Apology tour: Can Dumler remorse salvage supe seat?

Scottsville Supervisor Chris Dumler is a cad. He doesn't like that description– and he's been called worse– but says, "I wouldn't say that's an unfair characterization." This is on February 27, the day he releases a statement and makes the rounds of media interviews, apologizing for what he calls "inappropriate" behavior, one month after pleading guilty to sexual battery. The case has ignited a firestorm– one that's jumped the pond to the Daily Mail in Britain– and threatens his term on the Board of Supervisors.

On February 28, Dumler spoke to WINA's Coy Barefoot, who beseeched Dumler to "do the right thing and resign." A caller named Meredith said she was the victim and found his apologies insincere and his statements a "slap in the face." Said Meredith, "I want my voice."

Dumler admits he has a history of treating women badly, including his girlfriend, whom he cheated on in the encounter that led to him being charged with forcible sodomy last fall. "I've been disrespectful and discourteous," he says of his M.O. with the opposite sex. "My current girlfriend– I obviously treated her very badly."

And then there's the victim. "The legality or illegally of any of this notwithstanding, I acted inappropriately and I would like to make a formal apology to her," says Dumler, who is himself a criminal defense attorney. "Obviously, my actions– as evidenced by her reaction– left her upset and distressed, and I certainly never meant for that to happen; I am sincerely sorry."

The apologies don't stop there. There's also one for his fellow board members and Albemarle County staff. "I'm very sorry for having put them in that situation," he says, referring to the recent board meetings that started with a line-up of citizens urging Dumler to resign in appeals ranging from the well-modulated to a tirade containing the f-word that resulted in being hauled out of Lane Auditorium. 

Finally, there's remorse to his constituents. "I know I have violated that public trust," he says. "All I can do is work to mend those fences and rebuild that trust."

Since Dumler pleaded guilty to misdemeanor sexual battery January 31, the outrage– and drama– continues to swell. Following the February 25 meeting from which protester Jamie Morgan was ejected after running to the podium and screaming, "He's rolling his eyes. He's rolling his f**king eyes," Dumler's usual allies on the board, Democrat Ann Mallek and independent Dennis Rooker, both now say it's time for him to go.

"I think their concern is a valid one," concedes Dumler.

Nonetheless, he's adamant that he's not resigning– at least when he talks to the Hook on February 27. "That would be unfair to the citizens of the Scottsville district to be punished for my lapse in judgment," he says.

"When he says he has a responsibility to the people of Scottsville," said WINA caller Amanda, "that was before he raped my sister. Let me tell you straight up– that man raped my sister."

There's been some buzz that Dumler would resign if he could choose his successor. "I can't comment on that," he says. "I decided not to go that route."

Instead, he explains, it would be unfair to his constituents to leave them with an unelected official unfamiliar with much of the critical county business that needs to be conducted, such as the $300 million budget and the comprehensive plan.

While he's clearing the air on the criminal charges that spawned this unprecedented mess, the beleaguered supe maintains he would have been acquitted at trial if he could have afforded another $40,000 to defend himself.

"I would rather be bankrupt having fought for my name than to take a plea deal," said an impassioned Barefoot on-air. "I would rather be on the street asking for food and money than take a plea deal."

Fluvanna Commonwealth's Attorney Jeff Haislip, who was appointed special prosecutor on the case, calls it "unfortunate" that a month after the plea agreement, Dumler is still releasing information to the press and making claims that he would have won the case.

"To say he only pleaded guilty because of the money is disrespectful of the victims," says Haislip.

"All I'll say from the commonwealth's attorney's office is, we only bring charges we believe the person accused committed," says Haislip. He also acknowledges, "He-said she-said cases are very tough."

According to the plea agreement, there are two additional victims and no other charges will be brought against Dumler in those cases. Haislip says the two women who contacted him were kept apprised of and agreed to the plea– and that Charlottesville Commonwealth's Attorney Dave Chapman signed off on it as well.

"It's disrespectful to them to make it seem like they were silenced," maintains Haislip.

He also says the requirement Dumler have a psychosexual evaluation and apologize were necessary "so the victim wouldn't feel like it was a baseless claim."

