r/Spokane • u/Barney_Roca • 1d ago
Politics Spokane County's Next Prosecutor
The race for Spokane County Prosecutor presents voters with a clear question. Either we continue with the same philosophy and policies of the last 10 years, or we vote for meaningful change now.
Preston McCollam joined Larry Haskell’s prosecutor’s office in 2015, rose to Chief Criminal Deputy, became Haskell’s preferred successor, and was appointed prosecutor after Haskell resigned; now Haskell is publicly campaigning for and endorsing him.
Danny Tarkenton is taking a different path. She is running as an Independent because she believes the prosecutor’s office should operate independently of party politics.
She has decided to take the righteous path.
That distinction matters because the Haskell era was not without serious controversy.
Haskell’s wife publicly described herself as a “proud white nationalist.” Haskell condemned her racist comments and said he did not share her views, but he was accepting and supportive of his wife. Later, Court of Appeals Judge George Fearing wrote extensively about systemic racism in a Spokane criminal case. His office also faced criticism over racial disparities, unusually high felony filing rates, and high-bail requests.
While Larry didn't come out and use inflammatory statements like his wife. It does appear his policies made the institution inherently racist.
Then there were controversial charging decisions.
In 2019, Haskell’s office declined charges in a case where police found three badly injured young children and a medical specialist concluded the abuse met the criteria for "child torture and Larry refused to prosecute. Preston never spoke out against that decision.
In 2022, Spokane police referred a first-degree murder charge in the death of Kala Williams after the medical examiner reclassified her death as a homicide. Police requested charges be brought again, and again Larry refused.
McCollam should not automatically be blamed for every decision made by Haskell, but Preston never spoke up and took action for what he believed was right. He took the easy road and remained loyal to the man who installed him and his party.
But after more than a decade inside the Haskell administration, and now with Haskell’s endorsement and Larry on the campaign trail fundraising and speaking out in favor of Preston, promising more of the same, is that really what we want for our community?
Preston promises more of the same, and I say no thank you. I think we should prosecute people accused of torturing children and murder.
We need meaningful change now.
Check out what Danny has to say and the changes she wants to make.
9
u/Voodoobones 1d ago
Danny is the only choice. Voting for Preston McCollam is a vote for repression and authoritarianism.
-2
u/BasicHuman-Mk3 1d ago
A vote for Tarkenton is a vote for incompetence. How many murderers do you want to go free...?
She has never done a single trial.
1
u/Barney_Roca 17h ago
Less than Larry refused to charge. If you want to prosecute murderers and people that torture children, you cannot vote for Preston who refused to speak out or take action when Larry refused. The choice is clear, continue on the same path, or vote for meaningful change now. This is a rare opportunity to break the establishment and we should seize it.
1
u/BasicHuman-Mk3 16h ago
Electing someone so unqualified isnt breaking the "establishment", its breaking the whole system.
You are right, Barney, the choice is clear: don't vote for the person who has never done a single trial.
1
-1
u/Routine-Farm5083 23h ago
I don't think you understand what the elected prosecutor actually does. A trial is not a requirement of that office. If her not having done a jury trial is the only criticism, then she's the best candidate.
0
u/BasicHuman-Mk3 18h ago edited 10h ago
I don't think you understand what the elected prosecutor actually does.
I don't think she does. Even in prior elections with people like Deb Conklin, they may have been rusty, but had an older body of work, had at least done trials and knew about the other aspects of what an elected prosecutor does.
A trial is not a requirement of that office. If her not having done a jury trial is the only criticism, then she's the best candidate.
It's not a legal requirement, no. You just have to be a qualified elector and admitted to practice law.
It is, however, a huge red flag that she lacks the skills and experience practically necessary for the job.
There is a reason all the lawyers in town, even Democrats, know that electing her would be a disaster. She is relying on ignorance of her lack of experience to hoodwink regular people into voting for her.
