More on Durden, etc.

As a follow-up to the earlier post on Durden running against Judge Sweat, we've become privy to some internal courthouse chatter on the matter, and a few others. Here goes:

1) Some of the specific complaints about Judge Sweat (it's not clear whether these are Durden's complaints or just generally shared ones) are that he goes way too long on some of his hearings, and that some of his rulings, in particular those involving domestic cases, have been questionable. In my opinion, the first is probably due to lack of judicial experience more than anything else, a problem which Durden would obviously have if elected as well. The second complaint is more substantive, but without some more specific data about the propriety of specific rulings, it's hard for me to say.

2) The general feeling around the courthouse is that, although there might be room to challenge Judge Sweat based on some of these issues, Mr. Durden is probably not the man for the job. The consensus seems to be that Sweat will be better at the politics involved than Durden.

3) In non-Durden courthouse gossip, it appears that Mr. Mauldin might put up a candidate to beat Mr. Wiltshire in the Solicitor General election. Word is Mauldin is afraid that otherwise Wiltshire might do a good enough job as Solicitor to mount another challenge against him for DA in the future. However, what happens if, and I'm just throwing this out there, Wiltshire loses and decides to come after Mauldin's job anyway? At least if he were SG, he'd have to decide whether to resign to run. Mauldin may end up making his own bed if he's not careful. If Mauldin goes this route, ADA Brian Patterson has been mentioned as a possible candidate.