Voters confront a choice between two accomplished, compelling, yet troubling candidates in the race for District Attorney — Joyce Dudley and Josh Lynn — both successful and charismatic career prosecutors. To an exceptional degree, the staff at The Independent has been torn over this endorsement. Likewise, people who are in a position to know these candidates best — their colleagues in the DA’s office, members of the criminal defense bar, and even officers of the court from the bottom to the top — are divided over their relative strengths and shortcomings. Supporters and detractors defy easy categorization and have provided sincere, passionate, and insightful testimonial. But given the major challenges ahead, we have concluded that Joyce Dudley — on balance — would provide the experience, direction, passion, and leadership that would best serve that office and the Santa Barbara community.
That there’s a race at all stems from the paralyzing illness that recently claimed the life of Christie Stanley, elected DA nearly four years ago, the first woman in county history to assume the post. What kind of DA Stanley might have become we’ll never know. Early in her tenure, Stanley was diagnosed with lung cancer. For obvious reasons, Stanley’s health struggles enormously distracted her from her obligations and responsibilities as the county’s single most powerful law enforcement official. In her absence, there was no leadership. Communication was minimal to nonexistent. Stanley’s husband inserted himself into the affairs of the department to a degree that many felt was inappropriate and downright bizarre. A few efforts to persuade Stanley to resign fell on deaf ears. She would get better; she would return. Of this, she was certain. The office suffered, mostly in silence.
Into this void stepped Joyce Dudley, a fearless, brash, media-savvy prosecutor who cut her professional teeth prosecuting sexual assault and child abuse cases at a time when many in law enforcement were reluctant to take such offenses as seriously as they do now. Last year, Dudley notified Stanley that she planned to run for her job. At that time, Stanley had not decided whether she would run again. She had not retired. Stanley and many of her friends and supporters within the office — Josh Lynn chief among them — were offended by what they regarded as callous effrontery on Dudley’s part. We certainly understand that reaction. But we’re convinced Dudley acted with courage and sincere concern for the future of the office. It was the right thing to do. Stanley should have stepped down. But we question whether Dudley went about it the right way. We can’t help but think Dudley could have better deployed her considerable political skill to minimize the emotional fallout inevitable in so volatile a situation. Courage untempered by sensitivity can be a reckless virtue.
Offended into action by Dudley’s announcement was Josh Lynn, a rising star within the office. Tough, smart, and forceful, Lynn was backed by Stanley herself. He was also endorsed by former DA Tom Sneddon and his assistant Patrick McKinley, who more than any single person, imbued that office with the stability, professionalism, and esprit de corps it’s enjoyed for nearly 30 years. In person, Lynn is thoughtful, articulate, and candid. But we are troubled by the glaring disconnect between the man and the negativity of his political campaign. Too much of this effort was spent attacking Dudley, too little on his own accomplishments. Politics, we understand, is not for sissies. But even by this standard, Lynn’s ads bent the truth too far in a race for an office that requires the highest level of ethics and integrity.
Joyce Dudley has run a clean campaign, emphasizing her 20 years as a Santa Barbara prosecutor who has won a 98-percent conviction rate in more than 50 jury trials and her deep involvement in the community, where she has won numerous awards. She is well-known as a crusader for victims’ rights. Before earning her law degree, Dudley, who has a master’s of education and administration, served as director of the county’s Head Start program, as well as another child development program for the tri-county area. This considerable administrative experience will help her with the difficulties of running a large department in a difficult time.
We were concerned, however, when Dudley, during several public forums, refused to state that she would not fire Lynn were she to win. This did nothing to calm the waters within the department and suggested that she might seek revenge after this bitter campaign. We hope that these are needless worries and that Dudley will do everything in her power to unite the department.
Whoever wins this election must take over an office polarized by the election itself, threatened with unprecedented budget challenges and overwhelmed by a system of criminal justice that is no longer sustainable, economically, physically, or morally. The state lacks the resources to keep locking up lawbreakers. The governor is threatening to remand all nonviolent offenders now in state custody to the 58 counties for incarceration. But county facilities are already jammed well past the breaking point. New approaches are mandatory, not just advisable.
In this context, we believe the next District Attorney needs to bring to the post an innovative spirit and an ability to collaborate creatively with community groups — as well as other law enforcement agencies — far beyond what the office has traditionally demanded. Given Dudley’s essential temperament and documented history of community involvement, we believe she will be better able to respond to these challenges. In addition to collaborative skills, the next DA will also need to impose an administrative efficiency and discipline lacking in recent years. By this measure, both candidates will find themselves tested. The good news is that there’s no shortage of talented, dedicated people already working in that office.


