As promised last night, the following is again, the $64,000.00 question and then the answer from States Attorney Davis Ruark.
Mr. Ruark – We all know that you encountered some personal problems during this last term. Why should the voters of Wicomico County be willing to overlook those and re-elect you to a seventh term?
Davis started his response with, “I was wrong”.
Ruark admitted what he’d done that night. He admitted it to his Mother. He admitted it to his Wife and Family. The very next day, a Saturday, he admitted it privately to his Staff and then he admitted it the all of the news media. He asked for forgiveness from God, from his family, from his Staff and from the community. He is grateful for all of the support that He's received. As a result of what occurred, he believes that he is a better State’s Attorney, a better man, a better husband and a better father.
I want to start of by thanking the Wicomico Neighborhood Congress for inviting me to last night's event. It was an honor being invited and I sincerely hope this sends a clear message out to those nay sayers, Salisbury News is the new generation of news and information.
To the few people who mocked me last night after I asked that question, hopefully today you can see why it needed to be asked. WE THE PEOPLE have every right in an open format to get the answer to what is by far the biggest thing on every one's mind referencing this race.
After all, scroll down and look at the rest of the questions we were going to ask. It's clear to me that the ONLY reason Matt and Seth are running is because of a personal flaw in Davis Ruark. NOT because there's anything wrong with the States Attorney's Office. Davis made a horrible mistake. Davis owned that mistake, apologized, asked for forgiveness and over the past 2 years has proven to change his personal life and better the States Attorney's Office through this experience.
Now, will there be people out there who may never forgive him for his actions, perhaps. However, I want ALL of you to think really hard about what I'm about to say. The ONLY reason there should be ANY change in that Office would be based on performance or the lack thereof. Mr. Ruark has been the Wicomico States Attorney for 24 years now. He has not been challenged because his performance has been impeccable. Well, maybe I've gone too far in that statement. However, now that he's made a mistake, others are coming out of the wood shed to challenge him because they feel he's vulnerable. That may be true and Davis Ruark could possibly lose this election because of such a mistake. However, he'd never lose it because he failed to do his job or run his Office properly.
Now, in my honest opinion, Seth did a horrible job last night. You know what Folks. Seth reminds me of that kid always complaining he didn't get his way. Those perky lips, like a pout, shoulda, coulda, woulda. Stomping his feet as Daddy gets out of his Rolls Royce saying, now Seth, you shouldn't have done that, GO TO YOUR ROOM! Pucker, pucker, stomp, stomp! Not my idea of the next States Attorney. My guess (if Seth were to win) is that 75% of the Staff in the States Attorneys Office would search for new jobs immediately. That's a scary thought Folks, especially with crime being so high in Wicomico County. Better keep that in mind when you go to the polls.
Matt did a fabulous job last night. A bit green but seriously coming on strong. Matt doesn't have a primary so we'll save our statements about him for later on. I will say his performance as a young man was quite convincing. In all honesty, however, it's the lack of experience that concerns me as well as others. Look, if I can ask Davis the $64,000.00 question, clearly we need to address the hardest question Matt will face and that's the lack of experience.
There's no question I personally like Matt. I truly do not know Seth as last night was only the second time I've met him face to face. I will add, last night Seth walked up to me and said, "Hi Joe, I'm Seth Mitchell." I replied, I know Seth, we've met before. He looked confused and I said, remember, the NAACP Forum? "Oh yeah, that's right, we spoke about Matt there." That was only a few weeks ago and I find it hard to believe that once you've met Joe Albero face to face that you'd FORGET you ever did so. I hope that doesn't come off wrong Folks but come on now, seriously.
We'll have more on last night later today.
48 comments:
If there wasn't change needed in the SA office then Sam Vincent wouldn't have made the decision to run against him. It had nothing to do with Davis's mishap with the law. I believe that the other candidates running against him feel the same way.
I vote Mr David Ruark!
When regular folks make the same mistakes as Mr. Ruark, they pay their full dues according to the LAW, they may even loose their jobs, prestige, etc... That's called Consequences to ones actions, unless of course you are the State's Attorney???
