District attorney candidate Pat Flaherty has attacked incumbent Mike Dugan on his politicking, his criminal-charging protocol and his handling of the high-profile David Black case. Recently, he opened up a new front that Dugan may not be able to ignore in the final stretch of his reelection bid.
Two weeks ago, Flaherty used the League of Women Voters candidate debate, a usually tame event, as a forum to hammer his former boss, 20-plus-year incumbent Mike Dugan on an issue that Flaherty had been pushing only privately in his campaign to unseat his former boss. Answering an audience question about his views on governmental transparency, Flaherty, a fomer chief deputy prosecutor, accused Dugan of allowing a prosecutor in his office to sexually discriminate against young female employees and then promoting that prosecutor.
Dugan flatly denied the claim, but acknowledged that his office had experienced some personnel issues that were now resolved.
That might be true, but what he didn’t tell audience members was that it cost Oregon taxpayers $125,000 to handle those issues. On Friday afternoon, state records shed a little light onto just why it was so expensive to get the DA’s office back on track.
The records, which were released by the Department of Justice after a public records request, included the resignation letter from former deputy district attorney Mary Jo Mongan, the employee who received that six-figure settlement.
The terse two-plus page letter details the treatment that Mongan was subjected to by her manager, Jody Vaughan, a hard-driving female prosecutor who was then head of the misdemeanor team. This team is a proving ground for young attorneys like Mongan, some of whom were fresh out of law school.
Among other things that Mongan detailed were allegations that she had been publicly derided by her supervisor, singled out for criticism that wasn’t given to her male colleagues, sneeringly micro-managed and ultimately retaliated against when she took the concerns to Dugan’s right-hand man, chief deputy Darryl Nakahira.
But the treatment persisted and in January of 2008, Mongan quit, providing a detailed account of the reason for her resignation in a letter addressed to Dugan.
She wasn’t the only one fleeing the prosecutor’s office.
Including Mongan, at least five young female prosecutors left the district attorney’s office while Vaughan was overseeing the misdemeanor team. Some of them are now in private practice and one works for the Department of Justice. Vaughan is still at the DA’s office although she is no longer in charge of the misdemeanor team. This seeming mass exodus from the prosecutor’s office is common knowledge among the legal community, but it’s been all but ignored by the media even in the midst of a political campaign. In an interview Monday morning, Dugan said that The Bulletin has had a copy of the settlement agreement for months. But the paper has yet to publish anything. A story that the paper printed on April 30 after the candidate debate forum made no mention of the exchange about the hostile workplace settlement.
A call to Executive Editor John Costa on Monday to find out why the paper was unwilling to follow up on the story hadn’t been returned as of Tuesday afternoon. It’s not for want of information. Documents released recently by the Department of Justice, copies of which have been provided to The Bulletin, The Source and KTVZ, include accounts from other attorneys detailing the harsh treatment that they had received from Vaughan, which in one case involved Vaughan pulling a young female deputy prosecutor into the jury room bathroom and yelling at her while a local defense attorney sat outside in the jury room, overhearing the exchange. That prosecutor has since quit.
Another young attorney, Kelly Hansen, endured some of the same type of treatment and was told by her coworkers that it was part of a pattern with her supervisor. Hansen decided to leave when the opportunity presented itself.
“It’s been three years, but I didn’t feel like I was going to be given a chance to succeed and it was extremely stressful,” she said in a phone interview this week.
Hansen started documenting the treatment she was receiving while she was still an employee in the office. She sent the notes to the Department of Justice (DOJ) after it opened an investigation following Mongan’s resignation.
“I have never received such poor training and had such an inept, hostile, crazy manager. It amazes me that a DA’s office would want to treat its (deputies) like incompetent people and harass them. I think Jody has a problem with women and with any person who dares stick their neck out. She is a bully,” Hansen wrote prior to her resignation.
Speaking Monday morning at his office, Dugan acknowledged the past issues at his office, but said they have been dealt with appropriately as a result of the Department of Justice probe—an investigation that Dugan points out was requested by himself, in consultation with Deschutes County Legal Counsel Mark Pilliod after receiving Mongan’s scathing resignation letter. DOJ spokesman Tony Green confirmed that its investigators were working on behalf of Dugan at his request and their role was advisory rather than investigatory.