Print friendly
E-mail story
Tip Us Off
Comments
Share Article
Myspace






Previous Month



Comments
Yeah clean campaigns! Santa Barbara make your choice. I'm glad to say I trust you.
LC (anonymous profile)
May 19, 2010 at 11:38 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Good call, Indy staff! Glad to see that Ms. Dudley took the high road with her campaign. She will make a great DA.
fredb93117 (anonymous profile)
May 20, 2010 at 6:08 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Mr Nails et. al.:
Please spare us your vitriol filled rants. Santa Barbara has had enough of your poorly written diatribes. The fact that every local print media has endorsed ms Dudley after extensive interviews speaks volumes.
InsideMan (anonymous profile)
May 20, 2010 at 6:29 a.m. (Suggest removal)
As sad, and "offensive" as Lynn and Stanley found the challenge, the proof that she was not well, and clearly not well to continue running that office for the county and under county tax payers dollars, was her deterioration while in office, and passing. So, sad or not, life. and tough decisions are about practicality. Dudley is clearly the best choice. Good job, Indy Staff!
windows (anonymous profile)
May 20, 2010 at 7:23 a.m. (Suggest removal)
The reasoning behind this endorsement is similar to that which resulted in the endorsements of Arnold Schwarzennegar and Bob Noel.
Chester_Arthur_Burnett (anonymous profile)
May 20, 2010 at 8:17 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Pointing out actual ethical transgressions and missteps of your opponent, especially for a law-enforcement position, is important, not "negative."
And to have that be the primary qualifier of an endorsement is goofy and lacks the weight to make a distinction.
Terrible endorsement and will result in a poor DA should Dudley win.
binky (anonymous profile)
May 20, 2010 at 8:27 a.m. (Suggest removal)
I agree Binky. Every single point he made was a fact that any politician would have highlighted about his/her opponent--and that the news media should have been reporting on as well! The links on his website were to court documents, etc. If that is the Indy's sole argument against him I don't get it. Oh well.
rbtlines (anonymous profile)
May 20, 2010 at 11:02 a.m. (Suggest removal)
I see that facts about Josh Lynn don't last long on this site. Violating someone's is a serious issue and the fact that I have requested he be investigated for violating mine should be everyone's concern. I am no fan of Joyce but she never had me falsely arrest. The truth will come out about Lynn I just hope it does before we vote!!
lamancha (anonymous profile)
May 20, 2010 at 12:16 p.m. (Suggest removal)
The problem with Lynn's accusations is that they are not fact. It's ironic that Lynn is accusing Dudley of "questionable ethics" in regards to "winning at all costs" when Lynn himself is knowingly trying to mislead the public in order to win their vote.
I guess desperate people do desperate things.
Matt Capritto
mcapritto (anonymous profile)
May 20, 2010 at 12:26 p.m. (Suggest removal)
How can the Independent endorse Dudley when you consider the non-anonymous comments about her misdeeds like the one from George Levine on another thread?
Here's another misdeed, all the more topical as the recent news is full of reports of resume fraud and lying about your experiences. Dudley claimes to have a "Masters in Administration" from UCSB. There is no such degree. She is making this false claim about her eductaional background to appear more qualified than she is. In some states resume fraud is a felony. If Dudley will make false claims to get your vote for DA, then she will make false claims in the court room to get a gulity verdict.
Dr. Robert L. Johns, Ph.D.
DrJohns (anonymous profile)
May 20, 2010 at 3:42 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Very thoughtfully done, Independent. Joyce Dudley will be an excellent, passionate and compassionate District Attorney.
Toodlee (anonymous profile)
May 20, 2010 at 5 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Doctor Johns - I assume you have two doctoral degrees since you signed off as both "Dr." and "PhD." Were you being inappropriately redundant or just making a false claim about your educational background to sound more qualified than you are?
magnoliaswingset (anonymous profile)
May 20, 2010 at 5:22 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Mr. Johns: For what it's worth I support Lynn but in what way does having a PhD pertain to the validity of your comments? Also, I googled your name and nothing came up about you. -B.C.-
billclausen (anonymous profile)
May 20, 2010 at 5:44 p.m. (Suggest removal)
bill and magnolia,
I find it very odd you two are questioning me instead of thoughtfully questioning my claim. Aren’t you the least bit curious about how I arrived at the conclusion that the person who is running to be the most powerful person in the County may be purposely misrepresenting her educational accomplishments to get your vote??
