Virginia Beach Commonwealth’s Attorney Harvey Bryant has taken exception to The Virginian Pilot editorial printed in last Sunday’s paper. His office released a response Monday, although it has yet to appear in the paper. Bryant writes:
The title of the piece is itself suspect.“Needless Suspicions in Beach Flier-Gate”. Unless the editor knows who prepared, authorized, paid for, encouraged and aided in the production of the Obama-Sessoms flier without the required attribution statement, how does the appointment of a special prosecutor raise needless suspicions? And if the editor does know all the who’s and how’s, the public and the special prosecutor should be told forthwith. Does the editor know about, or what is contained in the over 4,000 pages of documents and correspondence obtained as a result of the investigation I began? Does the editor know how many people have been interviewed or what statements have been made by whom or about whom thus far?
I found the editorial curious, for sure. (Actually, the word that came to mind was schizophrenic.) While I have waited for The Pilot to weigh in on the controversy, the editorial board’s reaction was a strange one. Calling out Bryant for turning the investigation over to a special prosecutor – the editorial says “Bryant has undermined his own credibility” – when such is the norm when a conflict exists, makes little sense.
In any event, it will be interesting to see if Bryant’s letter gets printed in the paper.
UPDATE: The letter was printed in Friday’s paper. However, it is not available online. (Shouldn’t it be in the LTE section?)
VIVIAN J. PAIGE | All Politics is Local 
I’d like to thank you for your continual coverage of this story. This isn’t something that should be swept under the rug. It requires investigation and possible prosecution. Thanks for your work on this!
Vivian,
Thanks for the link to the VP editorial.
I’m going to quote from it.
“The investigation is appropriate, but Virginia Beach doesn’t need a special prosecutor to handle the case.”
And:
“Sessoms said he didn’t know about the flier and ordered copies destroyed when he learned about them midday.”
And even further:
“In this specific case, Sessoms’ margin of victory – 6,852 votes – was substantial enough that the fliers couldn’t have affected the outcome. Still, someone needs to be held responsible for breaking the rules and given an appropriate fine.”
Of course I guess we are spending major bucks with this special investigation that is going to yield a minimal fine.
It is my understanding that Bryant already has an admission from the person who paid for the flier. Unless one of the over 4,000 documents (and that is not that many to look through) he has in his possession points to something more diabolical he should abandon his investigation and save us some money.
But of course the longer it takes for him to do the job the longer he collects the paycheck for doing it, right?
No, he already gets paid a salary — he’s a Commonwealth’s Attorney.
“Of course I guess we are spending major bucks with this special investigation that is going to yield a minimal fine.”
Why spend the money on criminal investigations if we’re just going to spend more money paying for the prisons? We should only pursue criminal investigations that will turn a profit for the State. Let’s go back to the weregeld system, but instead of the family’s getting the money, the State does. For lesser crimes, let’s take the money for the perp’s jail time from his family. If his family will not feed him, why should we?
spotter,
He could be earning his salary investigating bigger crimes. He already has an admission from the person who paid for the fliers.
Mouse,
Your post was dripping with sarcasm. Let me deal with that one with a bit of logic.
The person guilty will not even serve a day in jail. The fine the perpetrator will receive is minimal.
Seems to me the efforts of a Commonwealth’s attorney and his entire staff could be better employed. I’m sorry if such employment would not help you achieve your political goals.
Lil, that’s a decision Earle Mobley will have to make, in the exercise of prosecutorial discretion. He can decide how much time and resources to devote to the case, and whether or not to bring charges. He has a budget just like everybody else, and no incentive, unlike certain federal special prosecutors, to make a mountain out of a molehill.
All Harvey Bryant did was step aside to ensure that the prosecutor who actually makes those decisions does not have a conflict of interest. That’s an honest decision, and one the Pilot should be honest enough to commend.
“The person guilty will not even serve a day in jail. The fine the perpetrator will receive is minimal.”
We won’t know that until we get a conviction, will we? If each flier counts as a violation….
But that is not really the point. His career as a political advisor will be over, and others will be deterred from similar violations.
If you do not like it, work to get the law changed to either make the penalty more severe, or to eliminate the offense from the books. Just ignoring the law is not an acceptable option.
Mouse,
I am satisfied with the law as it stands.
It allows for citizens to make statements of opinion even when their opinion might not be grounded in facts. It slaps the hand of the informed activist that should have known better without dampening involvement of average citizens in public discourse.
I will accept your statement that you are satisfied with the law as it stands. I must conclude, then, that you are NOT satisfied with how it is being enforced, i.e., the special prosecutor.
How do you think the State should enforce the law?
Mouse,
It is my understanding that Bryant already has an admission from the person who paid for the fliers. The person who admitted to it (unless that person volunteered to be the fall guy) should be fined and let us get on with things.
It does seem that your understanding of the situation is at odds with the appointment of a Special Prosecutor. Are you at liberty to divulge the source of your understanding?
My understanding comes from something that was supposed to come from Bryant himself. I am not going to go back and retrace where I got that from. It came out within the first couple days Bryant was appointed.