Almost all of Davis's attorneys and staff were in the room to support him fully. The ones who couldn't be there had other family or professional obligations. To me, that answers any question about who is the best, and really the only, person who can lead as the State's Attorney. That person is Davis Ruark.
My humble opinion:
1. Joe, you are dead wrong that the only reason the other two candidates are because of Ruark's "personal" problem. Ruark's record is not stellar. Had Sam not died, he would be your front runner, and not because Ruark had a "personal" problem.
2. I can forgive, but breaking the law isn't a "personal" problem. It's breaking the law.
3. Speaking of personal, talking about Mitchell's lips? Get real.
4. I think it is highly unethical of his staff to be seen supporting him or involved in anyway. They are hired, not elected. In fact, I think that points to a problem with Ruark's office right there. They should remain neutral. Any other govt. office, that's how it works.
I applaud your involvement and questions. Your take on the meaning of things is questionable and I simply disagree.
I do agree Ruark doesn't have the competition in either of the other two and will win for that reason, not because he's done anything close to an "impeccable" job.
O.P.
I'll tell you a great reason for a change. Ever read the DT's court briefs? At least 80% of them are either nolle prossed (forgive my lack of spelling Latin), stet docketed ,or PBJ'd. It can't just be liberal judges- the SA's office plays an active roll in that.
Hell, I sat on a jury for an assault case where a guy was accused of spitting on a girl. The investigating officer had no evidence to make an arrest, but somehow the 'victim'got the SA's office to prosecute. After the jury had properly aquitted the accused, the judge admonished the prosecutor, who will remain nameless out of respect for his family,for even taking a case where the arresting officer had absolutely no evidence to support the accusation!
IMHO, Mr. Davis should have, at the very least, stepped down after his conviction for DWI as the SA and perhaps still work in that office. That friends, would have been the honorable thing to do.
12:37 They depend on him for promotions and paychecks. Sorry, I am not buying into your office propaganda.
12:37 are you really that sure of this? If you were a current assistant state's attorney and YOUR boss was running for reelection would you support him? DUHHHHHHH. Does the phrase "job security" mean anything to you? A newly elected State's Attorney can come in and get rid of all 12 assistants so who would you support if you worked there? uh - huhhhh. that's what I thought.
HaHa I see my attorney Chip Strott... He looks just as excited as he always does! Great lawyer though!!!
O.P.,
You may not have liked my "lips" discription but you can't deny the pouting aspect of it, can you. I mean, Seth is like a little spoiled child who never got his way. Reminds me a LOT of Charles Jannace, to be honest with you.
"Had Sam not died, he would be your front runner, and not because Ruark had a "personal" problem."
NEVER put words into my mouth. The ONLY reason Sam was running was because of the DUI. While Sam Vincent was a wonderful man, Sam was NOT a leader. I applaud Sam stepping up to the plate but don't you think for a single second that Sam ewasn't being encouraged by the Republican Party for their own selfish reasons as well.
I'll publicly say this again, I do NOT believe the States Attoney position is about a republican or a democrat. The Republican central committee feels different about that, unfortunately.
"I think it is highly unethical of his staff to be seen supporting him or involved in anyway." Hmmmm, are you Seth?
"They should remain neutral." Come on now. IF YOU worked in that Office and you had the opportunity to have either Davis or Seth, would you NOT come in there to that Forum and do EVERYTHING in your powers to support Davis? Anyone else in that Office who supports Seth is a fool.
Well I have an issue with the fact Sam Vincent was running. This sent a loud and clear message that problems in the S/A"s office are bigger than a twenty plus year friendship that Sam & Davis had. Sam was an awesome person and attorney.
Then the issue of the E-mail to Sam. Sam was told to resign and anyone supporting was to do the same thing. I guess his staff was present. In this economy work is hard to come by, even for attorneys.
Davis is a great prosecutor no doubt about it. I just want the facts as to why Sam felt the need to remove his old buddy from the office??
The rumor mill was rampant. If half of it is true Davis should hace stepped down.
I do believe in forgivness. I just can not get by Sam running. There is some dark info none of us outside that office will ever know.