Supervisor Ken Boyd is one of those not swayed by Dumler's apologies. "He looks a little phony," says the Rivanna supe. "The more I look at it, it seems disingenuous. He seems like a disingenuous person."

Dumler is causing problems for the other supervisors with all the email they're getting, says Boyd. "We've never had to remove someone from the auditorium before," he notes of the February 25 ejection.

"His constituents are bypassing him," continues Boyd. "We're already seeing he can't do his job. That'll be important when it gets to a judge."

Victim Meredith told Coy Barefoot that watching her personal trauma become a political fiasco has been devastating.

"The way the Democratic party of Albemarle has reacted to this is sickening to me," she said, noting that she has voted all-Democrat in every election and feels betrayed by the party she believed stood for women's and victims' rights. In particular, she calls out Ann Mallek and Cynthia Neff for standing up for him– although Mallek called for his censure.

As for working a deal to appoint a Democrat to keep the board's 3-3 split and entice Dumler to resign, says Republican Boyd, "I'm totally opposed to that. I'm opposed to anything but an open and transparent process. We go through that process all the time with appointing people to the planning commission or architectural board. We don't ask political affiliation."

"It's fine for Ken to say there won't be a deal," says independent Supervisor Dennis Rooker. "But he can't make Chris resign."

Rooker says he's always privately encouraged Dumler to resign. "It would be better for Chris and the county for him to resign," he says. "I've told him that several times."

Rooker believes that if a replacement were found who will uphold issues Dumler supports and has promised to champion, such as limiting growth in the rural areas, "in my opinion, he will be comfortable and resign," says Rooker.

The day he speaks with a reporter, Rooker gets a message from someone who says, "Thank you for keeping Chris Dumler on the board until a suitable replacement is found so all your work isn't undone."

The calls and emails Rooker has received reflect a variety of viewpoints, he says. And of the 13 people who spoke out against Dumler at the February 25 meeting, observes Rooker, "I think those who were most vociferous were city residents."

He adds, "The ball is in Chris's court."

In Earl Smith's court, the originator of the petition for removal, are 299 signatures of Scottsville district citizens to fire Dumler– 73 short of the minimum required for legal action. Smith admits he's a little frustrated that with all the people calling for a Dumler ouster, only a handful are actually helping him collect the signatures needed to do so through the only avenue afforded by Virginia law.

"I'm not stopping until I get all I need," he vows.

Smith says he doesn't belong to a political party or group, including the Occupiers or Tea Partiers, who want Dumler out.

The Keene resident saw Dumler on television apologizing. "I won't say he wasn't sincere, but I didn't get that feeling," says Smith. "When he says no one can take his place, that's self-serving. My reaction? That arrogant rascal is at it again."

Victim Meredith isn't buying the apologies either, which she calls "emotionless and insincere" on WINA and says he's only doing it because it's part of the plea deal that he requested.

"One of the biggest regrets I have right now is not going through the trial," she says.

 

Correction 3/4/13: Ken Boyd's Rivanna district was incorrectly identified in the original story. 

137 comments

Meredith, I understand your feelings, but from one of Chris's victims to another -- do not beat yourself up for your decision not to go through with the trial. When I first heard that someone had brought charges against him, I immediately thought what a brave person that woman must be. I admire you for coming forward. In all the years he has been committing these crimes, you are the first woman to step up to the plate. I wish I had been as brave as you.

Earl Smith tells Chris Dumler he has "almost enough signatures" almost a month ago at the Albemarle County BoS meeting, and that his goal is 1500 ...

And a full four week have passed, and he has fewer than he began with? Sounds like he's either not quite the organizer he thought he was, or we're talking about a lot of smoke and very little fire ... not that that's surprising.

I think a lot of those signatures were probably outside of the Scottsville district.

This guy has been the butt of several jokes.

He is not sorry for anything, other than getting caught. The more he apologizes, the more insincere and narcissistic he makes himself sound. Just get out already. I notice his death threats have appeared to go the same way as his integrity.

This kind of guy is extremely popular with the ladies of Charlottesville - UVA girls in particular. UVA provided an environment for these guys to flourish back when Casteen & co. took the helm over 20 years ago, and oh boy do they flourish. They didn't become Playboy's favorite campus in the world without lots of lots of effort.

