Roger, Davidson trade sharp words in DA debate

Erin Neff

Tuesday, Oct. 1, 2002 | 9:22 a.m.

A third-party candidate joined David Roger and Mike Davidson on stage Monday night at a district attorney's debate, but neither of them paid much mind to him, or to some of the questions -- for that matter.

Roger, a Republican and deputy chief district attorney, and Davidson, a Democrat and assistant district attorney, had their sharpest words to date during the forum sponsored by Southern Nevada law enforcement organizations at Las Vegas Academy.

Davidson spent much of his time on a question about an arresting officer's relationship with the district attorney assigned to the case to deflect attention from Roger's law enforcement endorsements and by reiterating that he is involved in each decision about which cases to prosecute.

Roger took the same question to tell the crowd of about 200 that Davidson works in the County Government Center, not in the courthouse.

Meanwhile, Independent American Party candidate Joel Hansen spent his opening remarks thanking Roger and Davidson for allowing him to debate and discussing his community service in Boy Scouts.

Later, Hansen changed his position on the marijuana initiative, coming out against it despite telling the Sun in an interview last week that he supported the measure.

Davidson completely ignored the question about drugs, spending the first 45 seconds of his answer to directly address Roger, before adding, "But I'll tell you this about drug possession ..."

Roger, who has picked up all of the major law enforcement endorsements, played to a fairly favorable crowd, and drew big laughs when he stood for his closing statement at the same time the sponsor's banner fell from atop the stage curtain.

"That's what's going to happen to criminals when I'm district attorney," he said after the banner crashed to the floor.

He also amended his stump statement about being the only candidate who has looked a jury into the eye, by saying, "pointing to the defendant who sits at the table where Mr. Davidson spent so much of his career."

Davidson, a former civil and criminal defense attorney who has worked for the district attorney's office for the past four years, said his entire experience gives him greater depth.

"Anyone who brings one dimension to the table is one dimensional," Davidson said, referring to Roger's 15 years as a prosecutor.

Throughout the debate, Davidson deflected criticism of his lack of prosecutorial experience by saying District Attorney Stewart Bell didn't have any when he took office eight years ago.

But Roger said he doesn't believe that precedent should continue.

"I don't believe in status quo," he said. "Mr. Bell has done a fine job, but we have to move forward and that doesn't include Mr. Davidson."

Davidson also wrote off Roger in his closing, by reminding that he serves as Bell's assistant, and mentioning that Roger "has never supervised anyone in this office, or anywhere else he's worked."

"Let David keep doing the job that he does best, let me keep doing the job that I do best in an office that works well," he said.