Dr. Robert L. Johns, Ph.D.
DrJohns (anonymous profile)
May 21, 2010 at 9:09 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Doctor, Doctor Johns - I happen to know for a fact that Ms. Dudley has two master's degrees in education - one of which is in education administration. Why don't you look past the petty semantics of her resume and see that she has provided invaluable service to Santa Barbara District Attorney's office and the people of Santa Barbara for 20 years! She has been an advocate for victims of hate crimes since long before it became fashionable! THESE ARE THE THINGS THAT REALLY MATTER IN THIS RACE!
magnoliaswingset (anonymous profile)
May 21, 2010 at 9:36 a.m. (Suggest removal)
And Dr., Dr. Johns I forgot to ask - should we assume you've fully researched Joshua Lynn's educational claims? Here is what he has on his facebook page:
"* University of California, Santa Cruz '92
* B.A." - In WHAT??
No Master's degrees? Ms. Dudley has TWO!!
"* University of San Diego Law School '95
* Juris Doctor, Trial Practice" - Does this exist?
I eagerly look forward to the results of your thorough investigation into this matter.
magnoliaswingset (anonymous profile)
May 21, 2010 at 9:56 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Magnolia,
If indeed you “know for a fact that Ms. Dudley has two master's degrees in education - one of which is in education administration.” then you must have seen her transcripts or diploma and you lend credibility to my conclusion that she does NOT have a “Masters in Administration” as she claims, and that the quote from a recent Independent article that Dudley “went on to get masters in both education and administration” is incorrect. Thank you very much for supporting my claim. But I’d like to see proof.
Your request that I “look past the petty semantics of her resume” totally misses the point! This sort of fudging of the facts could be overlooked if Dudley were running for dogcatcher. She is not. She wants to be in complete control of an entire county apparatus and administration whose primary purpose is to prove facts beyond a shadow of a doubt. That’s the problem. The fact is she does NOT have a “Masters in Administration” or an “MA, Administration from UCSB” as she claims on her websites. There is no such degree. If Dudley gave that testimony on the stand in a trial under oath, she would be impeached and a shadow of doubt would be cast over all the rest of her testimony. That should be the case here.
Imagine this: You, or a loved one, are on trial and there is no physical evidence. All evidence is circumstantial. You’re facing life in prison. You are innocent. But the DA and all her witnesses are fudging the facts to fit the DA’s theories and to fulfill her desire to gain a guilty verdict. The DA is even withholding evidence which you have requested and which you believe might disprove her theories. The DA is primarily concerned with getting a win, and NOT with a pure search for the truth. The truth, in a trial, being all the very small, but often incredibly significant, FACTS.
Now, ask yourself: would you want Dudley, if she had a history of fudging the facts and a shadow of doubt over all her claims, to prosecute your case, and perhaps put you in prison for life, even though you are innocent, based on “petty semantics”?
Dr Robert L Johns, Ph.D.
DrJohns (anonymous profile)
May 21, 2010 at 11:43 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Magnolia,
Responding to your second posting:
I intend to thoroughly examine both candidates, and my verbal and written calls for a thorough vetting of Lynn’s and Dudley’s transcripts is a matter of public record at the SB Board of Supervisors. I have also requested a complete set of transcripts directly from both candidates, but received no responses.
I currently endorse neither candidate. I am simply focusing right now on what appears to be a rather serious problem with Dudley’s claims discovered in my due diligence as a voter. I have spent a great deal of time on this and was hoping the press and other citizens such as you would help me out. Perhaps you can help me out with some actual legwork and due diligence. For example, part of my research involved going to a library. (Imagine that. Not everything can be learned from the internet.) You may not realize this but UCSB has a library, and that library is open to the public. In their library they have historical collections. One of their collections contains old Commencement Brochures and another collection contains old Catalogs. It was a simple matter to just go to the library and research Dudley’s claim to having a “Masters in Administration.” From these records I was able to determine that UCSB did NOT offer such a degree, and no one, including Dudley, was awarded such a degree in 1981, or before or after 1981.
Please help us all out and start digging on Lynn so we can all make a rational decision on who to vote for.
Dr. Robert L. Johns, Ph.D.
DrJohns (anonymous profile)
May 21, 2010 at 11:51 a.m. (Suggest removal)
"bill and magnolia,
I find it very odd you two are questioning me instead of thoughtfully questioning my claim. Aren’t you the least bit curious about how I arrived at the conclusion that the person who is running to be the most powerful person in the County may be purposely misrepresenting her educational accomplishments to get your vote??"
