Question: 1. Does it really make a difference who gets to be district attorney?

Answer: Absolutely. Prosecutors have to build a case to convince 12 jurors that the State’s side is correct. In contrast, criminal defense attorneys tear down the State’s case in order to convince one juror that the defense is correct. Thus, the District Attorney’s position should be filled by someone who has the skill and experience to seek justice on behalf of crime victims and to convince all 12 jurors about the case at hand. I have spent the last 12-plus years representing the State and victims of crime. I believe this experience uniquely qualifies me to represent the community as the District Attorney.

There is a significant difference between a prosecutor’s approach to protecting crime victims, especially young children who have no voice, and a defense attorney’s response to crime victims.

For example, in late 2006, my opponent took on a case that I had indicted. The evidence demonstrated that a 6-week-old baby that had been repeatedly burned on a space heater by the parents. I indicted both the mother and father for cruelty to children and recommended the maximum sentence of 20 years for each parent. My opponent took over the case when he needed something to try. He then dismissed the case against the mother and reduced the plea recommendation on the father. The reason: he did not believe that “parents really do this to their own children” (State v. House)(See my website, www.rudjardhayes.com).

In the past 3.5 years, my opponent has sought to learn the mindset and skills of a prosecutor on the job. My opponent’s 23 years of working on behalf of criminal defendants has clearly contaminated his approach to case and office management.

The District Attorney should be someone who has a proven passion for public service and experience in standing up for individuals who have been victimized by crime.

I am the only candidate for District Attorney that has 12-plus years of proven experience in protecting crime victims. I have tried literally hundreds of felony trials, losing only five in 12-plus years. I have never had a conviction overturned. I do not require on the job training. I am ready and able to aggressively prosecutor crimes, manage the office by example, and protect the community.

Our campaign is working very hard to ensure voters are factually informed during this campaign. Due to commitments made prior to notice of this forum, we may be delayed in responding to questions posted on the blog. If you have a pressing question, please feel free to contact me on my cell phone: 678-920-4453.

Question: 2. In broad strokes, describe your philosophy of justice as the advocate for the people of this state and county against persons accused of crimes.

Answer: Prosecutors are required to take an oath to seek justice. The oath ensures that the laws of this state are upheld, victims are protected, and that the accused are treated fairly and held accountable for their respective actions.

The duty to seek justice is present at every step of the judicial process, including but not limited to: the arrest; preliminary hearings; bond hearings; grand jury; trial; and post-conviction appeals. The reason that there are so many steps in the process is to ensure that every case is thoroughly examined and reviewed to properly protect crime victims and to ensure that the correct person is accused and convicted of the crime.

I believe that the District Attorney is a public servant, accountable to the people of this community and circuit for (his) actions. I also believe that the District Attorney should be a strong and aggressive victim advocate. The District Attorney is a public servant 24/7. The District Attorney should not serve as a character witness for convicted child molesters in any jurisdiction, as my opponent has done.

Question: 3. How will you allocate scarce resources to best serve Fayette, Spalding, Upson and Pike counties? Will the biggest get the most?

Answer: This is a judicial circuit comprised of four counties with very distinct and individual needs from the District Attorney’s office. I will ensure that every county has prosecutorial staff so that the needs of law enforcement and victims can always be met. The resources will be allocated to reflect the various case loads of each county and adjusted to meet the changing case load / demands of each county. Finally, as each of the four counties is within close geographic proximity to one another, we must identify proactive measures that can be taken in each county to combat and prevent criminal conduct.

- - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Questions for individual candidates:

TO RUDJARD HAYES:

Question: 1. Could you not be described as a carpetbagger at worst, an opportunist at best, for moving into Fayette County a year ago from outside the judicial circuit specifically to run against the incumbent DA? Explain why voters should trust your motives.

Answer: I have been involved in our local community here in Fayette County for many years. I coached youth football from 1997 to 2001 in Peachtree City; my children have both attended school in Fayette County since 1999; I have attended church in Fayette County and my daughter was baptized in Fayette County; I have also been an active volunteer in Fayette County for several years, beginning the Student Mock Trial Program at Our Lady of Mercy Catholic High School, assisting with swim team activities at Kedron pool as a parent volunteer; and, this community prayed for and provided our family with the support we needed when our son was seriously injured in a football game in Fayette County in 2004.

