John Bradley: Diary Of A Sore Loser
John Bradley seems content to continue his game of blame. Sources say Bradley has been chewing sour grapes since the citizens of Williamson County sent him packing in a resounding defeat at the polls in May. Oddly, Bradley has only been seen at his office a handful of times since his May 29th defeat.
Now, according to sources, Bradley has met with District Judges and is attempting to meet with county commissioners to garner support for creating two positions for indigent defense appellate work; one for himself and the other for Kristen Jernigan.
Even more, according to sources, Bradley was notified (again while he was out of the office) of District Attorney Elect Jana Duty’s intentions not to retain certain staff members in the District Attorney’s office. Sources say Bradley contacted several media outlets in an attempt to gain a negative story about Duty’s re-staffing. Ironically, public perception of the re-staffing is quite positive for Duty and Bradley’s attempts to generate negative press has backfired badly.
The Statesman published a story this morning about the shakeup. Several quotes in the story are quite puzzling. Bradley described those let go as “good and professional employees” and said Duty was “blinded by her political hatred.” The only person that seems to be blinded by “political hatred” is Bradley himself. According to sources, he offered no phone call to Duty after the May election and no attempts to assist Duty with a smooth transition over the past six months.
Bradley still hasn’t come to grips that he lost, and lost badly. He still hasn’t come to the realization that his life in politics is over. He also seems not to have accepted the District Attorney’s office now belongs to Duty and if he had the best interest of Williamson County in mind, he would be working with her, since May, not against her. This isn’t about Duty winning or Bradley losing, but about what is best for the citizens of Williamson County. But as we saw in the Morton case, everything is about John Bradley and “winning”, not what is “right” for the justice system or community. Bradley could not accept defeat at the hands of John Raley then with the Morton case and certainly has shown he cannot now.
Rob Kepple, executive director of the Texas District and County Attorneys Association said “It’s not unusual to have a lot of changes early on. Everybody gets to set their office up and get the people in that they want.”
Two attorneys, Lindsey Roberts and Kristen Jernigan were notified they would not be retained by Duty also commented to the Statesman. “Given the depth of my experience as a prosecutor, it makes no sense that she (Duty) would make any assumptions without ever having met or spoken with me in the eight years that I have been with the district attorney’s office,” Roberts said.
Jernigan said she had never met Duty either. “The reason I stayed on was that I’m the only appellate lawyer here,” she said, “and if I left, it would leave the office in a bad position.”
These two were highlighted in a Texas Monthly article a few days ago. (See page 6 of the article for details by clicking here) Pam Colloff does an outstanding job with this detailed story. The article skewered Roberts, Jernigan and Bradley for their role in the Morton case. It was Roberts and Jernigan who fought the test results of the blue bandana that was a key piece of evidence that exonerated Morton and identified Mark Norwood. Even after DNA results showed Norwood’s DNA on the bandana, Roberts and Jernigan fought on. It wasn’t until the match also showed Norwood was linked to the Debra Baker murder in Austin. Norwood has been indicted for the Morton and Baker murders. That link left Bradley, Jernigan and Roberts no other “out” and they had to relent. If it were not for the link to the Baker murder, speculation is, they would be fighting the DNA results to this day.
According to the Statesman, Lindsey Roberts sent Duty a letter this week calling her statements to the American-Statesman untrue and threatening possible litigation, saying Duty’s claims could “damage his reputation”. We can only wonder if he also sent the Texas Monthly the same letter for their article that highlighted his war against testing the bandana and continuing his fight even after the results were known.
According to several sources, Roberts has stated he has future political aspirations to run for District Judge in 2014.
Bottom line, the office now belongs to Duty. The voters of Williamson County spoke loudly in May and even more so in November. It is up to Duty to restore public trust to the DA’s office, something that is sorely lacking; and a re-staffing of the office is a start.