Running a political blog, there are a lot of times you get “things” sent to you that make for interesting reading regarding political candidates. Sometimes, you have to put them in the category of BS. Other times, they’re a little tougher to explain away.
Today, I received one of those that’s a little tough to explain away.
I’m reading a South Dakota Clerk of Courts history report sent to me regarding Rapid City Council candidate Dallas DeCory, Sr. DeCory’s campaign has been pretty silent since the Second of April, when the Rapid City Journal had a write up in the newspaper about his entrance into the Ward 4 race:
In Ward 4, Dallas DeCory Sr. will face incumbent Alderman John Roberts in the June 2 municipal election. In Ward 5, Cassi Andrews has challenged incumbent Alderman Brad Estes.
DeCory, 39, an enrolled member of the Oglala Sioux Tribe, said in a press release that he would strive to improve race and human relations if elected to represent Ward 4 residents in north-central Rapid City.
DeCory owns and operates a local roofing company, having worked in the industry for more than 16 years. He said his roofing experience has reinforced his understanding of hard work and personal drive and has sharpened the ethics he will use to produce community unity.
Apparently over the past 16 years, in-between “sharpening the ethics,” there were some other things that came up that are a little tougher to talk about in a campaign setting.
On this report, I’m reading requests for three protection orders for Domestic Abuse (see asterisks **) – one in 2006, one in 2007, and one in 2009, each from different women, with him filing one against the person who filed it against him in one instance. In case you’re wondering, in those instances, I’ve redacted the names of those involved who aren’t running for anything, although everything noted is public record. Plus, there was also a protection order filed for stalking, which was later dismissed, as well as a charge of Simple Assault (Domestic violence) which also seems to have been dismissed.
Apparently, this information has been floating out there for a day, as the candidate has already posted a fiery response on his facebook page:
Interestingly, he blames his opponent, who has no connection to the person who had sent the information to me. And, while he notes “protection orders that I filed against my ex girlfriends and some counter protection orders that were filed against me,” I’m reading it three against him to one from him against a girlfriend.
Is this information that the voters should be forearmed with prior to making their decision? How do you think this is going to affect the race?