Commissioner Mike Cantrell Continues Lonely Crusade Against Craig Watkins

Thumbnail image for Thumbnail image for Thumbnail image for Craig_Watkins_061910.jpg
Sam Merten
District Attorney Craig Watkins
Mike Cantrell, it seems, got what he wanted again. He's never going to succeed in getting the County Commissioners Court to appoint an outside attorney to investigate District Attorney Craig Watkins' use of forfeiture funds in an out-of-court settlement stemming from a February 2013 Dallas North Tollway accident for which the DA was at fault, just like he was never going to get John Wiley Price suspended from the court for the duration of his federal trial, now scheduled to begin in January 2016.

Cantrell didn't walk away from Tuesday's County Commissioners meeting empty-handed, though. He had his say, forcefully and on the record, about a Democratic elected official.

"We ought to be very upset that we were usurped," Cantrell said. "[The Commissioners Court] never knew anything about [the wreck]."

Theresa Snelson, the head of the district attorney's office's civil division, told Cantrell that it was common for matters not involving taxpayer money to be handled without the court.

"The suggestion that every claim comes before the Commissioners Court is just wrong," she said.

The district attorney's office, in accepting service for and then settling the suit, acted in place of the county, Cantrell said.

Watkins didn't really dispute that charge.

"I'm just as much Dallas County as you are," he said.

He had multiple reasons for not involving the commissioners, he said. General funds weren't used and, because he accepted full responsibility for the accident -- his office has said he was reviewing a speech on his phone when it happened -- the liability for the wreck and its fallout passed from the county to Watkins.

"There was nothing unethical, illegal or improper done in this case," Watkins said. "You want to complain about an accident I admitted [causing]."

Watkins said that Cantrell was acting politically, rather than in the best interest of the county.

"You did the same thing last week," he said, referring to Cantrell's resolution to suspend Price, "and you're doing it this week."

It practically goes without saying, but the court did not seem agreeable to appointing Cantrell's desired outside counsel when Cantrell makes a formal motion to do so, as he is expected to do later this month. County Judge Clay Jenkins told Cantrell that, Cantrell being an attorney, he could file a complaint with the state bar himself if he wanted.

My Voice Nation Help
19 comments
everlastingphelps
everlastingphelps topcommenter

Make no mistake -- this is black letter statutory misappropriation.


Texas CR 59.06:


(2) allocate proceeds from the sale of forfeited property described by Subsection (c), after the deduction of court costs as described by that subsection, in the following proportions:

(A) 40 percent to a special fund in the department to be used solely for law enforcement purposes;

(B) 30 percent to a special fund in the county treasury for the benefit of the office of the attorney representing the state, to be used by the attorney solely for the official purposes of the attorney's office; and

(C) 30 percent to the general revenue fund.


This wasn't a use under the official purposes of the office.  This was for Watkins' personal liability.

everlastingphelps
everlastingphelps topcommenter

Theresa Snelson, the head of the district attorney's office's civil division, told Cantrell that it was common for matters not involving taxpayer money to be handled without the court.


You know what?  FUCK YOU, THERESA.  FORFEITURE MONEY IS STILL TAXPAYER MONEY.  You don't fucking get to KEEP IT.  IT BELONGS TO THE TAXPAYERS.  IT ISN'T YOUR OWN PERSONAL SLUSH FUND.
But you know, you can lie and cheat and steal from the people all you want, as long as you are a Democrat.  It's the best reason to elect Republicans -- they are the only ones that anyone will demand be honest.


To all you people who are cheering about Perry being indicted for "misappropriation" of funds?  This is REAL MISAPPROPRIATION.  This is what it actually looks like when a politician actually misuses funds under his control.
Watkins belongs in jail.

dingo
dingo

Cantrell's crusade doesn't appear to be so lonely based upon the comments below.

HeywoodUBuzzoff
HeywoodUBuzzoff

So if we are driving along reading a  speech and get into an accident, can we claim nothing is wrong?  Or is it only when we pay things off with tax payer money when nothing is wrong? 

Rumpunch1
Rumpunch1

"The suggestion that every claim comes before the commissioner's court is just wrong," she said.


That argument shouldn't really apply in something of this magnitude.  Everything in the case appears to been done with the purpose of concealing it from the court, the public and the media.  Everyone lately has stopped talking about the actual county vehicle.  Why was it hidden away for months, then taken to a authorized vendor for repairs when it should have been totaled?

RTGolden1
RTGolden1 topcommenter

I can almost see a justification for using to pay a private attorney when Watkins was summoned to appear before Judge Lovario.  Almost.  I cannot see how using them to pay a settlement for an accident that Watkins (not the county) accepts fault for.  A $50k settlement payment is a pretty big personal benefit to shift from Watkins' pocket to the county coffers.

Anon.
Anon.

@HeywoodUBuzzoff


This whole thing stinks. The "reason" for the accident (which is identical to reading a newspaper while driving, and just as smart) is just stupid. The actions taken afterwards make it look like a cover-up especially due to the non-disclosure requirement, which makes it look like someone did not want the victim talking to the press. The fact that no taxpayer money was used makes it look like an attempt to keep it off the media's radar screen and away from the Commissioner's Court. 


And here is a news flash for Craig: You are not just as much the county as the court is. If you were you could set your own budget, which you can't because you aren't. 

ThePosterFormerlyKnownasPaul
ThePosterFormerlyKnownasPaul topcommenter

@RTGolden1 

It depends on if Watkins was traveling on county business or not.

If he was traveling on county business (and this does not include ordinary commuting) then it is proper that the county cover the repairs.

The fact that Watkins used the forfeited asset funds for repairs and settlements and did not report the accident or the settlement is at best highly questionable.


If the County had collision coverage on the vehicle, it makes even less sense for the forfeited asset funds to be used.

everlastingphelps
everlastingphelps topcommenter

@bvckvs @dingo I, for one, supported Watkins for his work with the Innocence Project, until it turned out that he thinks that work entitles him to break campaign finance laws, ignore court orders, engage in malicious political prosecutions, engage in contempt of court, and steal public funds.


I still support the Innocence Project, though.

ThePosterFormerlyKnownasPaul
ThePosterFormerlyKnownasPaul topcommenter

@Anon. @HeywoodUBuzzoff 

On the contrary, the seized funds are taxpayer monies as they are seized in the name of the people.


Basically they have become nothing more than unaccountable slush funds.

ScottsMerkin
ScottsMerkin topcommenter

@bvckvs a fender bender?  Pretty sure the shop they took it to, said it should be totaled.  Just from the picture you can tell it was more than a fender bender, dumbass

TheCredibleHulk
TheCredibleHulk topcommenter

@bvckvs

That's quite a tantrum.


And it's not about the "fender-bender" that is just the catalyst that brought about Watkins misuse of gov't resources and then trying to conceal the fact that he did so.

Anon.
Anon.

@ThePosterFormerlyKnownasPaul


I suppose in that way they can, indirectly, be considered a taxpayer resource, due to the fact that General Fund revenues are not used for the things this fund pays for, thereby freeing up that much GF revenue for other uses.

That brings us to another question (or two): Craig, what did your department have to forego because your bad driving cost $50,000? If you had simply paid attention to your driving instead of your vanity you wouldn't be explaining. Didn't you learn in law school that when you are explaining you are losing?

Now Trending

Dallas Concert Tickets

From the Vault

 

General

Loading...