CBA chickens out: Vote for either judge
Submitted by Enquirer Reporter Sharon Coolidge
The Cincinnati Bar Association said Tuesday both Hamilton County Common Pleas Judge Patrick Dinkelacker and Attorney Jim O'Reilly are qualified 1st District Court of Appeals judges. It's the only contested judicial race in Hamilton County.
"The voters of Hamilton County have two good candidates before them in the contested First District Court of Appeals race," according to Jeffrey F. Peck, chairman of the CBA Judicial Candidate Rating & Endorsement Committee.
The CBA also released results of a 2006 Judicial Poll in which attorneys who practice in those courts are asked to rate Hamilton County judicial candidates -- there are 10 this year with just one contested race -- on integrity, character and objectivity; legal experience, knowledge and ability; respect for and courtesy to litigants, counsel and witnesses; and diligence.
Dinkelacker got the best reviews. Of 594 responses, 294 rated him excellent on integrity; 247 rated him excellent on legal experience; 324 rated him excellent on respect; and 302 rated him excellent on diligence.
O'Reilly had fewer responses, but because his experience is from private practice and teaching, few attorneys have had the chance to work with him. The poll specifically said observations must be personally observed.
Here's the release and judicial ratings from the Cincinnati Bar Association in .pdf format.
Update, 10:45 a.m. Wednesday Oct. 18, from Sharon Coolidge
O'Reilly supporter crunches the numbers.
Scott Seidewitz of The Seidewitz Group, a market research company that looks at consumer buying habits, pointed out a reporter error this morning.
While I looked at the Cincinnati Bar Association's raw numbers, Seidewitz, who is an O'Reilly supporter, broke down the numbers by the number of respondents, which is different for each judicial candidate.
Seidewitz' analysis of those who rated the candidate excellent shows:
Integrity, character, objectivity: 71% Dinkelacker, 71% O'Reilly
Legal experience, knowledge, ability: 60% Dinkelacker, O'Reilly 71%
Respect for and courtesy to litigants, counsel and witnesses: 78% Dinkelacker, 67% O'Reilly
Diligence: 74% Dinkelacker, 78% O'Reilly
19 Comments:
at 5:25 PM, October 17, 2006 
Anonymous said...
-
-
at 6:18 PM, October 17, 2006 
Anonymous said...
-
-
at 8:43 PM, October 17, 2006 
Anonymous said...
-
-
at 8:43 PM, October 17, 2006 
Anonymous said...
-
-
at 9:03 PM, October 17, 2006 
Anonymous said...
-
-
at 9:39 PM, October 17, 2006 
Anonymous said...
-
-
at 10:31 PM, October 17, 2006 
Anonymous said...
-
-
at 10:58 PM, October 17, 2006 
Anonymous said...
-
-
at 10:19 AM, October 18, 2006 
Anonymous said...
-
-
at 10:45 AM, October 18, 2006 
Anonymous said...
-
-
at 12:08 PM, October 18, 2006 
Anonymous said...
-
-
at 1:10 PM, October 18, 2006 
Anonymous said...
-
-
at 1:34 PM, October 18, 2006 
Anonymous said...
-
-
at 2:13 PM, October 18, 2006 
Anonymous said...
-
-
at 8:20 PM, October 18, 2006 
Anonymous said...
-
-
at 9:02 PM, October 18, 2006 
Anonymous said...
-
-
at 10:32 PM, October 18, 2006 
Anonymous said...
-
-
at 11:56 PM, October 18, 2006 
Anonymous said...
-
-
at 10:55 PM, November 06, 2006 
Anonymous said...
-
-
Post a Comment*These ratings of O'Reilly are as bogus as his TV ads. I couldn't help but notice the category of "Respect for & Courtesy to Litigants, Counsel & Witnesses".
Who is the Cincinnati Bar trying to bamboozle here? This law professor hasn't had his face in a Hamilton County Court Room! So, how could he even manage 14% in the Respect category?
My thoughts about this O'Reilly law professor has always been: Why was he not a prosecutor or a defense attorney, a civil case attorney here in Hamilton County? Why did he not work through the ranks to become a Judge in this county? He settled into academia & now, he decides he wants to be an Appellate Court Judge. Something doesn't add up. I doubt very seriously if the voters will ever get straight answers.
He doesn't have the first clue what communities are facing in crime. I've never seen him in a Court Room paying respect & courtesy to witnesses.
Wake up, Hamilton County! Do you want a law professor who writes stacks & stacks of papers & books hearing the appeal of a child molester or do you want a real Judge who really knows the score?
For myself & my family, there's only one choice in our household.
O'Reilly is a nationally respected legal author and academic, widely recognized for his abilities and sharp intellect. You can't attain that level of achievement without analytical skills that would be fundamental for an appellate court judge. To suggest that there is some lock step "dues paying" formula to be a successful appellate court judge shows a lack of understanding about the job requirements. There is no reason to think that someone who has done time in particular jobs and served as a trial court judge necessarily has the abilities to be an appeals court judge. Dinkelacker may be qualified because of his background; CBA members seem to think so. But O'Reilly's legal abilities are exceptional, even though he didn't take the steps judges traditionally take in Hamilton County. O'Reilly is well-qualified for this important position, as the Enquirer's own endorsement recognizes.
The court house is riddled with wRong wingnut judges lacking integrity.
With one party rule in the appeals court, as well, you have a recipe for corruption !
The current judges and wRong wingnut party are willing to jeopardize integrity to maintain power !
hcrp.info
You need to correct the headline. Only one of these gentlemen is an incumbent judge.
I am so glad someone is challenging Dinkelacker. I have witnessed his incompetence for many years. He may be a nice guy, but he doesn't have the intellect it takes to be a judge on the Court of Appeals. His MISTAKES are proof of that!