“The DA is a state employee. We represent DAs. There is nothing weird about it,” Green said.
While the DOJ stopped short of issuing recommendations, Dugan said he made changes to his office based on what he learned in the course of the inquiry. Dugan said he is prohibited by state rules regarding the release of personnel information from discussing some of those changes. He did confirm, however, that Vaughan is no longer running the misdemeanor team or supervising employees.
Asked why he didn’t intervene earlier with Vaughan and his misdemeanor team, Dugan said he wasn’t aware of the scope of the problem until the outside attorneys began talking to his subordinates and former employees. He said that some of the information that he might have needed in order to act was provided in exit interviews that he didn’t have access to at the time. He has since asked to be provided with a summary of the comments given by his departing employees.
Hansen said she has a hard time believing that her former boss and his direct subordinates were totally in the dark about what was going on inside his office.
In fact, he wasn’t totally out of the loop. At one point Mongan took her concerns about Vaughan to chief deputy Nakahira who enlisted Dugan’s help. The DA confirmed that he sat Vaughan down for a discussion of her management style. That’s when things went from bad to worse for Vaughan’s employee. Instead of toning down her criticism, Vaughan confronted Mongan, according to both Dugan and Mongan’s resignation letter. That’s a violation of state labor laws and it opened the DA up to what eventually became the costly settlement.
But supervisors including Dugan and Nakahira either didn’t know or didn’t act on Vaughan’s behavior. Instead, Vaughan continued to supervise Mongan and the other deputies on the misdemeanor team. According to Mongan’s letter, Vaughan pulled her into the office of another supervisor and accused her of poor performance. Ultimately, Mongan said she was given a sub-par review and the standard pay increase was withheld. Rather than continue to endure, she quit.
“I have tried to work within the hostility of the workplace because of the importance of employment to me. However, I am no longer able to handle the hostility of this environment and the repercussions on my mental and physical health outweigh my maintaining employment with Deschutes County,” Mongan wrote in her January 2008 resignation letter.
Last May, the state cut her a check for $125,000 settling all existing and future claims against the county.
Dugan said he acted on advice from the DOJ’s attorneys when he agreed to settle the case with Mongan and pointed out that the money came from the state—not local taxpayers. A distinction that might matter to some. He takes issue with the notion that the DA’s office is anything but a great place to work, despite the past issues on his misdemeanor team. He points out that all of his deputies, with the exception of Wells Ashby, have endorsed his re-election. (Ashby is running for judge and is refraining from making endorsements. Dugan, however, is campaigning on his behalf.)
“I think that anybody who runs an office of this size over time is going to have some bumps in the road. I’m sorry that Patrick Flaherty has chosen to raise these issues in the last 10 days of the election,” Dugan said.
He characterized Flaherty’s decision to broach the issue in the waning stages of the campaign as “mudslinging.”
In an interview Tuesday, Flaherty called Dugan’s assertion “outrageous.” He said that one of the reasons that issue wasn’t raised earlier is that Dugan had requested that the League of Women Voters debate be pushed back to the end of April. Flaherty, however, confirmed that the public records request that produced the settlement and some of the investigator’s notes was made by a local attorney who had been involved with his campaign.
He takes exception to Dugan’s assertion that raising the settlement adds up to a political low blow. He accused Dugan of attempting to hide the settlement and the surrounding issues.
“When you’re the DA you have an obligation to be 100 percent truthful. Certainly when you’re asked a question in front of the League of Women Voters and you say my office is transparent and then you fail to disclose information that you have about issues that your opponent just raised, that’s dishonest—that’s not transparent. That’s the only word that applies,” Flaherty said.
Just a few days away from the primary, Dugan says that has been forthright about the settlement. It’s his opponent who is misleading people by saying that the issues were related to gender discrimination and that Vaughan had been promoted since the investigation. Neither of which is true, Dugan says.
Still, he acknowledged that there were problems that could have been handled better at the time.