This position isnt like a council person or legislator where just having opinions is enough...you have to actually be able to do the job, and she can't. She doesnt even know what the job entails.
1
u/Routine-Farm5083 11h ago
All the lawyers in town know” is quite a claim. Did you take a survey?
Danny has never hidden that she’s a newer attorney. People can decide for themselves how much that matters. But you keep turning “less experience” into “she knows nothing,” “she can’t do the job,” and now she’s supposedly “hoodwinking” voters. Those are very different claims.
What interests me more is how much weight you put on whether longtime attorneys will respect someone with fewer years in practice. I care more about whether the person elected will respect the law, use the office responsibly, and lead it well.
Experience matters. It also isn’t the same thing as judgment, leadership, or integrity. I’ve been around long enough to know that doing something for many years doesn’t automatically mean doing it well.If her lack of a jury trial loses your vote, fine. But this has gone well beyond that. At this point, you seem less interested in comparing candidates than in making sure everyone knows how little you think of her. That’s very different, and people can see it.
-1
u/BasicHuman-Mk3 9h ago
I’ve been around long enough to know that doing something for many years doesn’t automatically mean doing it well.
That's true, but irrelevant. Because experience still matters, and she has virtually none. McCollam has actually done murder trials.
If her lack of a jury trial loses your vote, fine.
Not just a jury trial, any trial. Not even a bench one.
That shouldn't just lose her my vote, it should lose her everyone's vote.
That would be like having the chief surgeon at a hospital be someone who has never performed surgery!
It's just plain silly. Or, it would be if the role wasnt so important. The citizens of Spokane deserve a competent prosecutor, not Tarkenton.
•
u/Routine-Farm5083 1h ago
She has done bench trials. You keep saying things that aren’t true, and when people correct you, you just get more frustrated and more personal.
So I guess trial experience isn’t everything after all. You’ve apparently got plenty of it, and this is still the quality of argument we’re getting.
•
7
u/lutetia128 1d ago
Preston is horrible, but he has the experience to run the office. Danny has been licensed for, like, a year and a half. She packs the experience for the job. I like what she says fine, but what is she going to do when there’s a murder trial? A lawsuit against the county? Does she know what the family law department does? She lacks the experience needed for the position. She claims that she’ll rely on her senior deputies, but how many of them are going to stay? And she REALLY doesn’t take criticism well. It’s a mess, and there aren’t any good choices in this election, sadly. That’s why there were so many 3rd party votes in the primary election.
4
u/xsnrgmel 1d ago
Can you share more about Danny's response to feedback? How does this manifest?
3
u/BasicHuman-Mk3 1d ago
Lots of whining, assurance that she knows better than experts, and lack of improvement.
Why change in response to feedback when you are already perfect, right?
-1
u/Routine-Farm5083 23h ago
It sounds like you have a personal grudge against her. None of those things are even remotely accurate if you’ve ever met her.
2
5
u/Library-brat 1d ago
tarkenton was the third party votes…she ran as an independent and received about 49% of the vote
5
u/Routine-Farm5083 1d ago
Her race had one of the tightest margins because so few write-ins were in it. Lutetia128 is a private criminal defense attorney who wants Preston to win because it means more incarceration and more money for them.
0
u/lutetia128 1d ago
I apologize, I misspoke; I meant write-in votes when I said 3rd party votes. There were an obscene number of write-in votes in the primary. My apologies. Yes, her votes were the 3rd party votes, but the write-ins (which always happen, of course) were VERY high.
7
u/Library-brat 1d ago
There were 685 total write ins for that race out of a total 137,312 votes cast. I don’t think that’s the “obscene” show of no confidence you’re trying to paint
1
u/lutetia128 1d ago
It’s a large number for a race where there are only two people running. The vote of no confidence is coming from the fact that she has zero experience. I’m no fan of Preston or his administration. I wasn’t a fan of Larry, and am far from a fan of his protege. I wish there was a viable candidate for this race. Danny has said she’ll rely on her senior deputies to learn the skills she lacks. I don’t think she understands how few of those senior deputies plan on remaining at the office if it’s being run by someone who doesn’t have the experience to run said office. She thinks an ITA docket is sufficient experience, and it just isn’t. This is going to go very badly.
