She is despised by at least 80% of the lawyers in this town because she has no sense of right or wrong when it comes to her job.

    I am urging--URGING--my fellow Havre citizens to start cleaning up this mess at the courhouse by getting this woman out of office. SHE NEEDS TO BE STOPPED!

    ReplyDelete
  14. Jeremy Yellin finds the holes; even the smallest of holes and works them into a dismissed case or a reduced sentence. HE DOES WHAT HE IS HIRED TO DO - HIS JOB.

    Who creates the holes? The officers within the law enforcement depts and the county atty office; thru mishandled evidence or poor investigative research. I was visiting with an attorney from GF (non legal conversation), he randomly offered that our County Atty office is a JOKE.

    YET - the only one laughing is the defense attorney and his client.

    ReplyDelete
  15. LOIS--I too have heard from others outside our county (yes, Great Falls in my case too) who have labeled the county attorney in Havre, the "Felony Queen."

    I just hope and pray enough people in Havre are aware of her shenanigans, unprofessionalism and incompetence.

    ReplyDelete
  16. Isn't one of the county atty candidates having a fundraiser at a local bar. I just find that tacky.

    ReplyDelete
  17. I am troubled by the absence of a presumption of innocence in some of the posts to this thread.

    I agree that there is a great deal of over-reaching in the cases charged by the Hill County Attorney's Office, and I believe it is that over-reaching that is responsible for the poor win/loss record, not an inability to successfully prosecute a 'slam dunk' case.

    When a jury of the defendant's peers issues a verdict of acquittal, clearly the evidence presented was insufficient to overcome reasonable doubt. That is the State's burden, and the process of making the case starts with charging it correctly in the first place.

    The DUI case mentioned included a presentation to the jury of the individual's processing at the County Detention Center. The sobriety tests apparently did not support the State's contention that he was impaired, and the defense presented a strong argument for reasonable doubt in relying upon the Intoxilyzer result, due to law enforcement's sloppy record-keeping on the machine's maintenance record. Blowing over .08 is not in itself evidence of guilt in a DUI, when the machine testing BAC isn't properly calibrated. Food for thought, I hope, for some who seem so quick to believe the State's case must be good.

    I agree it is ridiculous how youthful offenders are being charged in this County. Charging a Felony Assault with a Weapon on a kid who accidentally hit his cousin with a BB (the cousin was inside a tent, it wasn't even a clear-cut case of him aiming at his cousin) is shameful. Felony convictions destroy the opportunity to live in student housing, obtain federal financial aid, get good jobs, and a whole host of other permanent consquences for young 'offenders' who then are likely set on a path which does not allow them to become productive, contributing members of society - when they otherwise quite likely would have.

    This County Attorney's Office lacks discretion and a sense of what is good for the community. I hope November will bring a change in prosecutorial philosophy to Hill County.

    ReplyDelete
  18. good post bigskygal, thank you ~almost sounds like 1st hand knowledge.

    ReplyDelete
  19. Well said Bigskygal... as far as the judge not holding SOME level of responsibility is inaccurate. I too believe that Judge Rice is an excellent judge, he is professional and I have a tremendous amount of respect for him. However, Decon, and a couple others are wrong. He DOES have a hand in the prosecution of cases. When the clowns at the County Attorney's office file charges against someone, they have to get "permission" from the judge to do so. It's called a "Motion for Leave to File" this is a summary of the incident and charges. The judge has the opportunity to read these motions and signs off on them. He DOES have a level of control . Again, I respect Judge Rice and he is good at what he does, but to say he has NO control over the three ring circus in the Suite at the Courthouse Inn is not correct.

    ReplyDelete
  20. "This County Attorney's Office lacks discretion and a sense of what is good for the community. I hope November will bring a change in prosecutorial philosophy to Hill County."

    WELL SAID. We really need to get her out of there. As you said, in kinder terms, she is a joke.

    Either way, Bigskygal, if you have had first hand experience, as someone suggested, let me assure you that Gina Dahl will someday be treated the way she treats others--call it karma or God's will or what have you, the lack of grace she shows towards people will come back to haunt her in some fashion. I truly believe this.

    We have actually had some pretty good county attorneys in this town over the decades, she clearly is not one of them. PLEASE people, spread the word NOT to vote for Gina Dahl. A vote for her is a vote for bad, really bad government.

    As for Judge Rice--he may have some accountability but in his position he has to pick his battles. I blame him for little to none of the craziness that comes out of the C.A.'s office.