“I’m not perfect,” he said. “I make mistakes. All of us do. I hope and pray that those mistakes that I make are not injurious to the public and I don’t think they have been,” he said.
This article appears in May 13-19, 2010.
MAKE LOCAL JOURNALISM HAPPEN
Republish our articles for free, online or in print, under a Creative Commons license.
Flaherty campaigns, “justice not politics”. From what I’ve seen so far, he’s done a great deal of mudslinging. How completely unethical and politcal on his part. The DA office works with those who do not need to be micro-managed, as the work load is quite heavy. Some come with the attitude that they get in with the county and have it made, then they realize they have to work, and when they can’t perform, they are surprised that their supervisor takes them to task? Job performance is what it’s all about in the long run. The DA’s are educationally and instinctively working in an environment of justice for the victims of crimes. This office has a large group of persons, who work together as a team, because of Dugan’s roll up your sleeve work ethic. His ability to hear ideas, complaints, and very little praise, all goes in and comes back out with a caring family attitude that we all appreciate. I’ve only had one other boss in my 53 years, who impressed me so much, that I would stand up and say now, that our office is not broken. Too bring back into this job anyone who left as their ego was bruised, they wouldn’t hang on and prove their worth, and then be vindictive enough to throw the mud based on talk from those who also couldn’t do the work, or whose family member made a poor choice to commit a crime and not stand up and say, “I did it”. This would be a mistake. This job, this office is not the problem, and does not need a new leader, we are not broken. I urge any and all persons who have been apart of the grand jury, helping to make decisions on charging persons who commit crimes, that you believe me when I say, “Vote for Dugan”.
I am so glad to see that people are brave enough to come forward to inform the public on the cover up of the DA’s office. Dugan has over stepped his bounderies more then a few times. question for Bend Bulletin. Do any of you play golf by chance with Dugan or hunt for game besides human that is? And Dugan proclaims that his office is transparent. Does he even know what the word means?
I admire TS Weekly for publishing/posting this article in light of your endorsement of Dugan.
I have first person experience with the professional conduct of both Vaughan and Dugan. Upon reading the quote at the end of the article I nearly fell off my chair. “I'm not perfect,” he said. “I make mistakes. All of us do. I hope and pray that those mistakes that I make are not injurious to the public and I don't think they have been,” he said.
I have witnessed his imperfection and his injuries to the public. His mistakes injure Lady Justice and our Constitution nearly every day. However, in all the debates there has been no reference to the injuries related to the mental and physical health of those who fall victim to his unreasonable and tyrannical ‘hard on crime’ ego.
I met with Dugan and Vaughan last October to discuss and present evidence that would invalidate a majority of the charges they were pursuing in a case. During the more than hour long meeting I was repeatedly horrified by Dugan’s attitude of indifference to facts related to the case. I sat listening to his blatant dismissals of my concerns over civil rights violations, discriminatory statements related to the accused, and his office’s vigilante implementation of justice. I found myself most violated by Dugan and Vaughan’s response to my last question. I simply inquired how the community that elected him received any benefit when the District Attorney chose to prosecute a misdemeanor as a felony. His response terrified me. He stood, leaning over the table, looked me in the eyes and stated very forcefully and clearly; ‘I have to send a message to people like you. I need them to know that if they make a MISTAKE in my county, I will come after them’.
Deschutes County, it’s time to play! He has injured more than one law abiding citizen who suffered the misfortune of making a mistake in Dugan County.
A MISTAKE IN DUGAN’S COUNTY IS PROSECUTED AS CRIME.
Let’s prosecute! Vote Flaherty.
Dugan, may your career live and die by YOUR rules!
Brian Fish
“Of all tyrannies, a tyranny sincerely exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive.”
-CS Lewis
I would just like to point out that most employees do not like their bosses/managers; of course they are going to bad mouth the manager that yelled at them. In the end that interaction has most likely bettered the employee. According to the article many of these attorneys seem to be fresh out of law school and may need to have certain interworkings of the actual justice system explained to them. Mrs. Vaughan’s leadership style in a man would be seen as someone who is assertive and a great leader. I fail to see the reason why Mrs. Vaughan “has a problem with women” as she is one.