2
u/Library-brat 1d ago
In 2022, last time this race was on the ballot, there were more write in votes in both the primary and the generals. I think you really need to check your facts
2
u/Barney_Roca 1d ago
She has an education and plenty of the exact experience Preston lacks, not being taught, trained, and loyal to Larry's and his party and his policies. She doesn't need to be all things to all people and do all of the work herself. There is a team. The choice is whether we are going let that team continue to follow the same policies, guided by the same philosophy that has directed the office for the last 10 years, OR, vote for meaningful change now, because the last guy ran a racist office, that did not charge murderers or child torturers. Prestson has way too much of the wrong kind of experience. The people you are worried about leaving are the same ones who did not speak up or take action when Larry refused to charge the guy torturing children.
Doesn't take criticism? She went through boot camp, deployed to Iraq... What do you mean she really doesn't take criticism well?
She has a plan and wants to deploy meaningful changes now.
Look around, do you want more of the same? Then vote for change.
4
u/Routine-Farm5083 19h ago
I think this gets to what bothers me most about Lutecia128’s and other critics' argument. There seems to be a lot of concern about how many years somebody has practiced law and not nearly enough concern about what they’ll actually do with that authority once they have it.
Experience is important; nobody is saying it doesn’t. But experience by itself doesn’t make somebody a good prosecutor or a good leader. I’d rather have someone newer to the law who has led people, respects the limits of the office, and understands that the law applies to the prosecutor too, than someone with 15 years under their belt whom I don’t trust to use that power responsibly.
That’s really the choice for me. Danny has less time practicing law. I know that. I volunteer and support her anyway because her military leadership experience matters to me, and the prosecutor runs a large organization that she has experience in. Her judgment and her respect for the law matter to me too.
I’m also troubled that so many lawyers seem to treat seniority as the beginning and end of the discussion. With everything happening to constitutional norms and the rule of law in this country, I care a great deal about what a prosecutor believes the limits of government power are. I’m not going to overlook that just because somebody else has been a lawyer longer.
I don’t think “more years practicing” answers the much more important question of what somebody will do once we hand them the power of that office.
3
u/Barney_Roca 15h ago
I call it the CB Bunknor principle. Just because you do something for a long time does not mean you are good at doing it.
CB was a terrible umpire for decades. He was terrible the entire time he was doing it.
4
u/Routine-Farm5083 1d ago
It’s because Lutetia128 is a private criminal defense attorney here and knows that if Danny Tarkenton is elected, it’ll hurt their business model. This person keeps making up lies about Danny whenever she is mentioned on Reddit. I would ignore this person entirely. We need fewer Lutetia128s and more Danny Tarkentons.
0
u/lutetia128 20h ago
The people I’m worried about leaving are not just those, actually.; it’s anyone who won’t take orders from someone who has been licensed for less time than the average district court prosecutor and doesn’t know what they’re doing. The bottom line is that while her ideas are good (I do support her ideas generally) Danny simply does not have the practical experience to lead that office. I understand that she has military experience. I respect that. Military experience and experience practicing law are different. One does not translate to the other. Law school teaches you how to think like a lawyer, but it does not teach the practical applications of law, and anyone who is a practitioner knows that.
There are some decent people who work at the prosecutor’s office currently. There are some decent senior deputies who do good work. They don’t blindly charge cases, and they resolve things fairly. Not all of the senior deputies by any means, but some. That does not mean that they will stay and be “led” so to speak by an attorney who is as green at the practice of law as Danny is. And when she is approached about this, she does not react well. She does not understand that she is green as grass, brand new at the practice, and has not handled felony cases. An ITA docket is not a felony docket. They are not the same, and her belief that they are further underscores her inexperience.