    ReplyDelete
  21. Surely/u/jest When Rice set the bail at half a million and Peterson got it jacked up to 1 million Rice should have looked at the reasonable bail requirement law.But the law is only for us to follow. Peterson lived next door to Rice. The man in question was 18 months out of jail with no violations and no one knows how long he will serve but a woman had 20 violations of the same thing she was put on probation for and then he didn't send her away for the full time but then she was a drug user and seller. A sex offender was out for the 2nd time around and created 15 violation before Rice sent him back. The point is if the county attorney has a grudge against someone Rice is their pal in the pulpit.

    ReplyDelete
  22. Get a CLUE Joe....the Probation & parole tally's up the violations before just giving up on that person and recomends revocation...not Rice....He can only go on what evidence is presented to sentence....& Bail is set on the person's threat to society,location,past crimes,aquantances...he can only go on what he is told in order to price the bond!

    ReplyDelete
  23. Neo : Talk about a clue? The judge knew she had 20 violations for using and selling drugs and did not react. He had put the sex offender in jail here for various crimes but after 15 he sent him back! If you believe that judge Rice is that fair you have never had any dealings with him and his willing accomplice Peterson.To quote Winston Churchill: " Keep feeding the lions in hope's you will be the last one eaten".

    ReplyDelete
  24. Joe Morgan said: "If you believe that judge Rice is that fair you have never had any dealings with him and his willing accomplice Peterson."

    I have had dealings with the Judge and I know him to be very fair. To suggest otherwise with nothing to base it on is BS.

    ReplyDelete
  25. I agree--Rice is fair and honest. Dahl is a whack job who needs to go.

    ReplyDelete
  26. Stephen, Gina is the boss but Lindsey does make her own decision as to if felony charges should be made on these cases. It is obvious she doesn't have enough experience to do a decent job preparing for trial so mayb e they are both just as bad as the other. That only leaves you Randolph if you want a new face in the office.

    The question to consider in a three way race is who will benifit from a vote for Randolph if he doesn't get enough votes to win? Will he take a vote from Gina to allow Lindsey to win? In my opinion she is the worst of the three choices but I will say that she is the one campaigning the hardest and is the most visible

    ReplyDelete
  27. Like I said: Keep feeding the lion and hopefully you'll be the last one eaten.With all the publicity on domestic violence:Ask him why he allowed Peterson to minipulate the charges and put the victim in jail.It is called political pay back. In this case rice violated the law 3 major times.He put the victim under 1 million dollar bail to make sure he couldn't assist in his defense. You know the story of" When they came for my neighbor" ? Who will help you when it is your turn?

    ReplyDelete
  28. As I was reading the old posts a little time back a light bulb came on for me. Doesn’t it appear that good old Joe Morgan is a plant for Lindsey Lorang’s campaign? Her husband perhaps? This is typical of what he has been doing around the business community. He must think we are all stupid too? Sorry Joe, we are on to you.

    I may just go ahead and vote for Randy because I think the whole county attorney office needs some help, but the current county attorney Gina Dahl is by far superior to Lindsey Lorang who rarely wins a case. I used to defend Lindsey because I thought the county attorney instructed her in the filing of these stupid felonies but have since learned that she does these amateur filings and badly prepared court cases all by herself. I will say that Lindsey wants the job bad because it would be a raise of 30 thousand dollars per year for her and she is getting out there and working and bad lipping Gina every day. I saw her and her husband’s drunken performance at the “I Love NMC” ball even to the point of an altercation where Lindsey’s husband was asked to leave the ball. Nice couple wanting to move up into the “high society” aren’t they. I don’t vote for anyone that badmouths his opponent to win. Sorry Joe but I happen to like Rice too.

    Why must Havre always be the laughing stock of Montana?

    ReplyDelete
  29. Also wasn’t the “Prosecutor of the year award” actually the “Domestic abuse prosecutor of the year” which Lindsey was awarded for filing felony charges against the abusers more than anyone else in Montana? For just filing no matter if she had a winnable case or not? Not quite following the truth in advertising campaign pledge is she?

    ReplyDelete
  30. Sorry suzie: I already called Helena and your information are incorrect.

    ReplyDelete
  31. Joe Morgan - Which 3 laws did Judge Rice violate? Please be specific as you are making an serious allegation.

    ReplyDelete
  32. SuzyQ: I should have read the rest of your statements. You are loosing credibility fast. To quote John Wayne;" Lady: I have a saddle older than she is."

    ReplyDelete
  33. Joe? What information? Who exactly did you call? What are you talking about?

    ReplyDelete
  34. SuzyQ; The criteria for the domestic violence program. It is up for change. If the law was followed they would loose their federal funding for not offering to help a victim because he was male. You didn't answer on who I was married to?