After reading this poorly written article, I think it is important to consider the other side of the story. Why might Mr. Dugan didn't inform the public about the ‘scandal.” Maybe it could be that his is more interested in prosecuting people who have done wrong than focusing on this matter which has affected the office in a small way. Also consider the other side of Mrs. Vaughan’s story, would she yell at other staff just for the hell of it, or was it because she is trying to help them become better lawyers?
Come Election Day there is only one question: Who would better run the DA’s office for Deschutes County? Mr. Dugan who has been running it for years and knows how to put together a team that can handle all of the crime in Deschutes County? Or, Mr. Flaherty who brings up political stunts to detract from his own shortcomings in order to get an office that he would not know how to run.
If you are tempted to agree with the perspective of Devon and Ms. Nicki West please take the time to read Lyle Hick’s blog post where he recounts with startling detail how Dugan failed him.
On three different occasions Lyle’s rights as a victim were violated and Dugan as a true politician blamed someone else; his staff!
http://jakesdiner.blogspot.com/2009/10/dealing-with-da.html
Dugan repeatedly quotes his office’s statistics to illustrate his ability to do his job. Maybe he has forgotten the people he stepped on in the last 20+ years.
I hope Deschutes County voters won’t.
Major props to Flowers for reporting on this sordid affair on the heels of the paper’s endorsement of Dugan (FYI, I don’t see Dugan mentioned anymore on the TSWeekly endorsement page).
Sadly, some confused readers think this is about an employment issue in the DA’s office. Its not. Its about Mike Dugan’s reaction to questions and inquires into the settlement. He went on written record claiming that he did not know of the existence of the documents; one that was addressed to him and one that was signed by him. He is finally (or once again) caught in a blatant lie. Some would say it fits an established pattern.
For him (or anyone else) to try and spin this as A) political mudslinging or B)customary for long-time employers is disingenuous and insulting. If you have questions about the timing of these revelations, they should be addressed to Dugan, not Flaherty. He’s had the opportunity to disclose this since last May. Why didn’t he? Because he thinks its no big deal for long-term managers to have issues like this? How many long-time local employers have been investigated by the DOJ for a hostile workplace or had to settle a complaint for $125k? He was hoping this would go unnoticed until the election was over and he has been misleading about it to that end. That is the story. His reactions now speak volumes more about him than his opponent.
This is about having a county prosecutor that is honest. Its that simple. The non-partisan elected position wields tremendous power that is to be used in ascertaining truth and justice above all else. When the DA can’t even tell the truth about the affairs of his own office, I think he is categorically disqualified from the job.
This is in response to “…”‘s post. Even if Mr. Dugan has violated Lyle’s victim rights, I am sure he did not mean to do so. The Deschutes County District Attorney’s office is there to make sure the victims are spoken for, not abused. It is impossible to, in a career as long as Mr. Dugan’s, to not make a few mistakes. The mature thing to do in these situations would be to realize this and forgive him since he has done so much good for the community rather than just complaining about it. No matter who the DA is, he/she will make mistakes, it is just human nature.
On another note, make sure to read all posts on this page. It would seem that we have some ardent fans of Dugan’s opponent who have voted down the other comments in favor of Dugan. Is this fair?
I am appalled at the unmitigated hackjob Flowers has done with this piece. It’s one thing to FAIRLY and accurately report the news, but this is something else entirely. It’s reported that “at least five young female prosecutors left the district attorney’s office” while Ms. Vaughan supervised the misdemeanor team. How many of those five were interviewed for this story? Moreover, why isn’t it reported that two of those females left to join a private law firm in town, and only lasted at that firm a short time as well? Or is it somehow Ms. Vaughan’s fault that they couldn’t hack it there, either?
I am a female attorney. I have worked with Ms. Vaughan for two and a half years. She advocated for my hiring at the DA’s office, a DA’s office I was dying to work for because it is well-known among prosecutors that Dugan’s DA’s office is, without question, one of the best in the state. I have worked on trials with Ms. Vaughan where she was the lead attorney and I was the second. At no time was Ms. Vaughan abusive, retaliatory or discrminatory against me in any way, nor did I ever witness her treat any staff that way.
