I can understand that to an extent as well, especially when looking at DV cases where the victim returns to the abuser and doesn't want to pursue charges. The POS still needs to be locked up

I have had the unfortunate experience of watching a friend's family go through an agonizingly slow juicing case. It showed very little compassion, efficiency and communication. This mismanagement leads me to vote for Person's opponent.

Lester Blackshear is a defendant who was offered lenient plea deals by Parsons' office. He has seven assaultive convictions (including committing child abuse twice, pepper spraying his sister and trying to stab his brother with a seven inch knife) and the longest sentence he's gotten was three years. For his last three assaults, he was facing 25 to 99 years each time.

cslifer said:

---

BCSWguru said:

---

I seem to remember seeing Parsons made contributions to Obama. Same with Esparza.

---

I would hope that people vote for their DA based on experience/integrity/results instead of caring about a campaign donation made at least a decade ago.

---

This. I wouldn't trust the local R party only...at all and especially these days. Just because I tend to vote Republican for most offices, doesn't mean the R candidate for DA is better just bc they are 'certified' by the party. Just like in our upcoming national election. I desperately wish their were better candidates exactly because of the experience with the front runners.
B/CS is still small enough that the local DA works for the community and not a party.

Lots of people in public offices donated to another party at one time. Lots.

Just discovered this thread.

Team Maritza, all the way. It's time for a change.

As an earlier poster said, ask a local detective if you happen to know one.

Specifically, ask them their thoughts about the DA's Office philosophy on taking sexual assault cases and the astronomical turn around time on getting an answer.

In the spirit of asking questions, rather than asking a detective of your choosing about the DA's office's policy on sexual assaults, or any other case for that matter, why not ask the person actually running? He's the one wanting to be re-elected. Have him answer this accusation. If he won't, then I think you have your answer.

And keeping in the spirit of asking the candidate, why not ask the Sifuentez campaign why she's sending out mass mailers misrepresenting her experience as a prosecutor. She claims she was an ADA for over 8 years yet the State Bar website says she was licensed as an attorney on 4/30/15 and the news story on her flyer about her becoming a defense attorney was published in March 2023. That means she wasn't an ADA for even 8 years.

AND...during that time, she left for a year to work at the County Attorney's Office.

Her mailers also imply that Parsons doesn't actively try cases...which anyone who has sat on a jury in which he was the prosecutor knows that to not be true.

Truth doesn't seem to be her strong suit...seems to be an issue with her when she is running for DA.

I'd honestly rather someone who isn't a lifetime Brazos co resident. The good ole boys club vibe runs strong with most of them.

aggielawyer00 said:

---

And maybe ask them if they ever addressed their concerns with Parsons. (Hint...the answer for a long time was no.)

Once those concerns were raised, that issue was fixed!

---

Are we really going to pretend that local law enforcement hasn't voiced their concerns with Jarvis over the years?

7 years and 11 months? I'd just say 8 years too. That's how everyday normal people talk and communicate.

That's how long she has been a licensed attorney. As others have pointed out, she hasn't been an ADA those entire 7 years and 11 months.

Heck- she says she OVER 8 years experience as an ADA, when she doesn't even have 8 full years as an attorney.

Except the mailer says "over 8 years." And another poster says she left the DA's office for a year and went to the CA's office. If that's true, then she wasn't an ADA for even 7 years, 11 months. Why does her campaign feel the need to inflate her experience?

EDIT: Went to her campaign website to see if there was more context for this claim. On there it says she helped open and establish the PD's office in January 2023, so she left even before March. It doesn't mention anything about being in the CA's office. Anyone who actually knows her know if that's true?

Agreed, talk to local law enforcement and see what they have to say. Asking a candidate direct questions can be beneficial, but it's likely the answer that benefits them is all you'll get. I'm going with what I've seen them do, what I know of them and the experiences from those I know who work with them.

Being untruthful about one's experience in a race to be the District Attorney is a non-issue?

histag10 said:

---

TexShootMan said:

---

Not sure, but I consider it a non-issue for me

---

You consider blatant lying and bending of the truth in a public campaign a non-issue for a DA candidate?

\

---

Kinda like how Jarvis is an actual republican?

That's neither here nor there in regards to my comment.

I just find it odd that someone finds blatant dishonesty a non-issue in a candidate for a position that requires seeking out the truth.

I'm more concerned with the "equity" and "bias" that's pushed from the current officeholder

Darth Randy said:

---

Just discovered this thread.

Team Maritza, all the way. It's time for a change.

As an earlier poster said, ask a local detective if you happen to know one.

Specifically, ask them their thoughts about the DA's Office philosophy on taking sexual assault cases and the astronomical turn around time on getting an answer.

---

I'd like to see something backing up the bolded part of your statement. From what I understand, other districts around the state look to ours as a model for sexual assault cases and have visited Brazos Co. to see how it's done here.

[removed]

Said it before, we better know WHO we're voting for! Not interested in becoming a Dallas, Houston or God forbid a California!