Jim O'Reilly would be an awesome addition to the Court of Appeals. His legal expertise and unique perspective would be invaluable on a court made up of judges from only one party. He is an ethical, brilliant, accomplished legal scholar, and the better candidate for the Court of Appeals.
Wait a minute. This Dinkelacker is the whacko who threw a rape victim in jail when her attacker threatened to kill her if she testified, right? Then after five days, surpise, surprise, she blamed someone else so that she could get out of jail but still not be killed. When she later admitted the guy she pinned it on wasn't the real rapist, Dinkelacker beat his chest saying he was right about her all along. Hello? That's why she blamed it on the wrong guy, Dumbo, to get out of the slammer where you put her!
This Dinkelacker should be thrown in the funny farm, not elected to the court of appeals.
There is a factually incorrect statement in the original post from Sharon Coolidge. She states that "Dinkelacker got the best reviews." This is actually not true.
Because far more lawyers know a sitting judge than a challenger, Dinkelacker has more survey responses than O'Reilly. Thus, the only way to compare the two is to look at the percentage of respondents rating each candidate "excellent" among those who provided a rating (in other words, don't count the respondents who said "I don't know this candidate").
The results from such an apples-to-apples comparison are revealing:
Integrity, character, objectivity: 71% Dinkelacker, 71% O'Reilly
Legal experience, knowledge, ability:
60% Dinkelacker, O'Reilly 71%
Respect for and courtesy to litigants, counsel and witnesses
78% Dinkelacker, 67% O'Reilly
Dilgence 74% Dinkelacker, 78% O'Reilly
So, they're tied in one category and O'Reilly wins in two of the other three. I'm afraid that Dinkelacker did not get the best reviews; O'Reilly did.
Disclosure: I am helping the O'Reilly campaign and was not planning on posting on this blog. But when I saw what I'm sure was an honest mistake by Ms. Coolidge, I thought I should provide the correct analysis. My numbers and conclusions are mathematically correct.
hcrp.info
Link correction:
Hamilton County Republican Party .com
(click on You Be The Judge)
hcrp.info
Scott,
You have to be F'n kidding me right?
Over 400 attorneys didn't even come in contact with this dude!
But yet you somehow cook the statistics to show him ahead of Dinkelacker???
You CANT make an APPLES to APPLES comparison because of the respondents to the survey over 400 attorneys HAD come in contact with Dinkelacker... No matter how you slice it HE FINISHED FIRST.
The CBA chickened out because of one reason... a democrat is running for a judgeship. Big F'n deal... just because you have 250,000 dollars and decide to run doesn't make you qualified.
and for Scott... its no suprise that you post another lie... you must have had some input on the commercial.
I'm glad the respondent used my name in replying to my post. It points out that he didn't have the courage to post his own name.
How the anonymous, profanity-spewing respondent can call my analysis a "lie" is beyond me. Of course 400 lawyers didn't know Jim O'Reilly well enough to rate him. He's not a sitting judge! He doesn't come into contact with nearly as many lawyers as Dinkelacker.
What's informative, though, is that among the lawyers who have met each candidate, O'Reilly was rated higher. That's statistics 101 (and just common sense). The anonymous, profanity-spewing respondent obviously flunked that class...if he attended school at all.
Oh this is fun! And these are the folks inside the campaigns for judges--the campaigns that traditionally hold to the high road.
Who needs the Jerry Springer Show?
And you should any reputable pollster would never make the claim you are insuinating. You are trying to compare a sample of just over 100 to a sample of just over 400. Of course the SMALLER the sample the better chance you have of seeing a favorable result. What is truly telling is how many more people have come into contact with Dinkelacker and rated him excellent. Any attempt to try and look at it your way ends in a totally misleading result.
You have to take this poll on its face. That is 594 attorneys responded. Out of those total responses Judge Dinkelacker was rated the Highest. As you mention Jim O'Reilly can't help he is not a sitting Judge... at the same time Pat Dinkelacker can't help he comes into contact with so many attorneys. Unfortunately for you the poll is the poll and it is the fairest way the CBA has come up with. They have tried and tried and have settled on this method. Looking solely on the method chosen by the CBA Dinkelacker was rated the highest.
I'd love to see Dinkelacker and O'Reilly compete in an IQ test. Do you think Dinkelacker could even reach 100?
Seriously, this guy can't even hold his words together. My advice to him as an O'Reilly supporter, keep talking, keep making no sense, keep making mistakes...
"Of course the SMALLER the sample the better chance you have of seeing a favorable result."
Please explain this to me. Isnt it just as likely to have a bad result if the sample is SMALL?
I think it just means the margin of error is larger.
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
I think O'Reilly is the best person for the job. HOWEVER, he is SO bitchy. Can I say that word?
It's like he NEVER takes his guard down. can't he just be REAL with us?
It's like he's always trying to put on this front of academia, etc. etc.
That's my only complaint against him.
Dinkalacler is oevrely pro establishment. Has no clue of adminstrative law in Ohio and is a champion of upholding due process to law ... see his rulings are all overturned... he is a costly idiot.. hw should be on the street not on the bench
* Our online blogs currently are hosted and operated by a third party, namely, Blogger.com. You are now leaving the Cincinnati.Com website and will be linked to Blogger.com's registration page. The Blogger.com site and its associated services are not controlled by Cincinnati.Com and different terms of use and privacy policy will apply to your use of the Blogger.com site and services.
By proceeding and/or registering with Blogger.com you agree and understand that Cincinnati.Com is not responsible for the Blogger.com site you are about to access or for any service you may use while on the Blogger.com site.
<< Home