The treatment of this story just goes to show that the Source will always be a two-bit rag only suitable for lining birdcages and wrapping fish. My junior high school newspaper did a better job verifying stories and checking facts before it went to press. It’s disappointing that in your rush to run an anti-Dugan piece before the election you missed the chance to actually tell the truth.
Hmmmm, Devon, interesting question. Are juries who vote in favor of guilt for an accused fair if they all agree that the evidence presented shows guilt? Is an election fair if one candidate receives more votes than the other? Is it fair that the media, which controls the masses (except the Source–I praise your intergrity) has whored itself out to Dugan and missed the point about his lack of honesty regarding questions? Is it fair to judge a person’s history, and record, as Dugan wants you to do, without juding the WHOLE record? Is it fair to vote a less than forthright individual like Dugan into the DA’s office? The FACTS are in. Listen to the debate, look at the public records yourself. NO, it is not fair! Vote for JUSTICE, VOTE FLAHERTY!!!
INACCURATE or INTENTIONALLY MISLEADING? Either way I am disappointed in the Source for publishing this article without doing a better job of checking their facts and confirming the information that they were provided. Unless the Source intentionally omitted and ignored that information to write an article that would be more sensational.
I have worked for the District Attorney’s Office for over 12 years as a DDA. I worked with Patrick Flaherty as my Chief Deputy until he quit.
Mike Dugan is the best candidate for DA, he has dedicated his time as DA to promoting justice, victim rights, community safety and offender reformation in Deschutes County. He cares about his community, the people that work in his office and our partners in public safety. I endorse Mike Dugan and I hope to continue to serve my community in his office.
Looks like a few people on here are a wee bit worried about losing their jobs if Flaherty gets elected! Try not to speak for others’ experiences that were not your own. Fear is a nasty monster. Facts are facts. The public records are in. Doesn’t matter where the women felt forced to find new jobs. And the point is, Dugan was NOT honest at the debate, and tried to cover this up. The point is a lack of transparency. The ugly monster here? Hypocrisy. Too bad, and too late.
May be a whole office culture problem…
http://jakesdiner.blogspot.com/2009/10/dealing-with-da.html
The correct link, sorry: http://jakesdiner.blogspot.com/2009/10/dealing-with-da.html
To Transparency:
could it be possible that the other news agencies have not reported as much on this as the Source has because they realize that in Mr. Dugan’s long career in the service of the public, it is ok to make a few mistakes. The Source has obviously not researched this article near enough. They talked to so many people who do not like Mr. Dugan, did they interview the same amount that actually work in the DA’s office in order to present both sides of the argument? The answer is no, as evidence by all of the posts here from actual employees form the DA’s office. (All of whom support Mr. Dugan).
Judge our candidates with everything they have done in mind. However, make sure to keep in mind over Mr. Dugan’s career it is only human to make some mistakes. It is also only human to forgive these little problems since he took the best course of action with what he was given. Would it be better for the office to pay a settlement to its ex-employee who obviously wasn't up to the challenge, than bring it to court where the potential to pay much more is great. AS Bren said in her comment, these employees just couldn't cut it. It is my opinion that employees such as this one realized she couldn't make it in such an environment, and then decided to make a situation much worse than it is just to get some money out of it.
To Hmmm:
It seems to me most people here who are in support of Mr. Dugan are in support because they fear how his opponent will mismanage the office if he should win. They realize the office is in a good working order, making sure the community is safe. They would like to continue insuring this, not letting the office become a political battle field which would lead to many criminals not getting a good trial.
Thank you Mary Anderson, Bren, and Nikki West; you know how the office actually works, and it is only right that the public knows the other side of the story.
I have to agree with Devon. The media has taken a very biased stance on this matter. Some people really need to wake up and smell the coffee. Lets not put so much focus on this one event and instead lets look at the whole picture before jumping to such rash decisions. My friend Cobra once said that office politics should not get in the way of the task at hand. I think its easy to see that this is what is happening here.