    ReplyDelete
  35. OH OH, it looks like you have been found out Jakie. I have heard your anti-Gina talk around town too and it is not very becoming to Lindsey’s credibility if I do dare to say so. I would be more likely to support her if she ran on her accomplishments instead of just what is disgusting about Gina. Is Randolph running on the platform of replacing them both?

    ReplyDelete
  36. On the one hand I do agree that Lorang should campaign on more than just her boss's shortcomings. However the incumbent always has to take more heat. In Dahl's case though, she deserve all of it. And there is so much there to criticize her for, it must be very tempting to jump all over it.

    That being said, I think Randolph's the way to go.....We need a change. I will settle for giving Lorang a try but Randolph is the lesser of three evils.

    ReplyDelete
  37. "Why must Havre always be the laughing stock of Montana?"

    That not is quite true, but I do get your point. Cities of our size sometimes (not always of course) get inexperienced, unqualified or incompetent people in leadership roles. We are almost like a training ground. Good ones often (not always of course) move on.

    Bad ones hold positiions for awhile until the people get sick of them and vote them out, and then they have to get real jobs. I would assume in the case of Gina Dahl, it shan't take too long for the people of Havre to wake up and send her to some unfortunate private practice who would make the mistake of hiring her....

    ReplyDelete
  38. By putting Lindsay in office you bring fresh eyes to the office. Eyes that don't know where the bodies are buried and owes no favors to anyone. Look around the state and see how the offices are inherited not worked to achieve.If you are ever involved with the legal system you will see how many names you will recognize from the past.Correctional is the worst with the nepotism.

    ReplyDelete
  39. I think SuzyQ is right in her assessment about Jacob, er, Joe

    Joe, why would you think putting Lindsey in office would bring fresh eyes to the office? She is not long out of law school, all of her practical experience is in this poorly run office, she has been a big part of the office to date, and she doesn’t prevail in court very often.

    You say she doesn’t know where bodies are buried? What a bunch of melodramatic campaign hooey. And what does nepotism and the state corrections department have to do with cleaning this office up?

    One point I do agree with Joe, Gina should go, but should also take Lindsey along with her.

    ReplyDelete
  40. Superman: I'll try to give you an idea where I'm coming from. A few years ago 6 thousand dollars was missing from a office in the court house. The guilty party only resigned and left town. There was 8 million dollars in county property missing.But there is so little we can do to make any of the people account for their actions because the old saying: " One person lies and the other swears to it". I have not the authority to make any one show me the records, They are masters at covering for each other. With Lindsay we could have an out side friend to take out concerns to with out wondering if we were talking to her cousin. All roads lead from the court house to the correctional department. When you get there you will be dumbfounded of the names from the past.When you get there the law doesn't matter they do what ever they want to and people like this governor don't dare say any thing. Give her a chance and if you do I'll be the first one to own up to my mistake if her actions take us the wrong direction.

    ReplyDelete
  41. Krist-all-mighty Joe, you would make a great lapdog for any cult leader or other such presence that you Worship....lol...Its feeble-minded people like you with all your DEDICATION that SPEW your STUPID Rhetoric that is meant to CONFUSE others, I can see right thru you dude,...but carry on ...U AMUSE ME....

    ReplyDelete
  42. NEO-CON Destroyer said...
    ..........Its feeble-minded people like you with all your DEDICATION that SPEW your STUPID Rhetoric that is meant to CONFUSE others,...

    Now ain't that "The Pot callin' the Kettle black"....time to get back on your meds NEO....

    ReplyDelete
  43. It's too bad NEO doesn't have something to say about the subject that could be of value. Why don't you tell us why you feel Dahl is a good county attorney?

    ReplyDelete
  44. I have been reading Joe’s posts and have to wonder why if he thinks Dahl is so bad he would think Lorang would be any better? They both are presently part of the office that is supposedly running so badly. I can’t see a lick of difference between them. Why not get rid of them both if that is the case? Could Randolph be any worse? I agree with Neo that Joe’s constant push for Lorang is getting old

    Same goes for the Treasurer’s office. If everyone thinks Dickerson is so bad why would they think an underling moving on up would make any vast changes? All I hear about up there is that Dickerson doesn’t carry her weight in the office but Brown is not talking about doing anything superior or different than what is happening now. It is a tossup and if you really believe change is in order you would have to go with a new unattached person that just maybe would have a better idea or two and maybe a more pleasant approach to dealing with the customers

    ReplyDelete
  45. OK, I have done some research and read the posts here and eleswhere, and I am officially (like anyone cares!!) throwing my support to Randolph.

    As someone here said, we need a new start. If Lorang wins, I will give her a fair shake but I hope it does not come to that. And if we are stuck with Gina Dahl, then God help us all......