I received the Georgia Bar Association’s Justice Robert Benham Award for Community Service in 2007 for this District based on my community service and work as a public servant. Moreover, District Attorney Scott Ballard hired me as an assistant district attorney in this circuit in January 2005. Thus, I do not believe either title referenced above is appropriate or accurate.

I am a committed public servant. I have been a committed public servant for virtually my entire legal career of 12-plus years.

My opponent has implied that I attempted to run for office in Coweta County and was unsuccessful and thus moved to Fayette last year. This is false.

This is the first political office for which I have ever sought election. I felt so strongly that something had to be done to serve the needs of crime victims and the communities in the Griffin Judicial Circuit that my family and I made the decision that I would run for District Attorney.

My opponent has repeatedly implied that he did not “know” about the fact that I was going to seek election for the District Attorney’s office until he saw me at the July 4th parade in Peachtree City in 2007.

Contrary to his innuendoes, however, I made repeated attempts to contact him to discuss my intent to run for this office in June 2007. Mr. Ballard never returned my telephone calls. He admitted to me when I saw him at the parade in 2007 that he had been too busy responding to press inquiries about the Benoit matter (in which he has not brought a single indictment) to return my telephone calls.

Question: 2. You have criticized Ballard for having a Fayette-centric campaign. Does this mean you will de-emphasize the issues facing Fayette County? In other words, will you place greater importance on those smaller counties?

Answer: Specifically, I have criticized the incumbent for doubling the amount of money he takes out of Pike County while removing the only prosecutor who worked in Pike County. If Pike County pays nearly the entire salary of a full-time assistant district attorney, i believe that they deserve an assistant district attorney who works in Pike County.

I will not favor any county over the others, but will ensure that every citizen within the Griffin Judicial Circuit receives fair representation by the District Attorney’s office.

This is not simply about geography but about budgetary priorities and it is not the only budgetary difference I have with the incumbent.

I have also criticized the incumbent’s use of thousands of dollars from the victim witness program budget to buy drink coozies that he hands out at parades.

I believe that money in the victim witness budget should be spent to help victims and witnesses of crimes and for additional training for prosecutors and law enforcement to become better advocates for crime victims.

If the district attorney stopped wasting public money on drink coozies, maybe he’d find the money to ensure that all four counties in the Griffin Judicial Circuit are fairly represented.

Question: 3. Specifically how has Ballard been “soft” on crime” as you have alleged? And how would you be any “harder” on crime?

Answer: The most egregious example of Scott Ballard being soft on crime is the case of Jeffrey David Allen, where Scott Ballard traveled to South Georgia to appear as a character witness on behalf of a convicted child molester who had molested at least five different children while a school teacher.

As the Atlanta Journal-Constitution and The Citizen both reported, Ballard said the five-time molester was “a good person” and he urged to judge to “take a chance on” the convicted child molester.

It is inexcusable for an elected District Attorney to testify on behalf of a convicted child molester and seek leniency. Scott Ballard has claimed that he was subpoenaed, and that he didn’t seek leniency, but he’s just trying to hide the fact that he attempted to keep a convicted child molester from having his probation revoked and sent back to jail.

All the while, there was a case pending against Allen for theft of services and felony obstruction against a police officer in Fayette County. If Scott Ballard had his way, this convicted pedophile would be on the streets of Fayette County today. That’s soft on crime. I commit to you that I will never testify on behalf of a convicted child molester.

Scott Ballard has also said to the Atlanta Journal-Constitution that prosecutors should not believe a child who says he or she has been molested. Giving an accused pedophile the benefit of the doubt is “soft on crime” and I will not do the same.

Also, as noted above, my opponent dismissed cruelty charges against a mother I had indicted because he did not believe that “parents really do this to their own children” (State v. House)(see my website, www.rudjardhayes.com). This is a travesty.

Yet another example of his soft on crime attitude is that many of the individuals charged with Internet pornography out of Peachtree City were given probation and some even received first offender status, which means that they will not have a record of a conviction if they complete their probation without incident.

Question: 4. Your opponent has criticized you for leaving work undone immediately before you resigned from the office, particularly in preparing child molestation cases for indictment. How do you respond to this allegation?

