Somehow we should have known that someone would dig out their "quote" book and give us a jewel to chew on.

All of this is just a mess. My question about the whole story is--how did Ronald McDonald get elected as the special prosecutor that offered Ratcliff the plea bargain---oh wait a minute--that's pronounced Terry McDonald.

Was there ever any doubt that the petition would stick? I just can't wait until the trials!

I just saw this again in the printed edition. The thought came to mind "my God, what if the author is right! We are screwed pooches!"

This would back up the claims of the Victoria Haters Club that we aren't worth the power to blow the whole place up...

I think I need a drink.....

Our city officials would do well to follow your lead.

Nah, that would be mature, logical, and would not defy common sense.

I have my suspicions on why they do the things & pick the people they do, but for now I'll keep that "theory" to myself.

Yes, you are correct. An ex fire chief, a career civil servant, an attorney out of private practice, and the inheritor of a family business are better at investigating all criminal acts than our state police.

And then lied about their acts.

I never heard of Tyler refusing DPS cases? Were they of higher quality? And above the caliber of that of local agencies?

Interesting perspective, hmm?

I found the previous comment that the VPD stepped in because they were frustrated with the time the DPS was taking & they thought they could do better. Because everyone knows a small town police department is able to handle a case like this better than the states policing agency!

left: I believe they are the investigating agency (along with the FBI who I think found nothing) on the Ratcliff indictment, and the follow ups for our city officials.
 Unlike our city and county leaders, I believe they are doing their jobs, and not interfering with other law enforcement agencys and RUNNING THEIR MOUTHS for the cameras.
To actually approach DPS and ask questions would require the independent thought and maturity of journalists.

They have been extremely quiet. I wonder what they are thinking & why there hasn't been a statement from their spokesperson. Has the VicAd even contacted them concerning all this mess? It might clear up a thing or 2.

Back to the subject of this article. Using Mr. Rollins (the author for those of you who have forget), his comments could have been used for the former sheriff just a few months ago. Given his criteria, I wouldn't let it hold much weight.

Elected officials under indictment will face elections shortly. Hired officials, if found guilty of a felony will be dismissed. And lose their careers in the process. Hope they enjoyed time in power.

The only agency/department worthy of ANY respect during these events is the Texas DPS. And I believe we have yet to hear from them.

Just wake up, ALS?

Fact: Tyler refused to even review any cases the VPD, VCSO, et al submitted to his office unless they played ball with his 5th-amendment-ignoring affidavit. The job he was elected to do is review and prosecute cases submitted to his office by the VPD, the VCSO, et al. He did so to the point even a local judge complained about his inaction leading to suspects being released. He claimed at one point the VPD had quit submitting cases for him to review but the documents we were able to obtain indicate quite the opposite. Official documents trump "he said" in our book.

Fact: Ratcliff was under investigation on suspicion of committing a felony when Tyler offered him a position in the DA's office. Tyler himself admitted he was made aware of that fact BEFORE Ratcliff assumed his position and that the DPS asked that he not retract the offer of employment to help further the investigation. Nothing we've gotten or even heard from DPS substantiates *that* he-said.

Just those two facts are a matter of record, my friend. They are not in dispute. What is in dispute is Tyler's "spin" on those facts.

All we're looking for is someone with a whole lot more authority and a whole lot more resources to figure out if Tyler's on the up-and-up or, as we suspect, playing politics and power trips at the expense of the citizens of Victoria.

There are several other instances being questioned. Some of them are *documented* in our petition. Your interpretation may differ from ours for whatever reason but it is our *right* under the Constitution and the State of Texas to demand accountability from our elected officials and we are, regardless of your differing opinion, well within our rights to pursue that accountability.

If that pursuit is fruitless and you feel we're wasting our time, energy and money feel completely free not to worry your head about it; we'll be fine without your support as we *do* have much of that without yours and southtexasguy's.

Ernie

Lindams,
Yes I agree with you. The chief's involvement was a bit a neccessary, however his involvement was to supply evidence to the DPS. It was not his place to interrogate or advise him to talk only to the VPD

I apologize for not being more involved then I should have(Though I don't seemed to have missed much). FYI=Don't go to Casa Ole. Now then, sniff, sniff, sniff. Do you smell what I smell? I think it's the stench of irony. Yes I know VCC, you work in the DA's office and Tyler is to you what Superman is to a 3 yr old. However, let me ask you this: if your going to recuse yourself to make sure you have no involvement in a case like this, other then being a witness on the stand, why would you pick/recommend a prosecutor for the case instead of just letting the state assign one? Tyler had his hand in the cookie jar just like the officials did. The only difference is, that Tyler's trying to take the whole jar.