Devon, you are correct, it is human to make mistakes. It is arrogant and narcissistic when they are brought to your attention and you refuse to make it right.
I have a case pending in ‘how the office actually works’ since April of 2009. I have presented to Dugan a substantial amount of verifiable evidence that certain crimes I am charged with never happened. His response to me and my lawyer was that we could argue that at trial if I didn’t want to accept his plea agreement. To quote him directly “I can not have a reputation with my staff or the public of dropping charges that might not be valid. If I did it for you, everyone would expect it. I can’t have people expecting leniency from me.”
My current lawyer has advised me that even my alleged victim is not claiming the severity of injury or violation that Dugan and your office says occurred.
This is not the kind of attitude that fosters justice or integrity. It is of no benefit, regardless if you are a staff member or a voter.
To debunk any idea that if you are a loyal staff member you are sheltered from becoming a pawn in his political game I will give you some background on me. Three years in a row I hosted donation events and personally matched what we raised for the benefit of programs related to Dugan’s pet project Safe Schools. I have his signature on three certificates of appreciation for my “tireless” volunteer service.
I have NO prior legal troubles. In my mid 40’s I have TWO traffic tickets.
Hardly seems that I pose an ongoing threat to my community.
None of this matters to Dugan. My reward for supporting my community was him proceeding to charge me with crimes that not only didn’t happen, those charges cost me my career, my business (which is how I funded my donations to his projects) and now my home.
So yes, in the number of years that he has been in office any human would make mistakes. However not every human would willing destroy another person’s life to defend his own public image.
It is disgusting to me that Dugan, and you as his staff, are spouting forgiveness and mistakes are “part of being human”. I referenced the same ideal in discussing my case with him, but he dismissed the topic as a trial argument for a jury, not for discussing a plea with him.
So, Devon, Niki, Bren and Mary…mistakes ARE human. You are correct. But your boss, Dugan, in spite of the opportunity, refused to extend to me the graciousness or consideration you and Dugan want me as a voter to extend to him.
My vote is my verdict, he will get what he gives.
Transparency? Hmmmm? Funny– the Dugan supporters on here have all listed their names. How’s that for transparency?
You’re right, facts are facts. It sure would have been nice if the Source would have chosen to fairly and accurately report ALL of them, instead of a select few.
And if the true concern is HONESTY at the candidate forum, let’s talk about the whoppers offered up by Flaherty– the DA’s office has one of the lowest conviction rates in the state. Not true. DA employees were coerced into endorsing Dugan. COMPLETELY not true.
As for your concerns about “hypocrisy”– it’s okay for Flaherty supporters to speak about “other’s experiences that were not their own”, but we shouldn’t? Actually, you’re right– I’d rather take the high road. What a shame that the anonymous Flaherty supporters can’t say the same.
if you are uninformed enough to believe this is one even please go to KTVZ’s story on this and read the comments.
One of them holds a copy of inappropriate emails from Dugan and a copy of the settlement check she received. After her settlement she was a theft victim two different times and the DA’s office refused to prosecute.
coincidence?
This behavior is not isolated to one disgruntled former employee. Do some research.
From Harry Truman, we got “The Buck Stops Here”.
From Dugan, we get “Aw shucks, I didn’t know. These things happen…” The happenings have to be pretty bad, for them
to cost the taxpayers $125,000 before a lawsuit is even filed.
That is a substantial pre-filing settlement and one may correctly conclude that the commodity obtained for that price was silence.
What is beneath comtempt, however, is that Mr. Dugan then looses his deputies to defame, in this space,
the victims of unlawful employment practices in his
own office.
The DA’s job is to hold people accountable. Dugan is unable
to face accountability himself.
For the record, I have no confidence in Mr. Flaherty do do any better. But I cannot see how he could possibly do worse.
As Cromwell told the Long Parliament “Go, you have been here
far too long for any good you are doing. Go, and let us have done with you.”