Good luck Davis and Matt.
It is a hard choice between the two. That says it all to me. When you have concerns with a twenty year prosecutor I think it is time for new blood.
I think the reason people are still cheesed off over Davis' "incident" is because were it any of us regular people,we would probably still be serving time,AND we would be out of a job.He made a mistake but he never paid for it.Was he embarassed?Yes.Is he sorry?I am sure he is.I just think its a prime example of Eastern shore politics where good old boys get away with anything and people are tired of that kind of government.
To Bluto and ALL others,
Davis Ruark was treated no differently from anyone else in that case. This was a FIRST OFFENSE and he took his punishment like a man. Now, if it was a second, third or whatever, I'd have to agree with you then.
Joe, I don't think you even knew Sam well enough to say that the only reason he was running was because of Davis's DUI. That is totally false. He was running because he felt some changes needed to be made. I know this is true because Sam was my cousin and he would not have lied about the reason he was running. So don't make statements based on your own opinion. Sam WAS a leader, and he would have won, no question about it.
1:01 boy you sure need to go back to school and learn your civic/legal lessons. The State's Attorney's office canNOT prosecute ANYONE, the State's Attorney's office canNOT arrest anyone, and the State's Attorney's office canNOT charge anyone. Your whole message is a moot point and utter b.s. once you mentioned that.
12:28, his name is DAVIS!
"State's Attorney's office canNOT prosecute ANYONE"
Uh. What?
The bottom line for this voter is which one will do a great job for the citizens of this county. Yes, Sam Vincent stepped up to the plate because he obviously felt he could make a difference. Knowing him, I believe he would have done a great job and I would have voted for him.
Davis Ruark is not running on his ego and I believe he has done a good job given the legal system, judges, etc.
As for Seth, please don't preach about responsibility. You stetted enough cases when you worked for the SA office. So no thanks. Stay in private practice.
As for Matt, he probably is a terrific person but he has already shown me that he is in over his head. First he wants the job then he doesn't until "convinced" by the Republican party. I am shocked by the actions of the person who asked him to run in the first place.
Check your egos at the door. Davis Ruark at present is the best person for the job and he does have the record to prove it.
Dear Judy C., Please allow me to start by personally offering you my condolences. Sam, (clearly) was a very fine man. Unfortunately I learned more about Sam after his death and would NEVER challenge him personally after what I learned.
Business is business, personal is personal. That being said, on the BUSINESS side of this matter, there were several reasons Sam's was running for this position. When I stated "only" I should have simply said the main reason and not the only reason. That being said, you're right and I'll ask that you forgive me?
The DUI is not the only reason Sam stepped up to the plate but I must say, there's NOTHING we can now do to change where we stand today. I'll not debate who would have won, who was the better man, it's mute.
Davis Ruark is running for States Attorney and that's the end of it. If I offended you in any way, again, please forgive me.
As for Sam being a "leader," well, I respectfully disagree. Sam was a great attorney and I have heard from many of his close friends that he did NOT want to run for States Attorney. He was doing so becaue he did feel the office needed change. However, again, I do NOT believe Sam was the answer. Nice guy, yes. States Attorney, I'm sorry but I again disagree.
There are some people who CAN do a job and there are others who are BORN to do it. A perfect example outside that Office would be Sheriff Mike Lewis. He was BORN to lead this County in Law Enforcement. If you don't believe me, then throw out a name of someone else YOU think could do the job any better.
Davis Ruark was BORN to do this job. For what it's worth, Matt was BORN to do this job as well. The difference being is, is the time right just yet for Matt to lead that Office? Sam Vincent was BORN to be an attorney, there's no question about that. However, States Attorney is a whole different ball game.
There's my two cents. Have at it.
JUDY C. --1:44PM-----You are Exactly right!!!
Sam Vincent Knew-----& being the person he was---he knew the only way to get change for the people was to run against Ruark! Sam would have Never done run for Office if things were right-----you can believe that with all your heart & soul!! Change is definately needed.