Coy Barefoot's show should prove to be the death knell for this guy's political career; utterly devastating.

Here's a link to the podcast:
http://www.wina.com/pages/podcast/121609.rss

The other board members should look at their own ethics when trying to stack the board with someone they like better. The people in his district spoke, they are the only ones who can and should remove him. If the other board members try and be judgemental and not work with him they do so at the peril of their own constiuents as they may just need his vote some day. If they try and punish the folks of Scottsville district then he has an equal vote to return the favor on the next issue.

It is obvious now that he lied his way into a girls bed and got caught. There is no way a jury would believe this was anything but payback. The prosecuters could have never made a conviction unless the jury was stacked with people like jamie who do not care about actual evidence . Either way.. that is the way it works. So hate him all you want and don't date him but don't go after the people of his district for allowing him to do the job he was elected to do. I doubt every other supervisor is perfect and that is not a can of worms I think any of them want opened.

maybe jamie should taske a trip to florida and get these cretins off the street...

http://www.syracuse.com/news/index.ssf/2013/03/woman_teenager_accused_of...

Come sign the petition at Snow's Nursery on Avon St March 3rd from 8:00 to 4:00. Sign the petition and buy something from Snow's to show your appreciation for their support of the Scottsville District and its well-being!

Sounds like Dumler is guilty of what the Board of Supervisors has been doing to county residents for years as a matter of public policy.

Sounds like Dumler did what the Board of Supervisors has been doing for years to county residents as a matter of public policy.

I don't care that he's sorry ... he needs to do the honorable thing and step down.

I assume Bill Marshall would also like to point out that when Mussolini ran Italy the trains ran on time. Seriously Bill, what was your PREVIOUS name here and is it really that much fun to be a troll?

Godwin lite St Halsey?

It doesn't seem anyone is willing to debate Bill Marshall based on the points he's made. The law allows for recall and lays out the procedure that must be followed. That's the only way an elected official in VIrginia can be forced to leave office if he doesn't want to.

Dumler doesn't seem to want to leave office. If he doesn't change his mind then it is rightfully and legally up to the citizens whom he represents to decide among themselves whether or not to take the necessary steps to petition for his removal.

I think that it's really best for all of us to have the system work like that. Pointing out how the system works and asking for it to be worked within isn't trolling in my book.

Liberals often dont wish to debate the points. Better to get the feathers all in an emotional kerflufflel a la Keith Ellison.

Good article Lisa.

But if Earl Smith thinks misusing the petition-based recall system is going to work, he needs to think again. First, the statute is entirely inapplicable.

Second--and this speaks volumes about Mr. Smith and his ilk--he's admitted on his group's little Facebook page that he knows the petition is unlikely to be successful, but that he hopes the thought of Mr. Dumler having to spend money to defend against the removal suit will be enough to "scare him out of office." So, he's admitting to misusing the legal system.

And third, the joke's really on Mr. Smith. If he knew how to read, he could just flip ahead a few code sections and see that all cases brought against respondents that are dismissed or found in favor of those respondents (i.e., elected officials), ALL attorneys fees are paid by the political jurisdiction to the respondent.

Why is Earl Smith wasting TAXPAYER DOLLARS on a frivolous lawsuit he knows has no chance of success? SHAMEFUL!

Listeners are encouraged to take the time to listen to Coy Barefoot's interview with Chris Dumler. While careful and respectful in his tone, Coy pointed well to the issues inherent in Dumler's current choice to remain on the BOD.

What is perhaps most disturbing to this particular listener is Dumler's repeated characterization of his criminal behavior as little more than a "lapse of judgment", an "error", "discourteous", and that he simply "acted inappropriately".

To commit sexual battery against another is more--far more--than a mere "lapse of judgment", an "error", "discourteous", or "acting inappropriately".

To imply or indicate otherwise goes to the core beliefs of the speaker...beliefs most disturbing in this case.

For Dumler to continue to mimize his criminal--and abhorrent--behavior is to continue to throw salt in the wounds of the women (plural intended) that he chose to assault.

When Dumler goes on to say that he simply "treated her very badly" and that his actions left her "upset and distressed", he telegraphs loudly his utter distain for the impact of his reprehensible actions upon these women.