I am not surprised that current employees are sticking up for their boss. However, the facts are what they are. The behavior that Ms. Vaughan displayed to not one but actually 7 female deputy district attorney’s WAS IGNORED not only by Mr. Dugan and Mr. Nakihara but pretty much the entire office. Everyone knew what was going on and the management did nothing. It is a LIE for Mr. Dugan to say that he knew nothing of Ms. Vaughan’s behavior. Seven different female deputy attorney’s were treated in an appalling manner not just by Ms. Vaughan but by Dugan as well. The fact is this..she supervised them and she harassed them. Everybody knew it was going on. It happened on Dugan’s watch..so ultimately he is to blame. I don’t believe that these women couldn’t “hack it”…they truly had a tyrannical boss. To say otherwise is a lie. Although I’m not impressed with Flaherty, I think we can stomach him for 4 years. Its long past time for a change. Dugan needs to go.
Why did Dugan say at the recent debate that he categorically denied the matter if this is blown out of proportion? And if nothing happened, and it was just a personality conflict, why $125,000? That is a lot of money, especially since I actually know there is a cap of $200,000. $200,000 would have been the absolute maximum amount possible, going to a contested trial, etc. No, there is something more to this…turn a blind eye if you want, but this is not right. As an elected DA responsible for upholding the law, this is a big deal. This is part of the record. And who is more biased than the Bulletin about this? There is something more to this. Regardless of the election, I hope this all comes to the surface, including why the Bulletin is so insistent on covering this up.
Jody Vaughan is being thrown under a bus to serve the Source’s anti-Bulletin purposes. This article and its comments indicate that it’s about Mike Dugan, but Flowers makes it about Jody Vaughan. I get it, The Source, you’re a bunch of mavericks out to show that an alternative weekly can out-scandal the traditional media. Well, you have. And in the process, dragged one of the state’s finest prosecutors through the mud with a one-sided story.
Being a new prosecutor is not for everyone, there is high turnover in every office among entry level DDAs. You handle as many as 1000 cases per year depending on the county. You earn respect and camaraderie in the Deschutes Co DA’s office by working hard. Not because of your sex, not because of your age. I didn’t start my career here, and have “only” worked here 4 years. The fact that I’m still a newer employee compared to my colleagues speaks volumes about this office. I have never seen any of the behavior or attitude described by the former employees from Vaughan or anyone else in the office.
Hmmmmmmmm: Patrick Flaherty has promised “all” of the DA’s Office employees on his campaign facebook that he will not fire us if elected, because he wants to “give us an opportunity to shine under competent leadership.” He “feels sorry” for us and believes we will be “happier” working under him according to his statements at the candidate forum. So any of us who would be willing to stay, including Jody Vaughan, including the DDAs who actually handled the Black case, even whoever he thinks is responsible for the “many people wrongfully in jail” (candidates’ forum quote) don’t need to worry about being fired if he is elected because he says so.
I support Mike Dugan because he is the better candidate. He hires and keeps brilliant career prosecutors who I learn from every day. He makes necessary large budget cuts that (so far) have not substantially impacted my ability to do my job. He makes broad policy decisions then leaves me (and us) to do our jobs. These are the qualities that are needed in an elected DA.
I have to agree with Devon and Bren. In Mr. Flowers’ attempt at journalism, he failed to fully investigate all of the facts which led to a very biased and inaccurate piece of work. I was happy to see that the Bulletin yesterday actually interviewed employees at the office to be able to share additional information which was more accurate.
I also had the pleasure and opportunity to work with Ms. Vaughan. I observed her on a daily basis mentor and coach young lawyers. She always strove to be fair and to share with them her skills. I never saw her retaliate, discriminate, or act in anyway inappropriately towards any staff in the office. In fact I saw her attempt to prepare and encourage both male and female misdemeanor deputies for promotion to the felony team where appropriate. Ms. Vaughan is an excellent trial attorney from whom any lawyer can learn. I wish that when Mr. Flowers investigated and wrote his story that he had checked the facts more closely. In his attempt at journalism, he has drug Ms. Vaughan’s name and Mr. Dugan’s name through the mud based on only part of the story. This is what makes it hard to believe the media when a slanted story like this is released. Ms. Vaughan works tirelessly for the safety of the community as she handles some of the most difficult person crimes crimes. Ms. Vaughan is a pillar in the DA’s office that deserves the respect of the community. Mr. Dugan has developed an office of prosecutors that keep the community safe under his direction.