Give it up Ernie. For months you and the others in your group have been running your mouths. Tyler did this. Tyler did that. Months and months of half-truths, innuendo, and falsehoods. And it took a lousy three hours for your petition to get kicked to the curb.

Ernie, Tyler has never "refused" to do his job, nor did he ever hire a suspected felon to "work on" prosecuting felons. No wonder your petition got tossed out so quickly!!

Now I think you're onto something, Luminary. (I figured with all those potshots, sooner or later you'd have a hit.)

But I think you're putting our cart before your horse. It wasn't concerned citizens who tossed the firebomb of refusing to do their jobs because they had a bad hair day over at the cop shop nor lobbed the brickbat of hiring a suspected felon to work on prosecuting felons.

But you just keeping beating around that bush. Methinks sooner or later the varmint in there might break and run.

Ernie

On the contrary, Lindams, your suggestions make *perfect* sense.

That was and is the focus of our efforts; to get an unbiased outside agency to scrutinize the events that were going on in the Victoria government and LE agencies and to find out just what the hell is going on and why.

Ernie

RG, you made some sense! I really do not believe that the Police Chief or the other officer did anything that would warrant their prosecution. They are law enforcement officers and were assigned to work on this case in cooperation with the DPS. I really can't see where the mayor and the city attorney were justified getting into this. From what I understand, that's not in either's job description.

As for Mr. Tyler, I don't see, from what has been presented to the public, that in the Ratcliff matter, he has done anything that would call for him being ousted. He did what he was supposed to do by presenting the facts to the Grand Jury. The Grand Jury did what they were supposed to do and brought the indictment against Ratcliff. Mr. Tyler then did his duty by presenting facts against the city officials to the Grand Jury and got indictments against them. I can't see where Mr. Tyler failed in these instances. As far as having an investigation by a State agency into this entire mess, I agree! That should happen before the other 4 go to court. Let that agency decide if the case against the officials has merit. If it does, then they should be tried by someone other than Tyler or our local judges. I think this same agency should look into the claims of the people who filed a lawsuit to get rid of Tyler. If substantial merit is found, they should investigate further and take appropriate action. All of this is just my opinion and maybe it doesn't make much sense. But that's how I see it.

Parrallel investigations are done in a cooperative fashion, and not in a manner that hinders the other agency, especially one with more jurisdiction.

Agencies run Parallel Investigations all the time.

I would like to see the Victoria Advocate run criminal histories on all our local public officials, elected and appointed. Semeza, shake some branches, you’ll be surprised what falls out, and you can do a preliminary check through our Texas Department of Public Safety website for a few bucks a head.

Your accusation that Tyler interfered and/or has obstructed justice is just plain insane. I cannot believe that anyone would go through the process of tendering evidence to a Grand Jury on high ranking city government officials and then would muddle up the process.
Secondly, I have gone to watch many trials and this is something everyone should do. The prosecutor MUST be passionate in their attempt to seek justice and cannot hide this in any way. To say otherwise is an uneducated assumption.
So, how do you feel about the potential of many civil lawsuits against the City for allowing felony indicted persons in places of authority? Once (and I truly believe this from everything I have read and studied up on) the indicted officials are found guilty (or get their plea deal), who's to say that the door is busted wide open for every newly bar-passed lawyer to sue the City for improprieties?
THAT is the main problem I see with this current scenario. Not only is one a mayor (i know, only a figure head but tell that to him), but a police chief and someone entrusted with governing the training of an entire police department! Ludicrous.

When I said that Tyler should be booted out I didn't infer that the indictments were wrong at all, these officials interfered with an investigation that was completely out of their hands and should pay the price for it. Might I mention, that I was also strongly against paying for their legal fees though I didn't come on here to rant about it? However, Tyler's interfered with the investigation and the prosecution almost as much as the officials did. First and formost, he delayed in recusing himself from the case which I'm guessing he did in order to arrange his strategy in the order he wanted, second, he recommended a prosecutor to handle the case rather then just let the state choose one. How do we know he didn't have a conversation with the prosecutor before hand in order to make sure that the future details were ironed out? Yes I know, I'm speculating, but it all points in the appropriate direction. Tyler recused himself for what ever reason, then the State should've began a selective process to assign someone to the case. That is justice. Now Tyler turns around and wants to prosecute the officials for committing a crime that he very much may have committed himself; obstructing justice. In order for a prosecutor to do his/her job to the fullest of his/her ability, their emotions and beliefs they may have concern the case must be placed on the back burner on low. I believe Tyler is incapable of doing that here. He should step down, and a new prosecutor must be picked so that these officials may recieve a fair and impartial trial in front of jury. I might also add that this case needs to be tried outside of the golden crescent, in order for an impartial jury to be selected.