2:10 they canNOT prosecute someone arbitrarily - they represent law enforcement entities when they prosecute someone who have brought specific charges against someone. The SA office cannot bring charges against anyone.
2:22 in what specific way(s) is "change definately needed" in the Office"?
who among us, has lived a perfect life ? who, if under the microscope of public scrunity, would have nothing to hide, or wish they could go back and do different ?
We here vote Davis Ruark. The man for the job.
Today you are supporting Davis Ruark. When he was arrested you demanded he step down. When he sent that email to Sam you said Davis was wrong. One minute you support him the next minute you don't. Which way is it do you support him or not? Stop flip flopping like a fish out of water.
Joe, I do accept your apology. However, the people closest to him knew why he was running and that's all that matters. Many attorneys and law enforcement officers have said that Sam was the best prosecuter Wicomico County had. I respectfully disagree with you when you say he wasn't a leader. He was doing the right thing and had a lot of people ready to follow him. He would have done a fantastic job. Not saying that just because he's my cousin, I wholeheartedly believe it. :-)
Sorry I wrote David instead of Davis Ruark. He has my vote.
In my opinion those who did not think Sam Vincent was a leader did not know Sam the lawyer nor the man.
My God, he was a leader just for stepping up to the plate and running for the position against Davis.
Sam had great integerity and never backed down from any challenge.
How can anyone make a statement regarding Sam's leadership if you never knew him.
2:52, you could not have said it better! I know this post was not originally about Sam, but it's nice reading all the great things people say about him!
OK, let's REALLY take a good hard look at this for what it is.
IF Sam Vincent was the LEADER you claim he is, a LEADER would have stepped up to the plate YEARS before they saw an opening. That's what LEADERDSHIP, true leadership is all about.
Sam was encouraged by the republican PARTY. I'm NOT saying the timing wasn't good but please don't try to convince me that Sam was the leader because he had the nerve to challenge Davis. If it was ANY other time, perhaps. They saw a weak link and that's all there is to it.
Moving forward, Davis made some mistakes and has corrected them over the past two+ years.
Jim Ireton leads the City of Salisbury, are you happy? Louise Smith leads the City Council, are you happy? Are you happy with the 2 vs. 2 votes because Gary Comegys refuses to step down?
I never hear anyone complaining because Davis lost a case or didn't handle one properly. I'm sure they're out there but like he said last night, he's not in a position to critisize what a JUDGE handed down for convictions.
I'll touch on that a little more in a later Post personalized to Davis, Matt & Seth.
2:30,
You didn't say prosecute "arbitrarily" in your first comment, you said they cannot prosecture "anyone". Of course they prosecute people, that is pretty much the job description. You ought to be a little more careful when you berate people for supposedly being dumb.
I would have voted for Mr. Vincent, now my vote is for Mar. Maciarello.
Joe, if Sam himself did not tell you why he was running, then you are just speculating as to why he was. As another poster said, if you knew him, you would know WHY he was running and that he WAS truly a leader. But hey, it's your blog and you're enititled to your opinion.
I think we are blessed to have three, totally different, very interesting men in the running. You can argue each of their merits pro and con. You'll probably go with your gut.
1. Ruark, the seasoned old centurion, his nose bloodied a few times, has been in office long enough that we all know his faults. But his demeanor was impressive last night. He was at his very best.
2. Mitchell, cerebral and experienced, analytical and mature. He's been around, and knows Salisbury like no one else. He has been on both sides, as prosecutor and defense lawyer. And he has a very good heart.
3. Maciarello, youthful, energetic, idealistic, VERY easy on the eye. He may be young but his intelligence and integrity will make up for mistakes I think, and he is clearly very bright.
Sorry, can't vilify any of them. I thought they all did great, it was a fascinating forum, and normally I can't sit very long, but last night was sorry to see it over.
BTW, the panel were well chosen. Dear Haven Simmons, ever the gentleman. His questions were trenchant, but his delivery was kind and respectful.
Joe, your question to Ruark was respectfully put as well and many people were wondering about that anyway.
3:13 - he was a leader within the office of the Sa and that is what mattered the most.
Joe, I did not say the staff should support Mitchell.