    ReplyDelete
  46. i don't know randolph but i do know the other 2 and they're idiots so i have to vote for randolph.Corcoran over Anderson,and magleson over shad huston.

    ReplyDelete
  47. Hopefully people will remember, and will remind their fellow citizens, that June's primary is critical to bring about a change of leadership in the County Attorney's Office - all three candidates are on the Democratic ballot, so winning in the June primary is key.

    ReplyDelete
  48. Hey, come on now, they do an exellent job by my standards. I used to be an employee at the Detention Center in havre, maybe you should stop thinking about the attorney's and start holding the jury responsible. These two ladies do a fantastic job, at what they are trained to do. You all dont see it because your not around it day in and day out. Stop jumping to conclusions and actually start thinking why dont you.

    ReplyDelete
  49. Dotc--You are entitled to your opinion,(though you certainly offer no reasons to back it up) but it's highly inaccurate to charge those who disagree with you (which seems to be 90% of the people who read this blog)with "not thinking."

    To the contrary, I would say most of the anti-Gina Dahl comments were very thoughtful, and contained solid reasons why they feel she is absolutely horrible at her job. While someone with a grammar issue can still hold valid thoughts and opinons, your comments really have no validity as you simply accuse people of not thinking. I am sure we would all love to hear more about why you think this completely inept, miserable woman should be elected to continue her reign of incompetency.

    I think the rest of us will give Randolph a shot. He simply can NOT be any worse than Dina Dahl. As stated before by many others, she is a waste of tax payers money going after miniscule crimes when major ones go unpunished.

    ReplyDelete
  50. Gina Dahl does live up to her name Felony Queen. That lady pisses felonies when she wakes up in the morning. Its just dumb. And talk about a man hater. I dont even know where to start when it comes to this lady. A lot of 4 and 5 letter words come to mind. As far as Rice goes; he was a prosecuter for years and he still is. Always looks for the guilty in people rather than the innocence. But hes the lesser of two evils in most cases. He does do his job.

    ReplyDelete
  51. Here is a big surprise! The sheriff and former sheriff are supporting Dahl for county attorney. Actually very little surprise after she pulled their chestnuts out of the fire with the suicide and a death due to lack of medical attention. Good time to pass the torch to Lorang or Randolph.

    ReplyDelete
  52. What do you know! An ex-county commissioner is supporting Dahl. It never ends with the inherited family. I’m sure they know where the bodies are buried.

    ReplyDelete
  53. I think the Sheriff has done a good job, and I honestly think the jailers are NOT to blame for the two deaths you are referring to.

    However, I was very, very disappointed and feel he is making a huge mistake by endorsing Dahl, and I suspect should she win, he will come to regret it. He is protecting the status quo and may feel she is "tough on crime." But he is not looking at the bigger picture.

    For anyone reading this who is voting in the Democratic primary I urge you and I beg you to clean up Hill County by voting for Randolph. He is a good man who will prosecute those who deserve it, and make sure the punishments fit the crimes. DO NOT VOTE FOR GINA DAHL! PLEASE!

    ReplyDelete
  54. Stephen--I came on here to post my two cents about the current County Attorny but see you have already said it way better than I could so if you don't mind--I will reuse your post with a few of my own words thrown in!


    As I and have others have pointed out on this blog many times, we live in a country that has the best crime and punishment system in the world. But it is flawed and always will be. But we can take steps to ensure it is as close to perfection as humanly possible by electing leaders with common sense, who have no axes to grind with any group, individual, gender or age group, and who are interesed in carrying out the spirit of the law. Leaders who are interested not in personal glory or personal numbers but leaders who want the best for our community.

    Gina Dahl is most certainly NOT such an individual. I am not advocating either Miss Lorang or Mr. Randolph (though I am voting for Mr. Randolph). I am not sure about either of them. And neither am I related to any of them.

    But I do know that Gina Dahl is a complete and utter mess. Her office is a mess. She is a miserable woman who needs to be removed from office. Serious felony cases go by because she is busy going after 12-year olds and teens who make youth mistakes.

    She is not wise enough to remove herself from the Long Soldier investigation because she has no common sense. She tries to attach felonies to young first-time offenders (including non-violent) ones because she wants to rack up her record. She is despised by at least 90% of the lawyers in this town because she has no sense of right or wrong when it comes to her job.

    I am urging--URGING--my fellow Havre citizens to start cleaning up this mess at the courhouse by getting this woman out of office.

    I would add it's time Hill County stopped being the joke of Montana. Take some pride in your community fellow Havre citizens, do your civic duty by removing Gina Dahl from her throne and reign of terror.

    Mallory

    ReplyDelete