Answer: It is patently false. Ballard is merely trying to take the focus off of the fact that he has repeatedly been criticized by the community for testifying as a character witness on behalf of a man convicted of molesting five girls. His attempt to criticize my work after I worked for him for 2.5 years without incident, and I voluntarily resigned my employment because I lost confidence in his leadership is desperate political posturing.

I voluntarily left the District Attorney’s office after giving notice. I completed the trial calendar during my notice period. Widespread discontent with the lack of leadership has led to eight of 11 experienced prosecutors leaving since Ballard has taken office. I am not the only one that left, yet because I have chosen to hold him accountable and speak up about the incompetence I witnessed, my departure is the only one he is talking about.

With respect to preparation of child molestation cases for indictment, I had all cases in order that were set to be indicted for that term before the grand jury. In fact, the family of one of the child molestation victim’s case that I was working on prior to my resignation has written a letter to the editor of this newspaper and other media, indicating exactly how informed they were while I was handling their case and indicating that I fully reviewed with them what would be happening during the grand jury process prior to my departure.

This same victim’s family asserts that after my departure from the DA’s office, they were not contacted by another prosecutor for over one year. In fact, they were not contacted until one year later by a prosecutor.

Notably, Ballard’s call to the family was one week before Ballard asserted in his June 10th letter to the editor that he allegedly contacted all of the victims of cases that I was handling, himself. This family specifically indicates that Ballard did not call them until one year after my departure, despite the fact that he has repeatedly indicated that he did so.

Additionally, I had multiple child molestation cases on which I was working. Ballard fails to tell voters that all of these cases would not have been brought before the same Grand Jury in June 2007, because all of these cases could not feasibly be tried by one person (me) during the trial calendar following that Grand Jury.

Ballard’s comments are clearly false and misleading to the public.

Question: 5. What will be the top changes you will make in the DA’s office if elected? Will lots of lawyers suddenly be unemployed?

Answer: No. Lots of prosecutors will not be unemployed. I believe that changes are primarily needed at the leadership level. We should expect that anyone hired or voted into a position should have experience relevant to the work they are performing, or be provided training to perform this job with a leader who has such skills. It takes more than a law degree to be a prosecutor. It takes prosecutorial skills, knowledge of the prosecutorial procedures available to the District Attorney’s office, and, it takes a commitment to aggressive prosecution of crimes, not selective prosecution of crimes. The District Attorney should set the example for the entire staff.

My opponent has been a career defense attorney prior to assuming the District Attorney position 3.5 years ago. I believe my opponent’s criminal defense experience has contaminated his decisions as a prosecutor and led him to make poor decisions as the District Attorney. During his time as District Attorney, he has testified as a character witness for a man convicted of molesting five girls. This sets a poor example for those in his office who are tasked with being advocates for crime victims, not advocates for criminal defendants.

I believe the lack of leadership and experience is the primary cause of eight out of 11 prosecutors leaving the District Attorney’s office (73 percent turnover), taking with them approximately 80-plus years of prosecutorial experience. I will set an example of an aggressive prosecution that will lead experienced prosecutors to stay with our circuit.

Additionally, defense attorneys and prosecutors carry different burdens at trial. Prosecutors carry the burden of demonstrating that a crime has been committed beyond a reasonable doubt. Defense attorneys are only required to show reasonable doubt at trial.

We have seen the District Attorney lose a double murder trial (Robbins v. State) because he did not meet his burden as a prosecutor in a case ripe with sufficient evidence for conviction.

In addition, I witnessed first-hand the lack of understanding the District Attorney has about his role as a prosecutor. In State v. House, the District Attorney dismissed all charges against a mother and reduced the sentencing recommendation against the father, both of whom I had indicted for cruelty to children after their 6-week-old baby was repeatedly burned on a space heater. My opponent’s stated rational for taking this position was that he could “not believe parents did this to their own children.”

All attorneys are ethically responsible to aggressively advocate on behalf of their “clients.” As a prosecutor, your client is the crime victim, not the defendant.

I am running for District Attorney because I have 12-plus years experience as a prosecutor with a record of aggressive prosecution of criminals. I have spent my entire career as a prosecutor mentoring new prosecutors and working with victim advocate groups. This experience makes me uniquely qualified to understand the duties of the District Attorney’s office and to implement policies and procedures that the District Attorney’s office upholds its duty to seek justice.