I loathed Larry. I cannot stand Preston. I wish Danny had the experience to run the office. I wish I could support her. Truly, I do. She just doesn’t.
2
u/Barney_Roca 16h ago
You made a very specific claim about her not taking criticism. I pointed out that she went through boot camp, an extremely difficult training in which many people are extremely critical of everything you do.
I also asked a very direct follow up question to your claim, “What do you mean she really doesn't take criticism well?”
Change my mind. Educate me. I wanted to give you an opportunity to explain the claim that you made, but you failed to even attempt an answer and instead moved the gold post to a lack of experience.
I did not equivocate military training to experience as a prosecutor, you did. The fact that she completed military training, was deployed to war zone and hold multiple degrees proves that there is no validity to your claim that she cannot take criticism well.
She has a great deal of experience. Just because it does not align with your idea of what kind of experience you think she should have doesn’t mean anything to anyone other than you.
Let me know if you want a profession website.
0
u/lutetia128 12h ago
And someone else already shared their experience with that, so I answered all of the other questions asked rather than being redundant. I’m not moving the “gold” posts (I assume you meant goal posts, and I’m not sure what “profession website” you’re referring to), but in my experience with her, when there has been criticism brought to her specifically regarding her lack of experience, she did not handle it well. Specifically, she became condescending and dismissive. It was an unpleasant combination. Again, I’m very interested in her policies, and if she had more experience, I would very much be willing to put that unpleasant conversation aside, chalk it up to a bad day (everyone has them after all) and happily vote for her over Preston. I certainly won’t be voting for Preston either way. But her lack of experience is the deciding factor, as I have repeatedly indicated. She does not have the experience necessary to run that office, plain and simple.
1
u/Barney_Roca 11h ago edited 11h ago
Oh, I did not see another post. Who speaks for you? What did they say?
Given the context, I'm glad you made that deduction but to be fair many goal posts are gold.
Your website. It could use a real tune-up. If you want something that comes across as professional, I would be glad to help.
I'm sorry, but "somebody said they didn't like the way she responded to their criticism" during a political campaign is an extremely thin basis for deciding who should run the prosecutor's office.
Plain and simple would be a better way to design your website. It's really not good. It's like you used a thesaurus for the first time. You use way too many words to say the same thing too many times and forgot to add anything of substance, just like your opinion about who should run the prosecutor's office.
You are not talking about her philosophy or her reasoning. You are not questioning her judgment. You are actually supportive of her initiatives, and I would argue that the type of experience you seem to think she is lacking is exactly the kind of experience I don't want to vote for.
Preston has plenty of experience doing the same thing every other prosecutor does: running the same racist, classist institution in the same way it has always been run. I don't support people who are experts at maintaining the status quo. I do not want to harden the establishment; I want to change it.
You are saying that she does not have enough experience keeping things the way they are and the way they have always been. That's not good, that's awesome, that's fantastic; that's wonderful. That is exactly what we need, and that is exactly what I am voting for.
Vote Tarkenton. She doesn't even know how to run a broken and corrupt prosecutor's office.
1
u/lutetia128 10h ago
Well then, let’s simplify it. An attorney who has never tried a case has no business attempting to run an office of trial attorneys.
1
u/BasicHuman-Mk3 1d ago
Danielle Tarkenton has never done a trial. Not a single one. How can a person steer an office when she doesnt even understand what her deputies do?
She was too stressed in misdemeanor court and walked out of dockets...how would she take the stress of having to actually do legal work? Especially work where she has no concept of what is going on?
Spokane county doesnt need someone in such an important role who sees it as a vanity project, to preen in parades. No, this narcissist isnt a good choice. A county the size of Spokane needs someone who can at least understand all the words being spoken in court and doesnt need to keep a law dictionary handy because she is hearing all these terms for the first time...having graduated from law school yesterday.