That is not the issue. I simply want to get people to thinking that your statement that you are a doctor either means you are more qualified than the rest of us in this matter, or that you are stating this because you simply want us to think you are more qualified, or possibly that you have an unwarranted superiority complex. It's also possible that you could be having a laugh on all of us.
Either way, even if you have multiple PhD,s I fail to see how it pertains to the subject at hand, whether your comments are correct or not.
Signed: William J. Clausen, H.S.G. (High School Graduate)
billclausen (anonymous profile)
May 21, 2010 at 3:12 p.m. (Suggest removal)
I would never sign my name with a title in front of it.
Drsevensnugbills (anonymous profile)
May 21, 2010 at 3:20 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Part One
So as I understand, the crux of Lynn’s position is that Dudley has repeatedly engaged in prosecutorial misconduct, that she agreed to a plea bargain Lynn insists he would never have signed off on, resulting in placing our community at substantial and immediate risk just so Dudley could return to the campaign trail, that Dudley lacks not only integrity, but experience, and that she has brought incredible disgrace and disrespect to the office of the District Attorney as a result of her alleged misconduct. While I have taken the time to carefully scrutinize each of Lynn’s claims, including having read transcripts of each of the instances of alleged misconduct identified by Lynn, and in doing have discovered that Lynn’s claims are misleading at best, and likely actionable at worst, I am troubled by one of the issues addressed by the author of the otherwise well researched, thoughtful, and excellent Indy article/endorsement. In the endorsement the author expresses the Indy’s collective concern regarding what is characterized as Dudley’s refusal to state whether she would fire Lynn were she to win. Conversely, as I am confident those following this disheartening campaign are aware, Lynn has stridently insisted that he would not fire Dudley were he to win. The question I have is, having taken the time and effort to publicly and repeatedly excoriate Dudley for allegedly engaging in alleged, reprehensible conduct, entirely unbecoming a Deputy District Attorney, and after having expended what I anticipate has amounted to tens of thousands of dollars getting the word out that Dudley allegedly placed our community at risk by engaging in a plea bargain Lynn would never have signed off on, for the sole purpose of allowing her to rush back to her campaign, why would any individual elected District Attorney allow such an allegedly despicable, self-serving, egomaniacal, irresponsible, and out of control prosecutor to remain in his office? Why would the head of the County’s top prosecuting agency knowingly and intentionally allow such an individual to continue to bring such disgrace to his office, and to subject the community to such harm? If Lynn’s myriad of allegations has any merit, wouldn’t it follow that the first act of newly DA Lynn would be to fire Dudley and immediately rid the office of such and allegedly disgraceful and overzealous prosecutor? The hypocrisy of Lynn’s position is more than disconcerting.
paulaticks (anonymous profile)
May 21, 2010 at 7:54 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Part Two
If there is any merit to Lynn’s claims, shouldn’t part of Lynn’s promise to our community be to ensure that Dudley is immediately sent packing, rather than expressly guaranteed a continuing position on his team?
Rather than expressing concern over what the Indy suggests is Dudley’s refusal to state whether she would fire Lynn if she were to prevail, my concern is the judgment of an individual who would publicly commit to retaining an employee whose alleged inappropriate conduct has, as Lynn repeatedly insists, consistently brought disgrace to the office of the District Attorney.
According to Lynn’s biography he’s been with the DA’s office for a significant period of time. According to Lynn and the select prosecutors and staff who support his campaign, they’ve recognized Dudley’s alleged inappropriate conduct for years. If the Lynn and his followers are to be believed, what possible explanation do Lynn and his followers offer for having maintained such incredible silence about this most important issue for the past 10 to 15 years? Why, if Lynn’s allegations are true, wasn’t Dudley fired by Tom Sneddon, Assistant DA Patrick McKinley, or any of the other higher ups years ago at the time these alleged acts of misconduct supposedly occurred, rather than retained and repeatedly and consistently assigned serious felony cases?