I said they should stay neutral.
That means not show support or opposition with either one.
Bad form, sorry.
How much do they make?
Joe,
Sam did not decide to run at the request of the Republican Party. His decision had been made long before the party knew about his running.
Sam Vincent coming out and running for State's Attorney tells me all I need to know about that office.
As for Davis, not going to bash the man but what was his experience for prosecuting cases and death penalty cases when he first ran 24 years ago? Put his experience then and that of Matt now and you might not have such an issue regarding experience.
Regardless of my party affiliation which happens to be republican, I vote for who I think is best for the job. So my vote clearly will be for Matt. Let's give someone else a chance to come in and make some much needed change.
Best wishes Matt!!!!!!!!
Anyone who knew Sam Vincent well would know that Sam first and foremost would have wanted the State's Attorney to be qualified and that meant years of experience prosecuting every level of criminal case particularly violent crimes. Sam was that person, but without him here to do it, he would never have wanted a defense oriented attorney or a new guy on the block to lead the State's Attorney's Office. And he would never have left Sarah's case to prosecutors without experience or to those outside our County. This case is in our hearts and deserves to be tried by the best prosecutor there is and that is Davis Ruark.
I also think the statement "While Sam Vincent was a wonderful man, Sam was NOT a leader" was wrong and insensitive.
Joe, you've been in the area how long?
Some of us grew up with Sam. Heck, some of use grew up with Davis!
Show a little humility and some respect both for the dead and for those of us who have known these people and their abilities long before you knew there was a Salisbury.
I do commend your questions, however.
Did Davis get a two-year suspended sentence?
Did he get his drivers license suspended?
Did he lose his carry permit?
I would have voted for Sam, but unfortunately, that can't happen now and I didn't get a chance to find out why he was running against his boss.
That said, under the circumstances, I'll probably vote for Ruark because I think he deserves the chance to help put that piece of scum (Leggs) behind bars forever.
Hopefully, Seth Mitchell is running because he knows defending that type of scum is wrong (or am I mistaken that he defended him at one time, if so, I apologize).
I hope Matt, if Ruark wins, decides to join the DA office and prove he's a capable prosecutor.
blutoj,
I usually enjoy your posts but today it was ridiculous. Nobody would be "serving time" 2 years later after 1 DUI. The norm for first offenses is 6-12 months probation and most often not even a suspended license.
Rob S
Sam Vincent was a good man and a good attorney but the fact is he is no longer a part of this discussion. I knew and worked with Sam so I know that he is in a better place because he was a good man. The question is, is Mr. Ruark the man for the job? He has 2 opponents who currently earn their livings defending folks that they know are guilty. They will tell you it is their duty, but no one is waving a gun in their face to do it they are waving a check book. When you look at the 2 challengers one admitted to having been involved in 1 jury trial and the other represented a person charged with capital murder. With multiple murder cases pending do we want Rookies protecting us?
How many of you know anyone that runs for any office, that does not believe they can do a better job? Would they run for office if they thought they would do a worse job? This thinking is always the platform a candidate takes, and has absolutely nothing to do with how an office is being handled now. There is nothing wrong with the way Ruark does his job. No one can say they could do better, if they have not had the job. So he made a mistake. Big deal. It was not a mistake he made at his job. I have seen Police drunk, off duty, and driving cars. How many important people do you hear about, that messed up big time, and it was swept under the rug. Ruark faced his music, and was honest about it. He did not have to have it white washed over, like some. The man does his job, and does it well. If his critics know so much, maybe they should run for the office. Talk is cheap.
I wonder why it is that some folks like to kick people when they make a mistake and are honest about it, yet laugh and joke when some one makes a mistake and gets away with it by not doing the right thing.
Would everyone rather that Ruark had lied, and pulled strings, like a lot over others we know? The guy does a good job. If anyone can do better, then go for it. Dont sit in the armchair in front of the TV and complain.
Does Judy know any other candidates running for any office in the country who do not claim they can do a better job. Just one would do, running for any office.
Leadership is action, not position
what a mockery of a sham.
Post a Comment