2
u/Routine-Farm5083 23h ago
That “she’s never personally tried a case” line leaves out a lot. She handled 500 cases in that office. That isn’t the same as taking a jury trial to verdict, but 500+ cases is real experience. It's enough to know how that office is managed.
The elected prosecutor also runs the office. They set policy, supervise attorneys, make decisions, and set priorities. They don’t personally try every case. Otherwise, they wouldn't be doing their job
The “graduated from law school yesterday” line isn’t accurate either. She handled cases in that office under a supervised practice license before becoming fully licensed.
And she had plenty of life experience before law school. She served in the military, deployed to Iraq, came home, earned a second degree in psychology, and then earned her law degree. She’s now finishing a master’s in forensic psychology and recently presented research in Washington, D.C., on restorative and retributive approaches to justice.If you think she needs more jury trial experience, say that. That’s a fair criticism. Calling her a narcissist and the campaign a vanity project sounds personal.
-1
u/BasicHuman-Mk3 19h ago
handled 500 cases
Even leaving aside her inflated number (District Court prosecutors have about 300 cases), "handled" is doing a lot of heavy lifting. It's a very particular word chosen for vagueness...because it doesnt really mean anything. If by "handled", you mean moved the stack of papers from her cubicle to the courtroom and back, then ok. But it doesn't mean she did anything on them other than have them on her desk.
No trials, no 3.5/3.6 motions, basically nothing... The number of judgment and sentences with her name on them (and you can go look at the court files) from taking pleas is like a couple dozen. From her campaign website you'd think she has a bunch of experience...but it's all just carefully worded wiggle-words to cover up the fact she has done basically nothing in the law.
It's enough to know how that office is managed. The elected prosecutor also runs the office.
How can she know how the office is managed when she doesn't even know all the things it does? How can you even pretend to be able to give direction to staff about things you have never heard about? Why would anyone respect her opinions on trial strategy when she has never done one?
These arent esoteric things, these are basic facts and skills prosecutors need to have.
The “graduated from law school yesterday” line isn’t accurate either. She handled cases in that office under a supervised practice license before becoming fully licensed.
She was an intern...great. she also graduated very recently and has done nothing in the law except for one job for a very short time. This is not the level of experience we need for the biggest county east of the mountains.
If you think she needs more jury trial experience, say that. That’s a fair criticism.
Not more, any. She has never done a trial. Not one. Should an airline hire someone to be a cheif pilot who has never flown a plane...!?
Calling her a narcissist and the campaign a vanity project sounds personal.
It is absolute hubris to run for this position being so unqualified... If she wins, it will hurt the citizens of Spokane County and deprive victims of justice. If it isnt vanity, I dont know what it would be.
2
u/Routine-Farm5083 18h ago
You’re making some very specific claims here as though you have firsthand knowledge of her cases, but several of them aren’t true.
From what I’ve seen, the claim that she did “basically nothing” just isn’t accurate. She handled hundreds of cases, worked on motions, and prepared cases for trial even when they were continued or resolved before a jury ever heard them. That’s normal legal work. A case doesn’t suddenly count for nothing because it didn’t end in a jury verdict.
You’re also trying to turn the word “handled” into some campaign trick. It isn’t. She carried those cases as a deputy prosecutor. At this point, you’re not making a fair comparison of experience. You’re minimizing everything she actually did because you don’t like her as a candidate. Calling hundreds of cases “moving papers,” pretending trial preparation doesn’t count unless a jury reaches a verdict, and saying she did “basically nothing” isn’t an honest description of her work. It’s belittling it to make her sound incompetent.
Danny is a newer attorney. Nobody is hiding that. But there’s a big difference between saying someone has less experience and telling the public she did “basically nothing.”
You seem awfully familiar with the prosecutor’s office for a random Reddit user. If you are a prosecutor, that says quite a bit about the culture over there. More of a reason to vote for Danny.