Odd that this election would coincide with the decision of Lynn and his followers to break their years of silence and finally reveal how incredibly dysfunctional and mismanaged the DA’s office has been all along. I suspect perhaps there is another, more obvious explanation, which is mired in Lynn’s offensive and intentionally destructive campaign strategy. Why anyone would expend any energy pursuing the helm of such a hotbed of disturbed souls is beyond my comprehension. However, dishonesty isn’t one of the qualities I would find compelling in my choice for DA. Perhaps Lynn would find much more comfort and familiarity in private practice, as a criminal defense attorney.
paulaticks (anonymous profile)
May 21, 2010 at 7:55 p.m. (Suggest removal)
To the impressive combination Doctor/PhD:
I’m quietly hoping the discipline in which you allegedly secured your doctorate is something as harmless as the study of the dodo bird, and that your continuing employment assignment is expressly restricted to clinical research. While UCSB holds a significant place in my heart, the frightening thought of your possible influence on unsuspecting students poses a curious and disturbing image. While I am confident your fixation and haphazard investigation of otherwise irrelevant data proves useful in your environment, it really doesn’t transfer to what I will refer to as the world in which most participate. By the way, which institution offers a Dr./PhD?
paulaticks (anonymous profile)
May 21, 2010 at 8:21 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Here is a musical tribute to Dr. Robert Johns from the greatest musical group of all time.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xFmSQK...
sixdolphins (anonymous profile)
May 22, 2010 at 2:25 a.m. (Suggest removal)
When you zoom in it actually says, "PhrauD"
paulaticks (anonymous profile)
May 22, 2010 at 7:31 a.m. (Suggest removal)
There is an important discrepancy between Mr. Lynn’s actions on the job and his comments while campaigning. In his official capacity and while on the job, Mr. Lynn has given Ms. Dudley outstanding written performance reviews (as did Ms. Stanley & Mr. Sneddon before him). Yet while he campaigns for office, Mr. Lynn portrays her as a detriment to the office and ethically challenged. Was he lying in writing while he was on the job and gave her those glowing reviews, or now on the campaign trail? Curious…
freshpavement (anonymous profile)
May 24, 2010 at 11:47 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Josh Lynn - Why do you lie when you claim on your website that you are endorsed by "15 current prosecutors in the DA's office..."?
Anyone that can count would locate only 9 on your website:
(1) Jeff Gittler, (2) Aimee Libeu, (3) Brian Cota, (4) Lee Carter, (5) Ben Ladinig, (6) Kimberly Smith, (7) Elizabeth O’Brien, (8) Hans Almgren, and (9) Margaret O’Malley. BTW Eric Hansen retired a long time ago.
For someone who has "Honest, Experienced Leadership" on their lawn signs you are being quite deceptive.
InsideMan (anonymous profile)
May 24, 2010 at 8:31 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Terrible pick. Typical of the Independent to have ZERO good reasons to pick one candidate over another.
Do you really think your readers are that stupid?
Lynn will win. . . I hope.
Lars (anonymous profile)
May 26, 2010 at 1:29 a.m. (Suggest removal)
InsideMan, are you high?
Nine of the current DA's support Lynn. The other four support Duddley.
Lars (anonymous profile)
May 26, 2010 at 1:36 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Josh Lynn as DA would be a constitutional nightmare. lAfter successfully defending Michael Jackson, Josh Lynn and his investigator found a way to have me falsely arrested. Their conspirators in LA had my bail posted at $250,000. When the Judge found out I was a 20 veteran and had never been arrested, as alleged, he reduced it. The charges were dismissed and Lynn failed to have an innocent person convicted. Attacking this Defense Investigator will have a price someday but for now Lynn should be disbarred not elected DA. My military brothers did not support and defend the U.S. Constitution to have it ignored and violated by Lynn. I urge everyone who believe Americans are still entitled to a fare trial vote for anyone but Lynn. I still defend the guilty and the innocent and have paid the price and would not have it any other way. Would You?
lamancha (anonymous profile)
June 3, 2010 at 11:26 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Just some additional info re: the issue on whether one candidate would/could fire the other upon election:
Employees of the County of SB are divided into many job classifications, but only two classes regarding "firing" issues. There are "at will" employees, who are usually at a relatively high level in a department and subject to dismissal for non-disciplinary reasons at the "will" of the department head. This is a very small percentage of employees.
The vast majority of county employees are subject to "civil service rules" protecting their right to employment so long as their performance level is satisfactory or above, and they have not engaged in behavior that warrants discipline, up to and including termination. The county posts the civil service rules on their website.
In the case of the candidates, Mr. Lynn serves in at "at will" position, and as such, if Ms. Dudley were to be elected, she would have the right to fire him if she believed his contribution to the office and her administration would not be of a positive nature.
Ms. Dudley is in a different job classification and is subject to civil service rules; as such, if Mr. Lynn is elected, he would not have the right to fire her without due cause. If an employee has had consistent high marks on their employee performance review, it is unlikely that "cause" to terminate their employment could be established; therefore, the department head would not be able to "fire" them.
additionalinfo (anonymous profile)
June 6, 2010 at 4:57 p.m. (Suggest removal)