Re: District Attorney Ray Gricar drops the ball
Mr. Keisling, you indicated that Mr. Gricar’s “disappearance would turn out to be a smart career move.” I would ask how?
Gricar announced, in early 2004 that he would not be seeking re-election in 2005 and that he would not be practicing law after that. He was not planning to run for some other office. He would not have a career after that. While I agree that his decision in 1998 would have, and in fact has, been widely criticized, what difference would it have made to an ex-DA and retired lawyer? He wouldn’t lose the next election over this, because he wasn’t going to run for anything. He wouldn’t have lost any clients, because he wouldn’t have any clients.
Gricar could lose is rather generous pension benefits if it was found out that he committed some criminal act in office, but even disastrously bad decisions are not criminal. To date, there has been no evidence of any criminal act on Gricar’s part in this.
Another commenter noted that the county could be subject to a law suit. The county carries liability insurance for such cases, so Mr. Gricar would not be faced with personal liability.
While Gricar would have faced criticism over his role in 1998, what possible career damage would he have faced?
EDITOR: We believe Bill Keisling was endeavoring to be facetios.