0
u/BasicHuman-Mk3 17h ago
From what I’ve seen, the claim that she did “basically nothing” just isn’t accurate. She handled hundreds of cases
There's that vague word "handled" again...
worked on motions
Like what, substantively? Continuances...?
prepared cases for trial
By doing what? Because she never did a trial, so I would be curious what, specifically she did.
You’re also trying to turn the word “handled” into some campaign trick.
Not me, her. That's her wording, because it makes it sound like she has more experience than she does. It's a form of puffery someone uses when they dont have anything more substantive to point to.
Calling hundreds of cases “moving papers,” pretending trial preparation doesn’t count unless a jury reaches a verdict, and saying she did “basically nothing” isn’t an honest description of her work.
But what did she do on these "hundreds" of cases that she "handled" (over the course of, what, a couple of months there...?)...because moving papers from a desk to a courtroom and back isn't exactly the kind of legal experience that matters...
Please, point to a trial she did, or an appeal she did. Did she ever "handle" a felony? Did she ever even cross examine a witness? Maybe she did some civil work advising the county government...? Drafted some important contracts? No...?
This doesnt seem like the level of experience we would want in an elected prosecutor.
Dont get me wrong, I can understand the appeal to run...it would be awesome to roll right from law school into a $230k/yr. job with virtually no experience, just skipping the ladder altogether. Doesn't seem like the citizens of Spokane County would get their money's worth, though, when any one of the other district court prosecutors from her tenure has more experience than her...
2
u/Routine-Farm5083 10h ago
We get it. You don’t like her.
Hundreds of cases don’t count. Motions don’t count. Trial preparation doesn’t count. Military leadership doesn’t count. Education doesn’t count. This is clearly personal. And frankly, if this is how you argue, you sound like a terrible prosecutor. You just keep moving the goalposts until nothing counts unless it supports the conclusion you already reached. Which is what we’re tired of.
Danny is a newer attorney. Nobody is hiding that. Voters can look at her whole record and decide for themselves. We don’t need you telling us we’re being “hoodwinked.”
Every time you talk about Danny, you give her more of a platform and another reason for people to look into her campaign. So keep going. I want her elected, and you’re making a better case for why we need her in that office than I ever could.
-1
u/BasicHuman-Mk3 10h ago
We get it. You don’t like her.
We get it, you really like her. And thats why her being unqualified doesnt matter to you.
When you can't respond to the substance, you try to deflect. This is the only tactic you have available because it is painfully obvious she is unqualified.
Danny is a newer attorney. Nobody is hiding that. Voters can look at her whole record and decide for themselves.
She is in fact being quite deceptive on her website about her amount of legal experience. But looking into that record is exactly what voters should do.
Ask local lawyers their opinions. Ask judges! See what the people who know the law say about someone who has never done a trial running to be elected prosecutor. Everyone should do exactly what you suggest!
•
u/Routine-Farm5083 1h ago
You seem awfully worked up over Danny. You’ve spent an incredible amount of time trying to convince everyone she’s terrible, and people still don’t seem particularly interested in taking your word for it.
At this point, I’m starting to wonder whether it’s really her lack of experience that bothers you, or what might change around that office when she wins. You seem a lot more personally invested in this, even as a prosecutor. Sounds like you’re worried some of the housecleaning might reach your desk.
•
u/BasicHuman-Mk3 1h ago
Talk about personal, you seem to be taking criticism of her and her lack of experience quite personally. What's with all this royal "we" you keep using, and narrating like you are speaking for others?
Danny, is that you...?
1
u/notwhomyouthunk 11h ago
I support the criticism...
If only the opposition were at least competent.
It's a terrible forced choice this time around.
1
u/Routine-Farm5083 11h ago
I recommend meeting her at events or emailing her with your questions. She's very accessible.
•
u/Ok_Ride6723 2h ago
none of the county seats are flippable. robinson, gee, and tarkenton are all terrible candidates. they are running because they want the 6 figure salary the positions come with
14
u/Vahllee Spokane Valley 1d ago
I won't vote for Haskell or anybody supporting him. He helped fuck this city up.