Why do you say that Tyler should be booted out? Is it because he is doing the one thing that no other previous DA has done in the past, and that is not allow the status quo to continue and hold everyone accountable? I for one am glad that someone has finally stepped up and refuses to let the good-ole ways continue.

You know, you know what? Ever since this scandal and the ones that followed began, I have racked my brains out over and over on where I stand. At one point, I stood with the officials thinking that they were what our town needed, then I stood with Tyler thinking that he was right in issuing the indictments in his crusades to protect the rights of the accused. This has had a long run with two very opinionated sides slinging mud at both each other and the ones that they stood against. I find it extremely ironic that an issue like this can rip this community apart, especially when we have so many things going right for us. Things such as expansion, the boost of our local economy, and the revamping of our education. These are the things we SHOULD be talking about and focusing on. Things that will enhance our community, not destroy it.

I believe that both the city officials and Mr. Tyler are to blame this. I believe that the officials should in fact be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law, not by Tyler, but by a state official. One that Tyler, can't pick. Tyler and Ratcliff should be subpoenaed as witnesses and Tyler should be booted out of office.

How can you say that the officials were supporters of Ratcliff? Ratcliff was Tyler's chief of staff, and they hated Tyler. So how on earth would they stand with Tyler's main henchmen?

LOL dig! It definitely was NOT my intention to make Ure and Buntello look worse....

What you are saying is very plausible, i.e., they tainted the investigation in order to get at Tyler.... I don't know. We'll never know all the facts because that's just the way it is.

I can't speak for anyone else, but between Michael Maples, Peeping Tom coaches, former sheriffs being accused of every unsolved crime from the Lindberg kidnapping to the World Trade Center Bombings, city officials being indicted for perjury, and all the rest in between, I'm pretty sick of the scandals around here.

"Indicted city officials are Victoria’s best"..where are these words in this letter to the editor?  Once again the Advocate twists the facts to fit their agenda. These four are more like Victoria's best at embarrassing the rest of the town!  And since when is it the place of a municipal police officer to interfere with a State police investigation? NEVER!
If these people REALLY thought that the investigation was not being worked properly then they should have followed proper channels with the State to have things changed - but since that never happened it looks more like what it really was - these idiots thought they could mess this thing up to get at the DA who was holding them to higher standards. And now they really believe that they will get away with it.
NO DEALS, STEVE! Loss of police license should be the bare minimum since these two "police officers" have violated the public trust.

Dig, it was my understanding, and I could very easily been mistaken, that VPD WAS doing their job. It was part of their job to investigate the allegations. But yes, DPS was in CHARGE of the investigation. I don't believe that Tyler was actively involved in the investigation, but was apprised of the situation. Tyler did do what he was supposed to do by getting the case to the Grand Jury.

I respect your theory, and can see that it plausible, that Armstrong, et al, conspired to taint the investigation to get rid of Tyler, or because they were secretly supporters of Ratcliff. However, in my opinion, I do not believe that is the case. I believe the case is exactly what it is: Local investigators frustrated at the snails pace of the DPS's workings, added to a recent rift with the DA's office, who was the employer of the accused at the time...

However this turns out, I hope that it is the end of it.

southtexas - I happen to agree that the Mayor had no business getting into the middle of the Ratcliff investigation. But it was the job of the police chief and the Lt. to be involve in it.

I wonder if they will be offered a plea bargain and get off with a slap on the wrist? HMMMMM?

Now, I will say this -- I did not accuse Ratcliff of being a sex offender just because he was indicted. I didn't believe in his guilt or innocence until he accepted this plea bargain and his attorney came right out and said that he'd had CONSENTUAL relations with the victim. Just because the Mayor, Chief, Lt and former city attorney have been indicted does not mean that they are guilty. IMO, it just means that the evidence presented by the Grand Jury was sufficient enough to get an indictment. The guilt/innocence will be decided by a jury of their peers and that will be that.

Oh yes...these guys are just pillars of the community....pillars of salt perhaps. Being indicted for a felony is not a minor thing.

The Mayor--I don't know the man but he has to be pretty full of himself to decide to interfere with law enforcement. He should have stuck to the Good Will Ambassador bit...more appropriate.