I find it interesting that deputy district attorney Brentley Foster resorts to a trash the victim defense. It is especially low considering that the comments were leveled at those that have tried to remain out of the line of fire.
Just a question to ponder… If nothing was wrong with the leadership why did the state pay out a large settlement before a lawsuit was even filed????
I have seen the real DA drama for years. It’s amazing to me how the same people who have said “don’t let Dugan talk to the media, he’s going to screw everything up” are the same people who are backing him to win this election. Why do you want him to win when behind closed doors you all think he’s an idiot? He is a liar as well. He’s been caught. No people this was not an incident between two employees. This woman, Jody Vaughn, drove away 5, yes 5, female prosecutors. This should have been a class action law suit where they paid out money to everyone who was harrassed.
Nikki West what a joke, you should keep your comments to yourself. For the record she can’t do her job so she kisses ass in order to keep her check. Others do her job there at the DA’s office. The DA’s office is a political place. If you kiss the right ass you can get away with anything. Jody Vaughn pushed 5 young prosecutors out. Dugan should have fired her when the first one left. He didn’t. He is a liar. They all are.
The silence is screaming at you Deschutes County. The Bulletin’s message is loud and clear.
It is now clear it is not just about the election of the DA. I suspect it is deeper and uglier than we can imagine. The DOJ needs to investigate their complete silence.
I have so much more respect for The Source for reporting on this. I don’t always agree with their opinions or endorsements, (remember, they endorsed Dugan) but I appreciate them providing the public with information that impacts us, our tax dollars, and our quality of life.
PS. Do an internet search on Jody Vaughan Deputy District Attorney. History repeats it’s self even if it’s a job history.
Is it just me or do ALL THE CAPITAL LETTERS make some look a little crazy?
I fail to understand how people who have not pushed for an article or been interviewed for an article deserve to be slammed simply because an article was written. To put it in terms that everyone can understand, the victim of an assault does not deserve to be bashed simply because she talked to the police and a newspaper reported it.
Why does Pepsi care who wins the race for DA? Someone dig, you’ll find the dirt!
“A victim”– You just proved my points, both with your anonymous namecalling (again) AND your point that people who haven’t pushed for an article or been interviewed for it don’t deserve to be slammed. Ms. Vaughan didn’t push for this article, wasn’t interviewed for it, and didn’t deserve to be slammed in print without any kind of chance to defend herself. It’s not any less fair to you than it was to her. Deal with it.
‘On the outside looking in’, My comments are from my almost 15 yrs of working at the DA’s ofc. Showing my immediate supervisors, that I can be trusted to do a the job given to me as the grand jury coordinator. Your comments, are offensive cussing, and childish in behaviour, as I can only come to the conclusion that you worked amongst us long enough to realize you were in the wrong job. You can stand ‘On the outside looking in’, crying about things, that you could never understand. JK/PA? While we stand inside crying over the many victims of crimes, and none make me cry like the crimes against children and babies. I am in a job were I’m making a positive difference. We get to educate 14 citizens of this wonderful county, to the inner workings of this office. I have to say that 98% leave with a good feeling about how our office is run. Again, I say vote for Dugan. Have a nice day!
Leave me out of your politics Nikki. Everyone knows that if I have something to say I don’t use an anonymous source to say it. I say it like it is cause that’s how I roll. I am not bitter, I left for greener pastures, I still have amazing friends who still work there and equally amazing friends who don’t. Don’t dirty my name over political BS I can care less about. I don’t like receiving text messages that my name or in this case initials are being called out.
RE: Above Pepsi Comments
Moore money = Moore turning the other cheek
TS Weekly
I am grateful to you for reporting this information.
Your motives do not matter to me. If web hits, boosting circulation for ad revenue, or plain investigative journalism drove you to report on a problem that has been buried for far too long is what matters. Thank you.
Thank you as well to Eric Flowers, you revealed the catalyst that produced change!
Congrats Patrick!