What disturbs this listener as much as anything else is that, with Dumler's adament refusal to step down, he offers "That would be unfair to the citizens of the Scottsville district to be punished for my lapse in judgment."

I would ask Dumler this: Where was a sense of "fairness" when you chose to assault these women? Or, are you the sole arbiter of what is fair and what is not?

To commit sexual battery against another is more--far more--than a mere "lapse of judgment", an "error", "discourteous", or "acting inappropriately".

Well on the other side of that coin... if the mistake that he made in his admitted drunken and impaired state was thinking that she was a willing particiapant in his sexual endeavors then his statmeent IS correct. It means he crossed a legal line that he has addressed and will still pay for with jail and probation, and crossed a moral line that he has apologised for. If she chooses not to believe it that is between her and her therapist. His stepping down was not part of the plea deal and she doesn't get a "do over"

There are lots of women who would have gone along with his antics... it takes about ten second with the search filter off to find them.
.

He is paying the negotiated price for his crime and that is fair. People hounding him on their own time is fair. (unless of course unless he were black, gay, female, lgbt, or disabled, then it would be a "hate crime") but corys crocodile tears over the radio was just a bunch of liberal whining trying to blackmail him out of office. and it should not work.

My advice to mr Dumler would be to simply issue a statement acknowledging his shortcomings, reiterating his apology, and promise to become a better person through his penance and reflection and then never answer another question about it again.

If that isn't good enough for all the people who want blood then go ahead and make his life miserable but at the end of the day the law is not on your side and if he is as bad a person as you say he is all of your antics won't faze him anyway.

Meanwhile there will be a lot of semiconsensual sex going on every weekend and nothin changes but the weather.

I don't see evidence that a majority of rh

I don't see evidence that a majority of those who voted for him want him removed. I also understand that given current law there really are no grounds for a recall on this charge.

Seems like the people of Scottsville who agree with the positions Dumler has taken as a board member are between a rock and a hard place. I'm sure this is why Smith's petition is failing because people know what happens if Dumler goes. In the article it states Boyd is unwilling to agree to be part of any deal that would allow a replacement for Dumler. Coy brought this potential up with Dumler during his interview and Dumler's response was he wouldn't do this because it would leave the board with a 3 to 2 split until the new replacement came on board. What needs to happen is for a seamless replacement for Dumler with someone all can agree on, but that's not going to happen because of Boyd smells political blood and wants to go back to a 3-2 split.

1) The recall petition can be used. The burden of proof is that the petitioners have to prove that Chris Dumler's job as Supervisor has been "materially adversely effected" by his legal problems. They have, and there is a mountain of evidence. Dumler's statement that the BOS meetings only comprise only a small part of his job is evidence. The BOS meetings have basically been hijacked by protesters. His constituents won't come to see him. He had to recuse himself from one committee. He had the recuse himself from votes already. Constituents cannot face him, and will testify that they will not bring business before the board as long as he is there, or to him directly. He couldn't give a presentation as Supervisor to the Democratic Breakfast meeting due to a (ginned up?) death threat against him. He had to cancel all appearances for a week or two last October/November after the charges were brought. He will be unavailable to do constituent service and appearances any weekend until June 22nd! That's four months of NOT being able to do his job on weekends! The list of ways his job has been "materially adversely effected" is long, and people willing to testify to that is longer.

2) Chris Dumler is attempting to try his case in the Court of Public Opinion after he gave up his right to a real Court trial. His reasoning about the $40,000 was just too expensive is total BS. He has many acquaintances who are attorneys who would have done it for him pro-bono, or at least cheaply, and he is an attorney himself, so he could have done much of the non-courtroom stuff himself. This is total posturing on his part.

3) Chris Dumler is being totally self-destructive. The more he talks, the deeper the hole he digs for himself. Apology tour? Coy Barefoot nailed him good! Then the victim(s) get to go anonymously on air and skewer him. What were you thinking Dumler? To make matters worse, the web is full of anti-Dumler stories and web sites that will live on and on for decades. This fiasco will follow him wherever he goes for years.

4) I have come to believe that the local Democratic Party is nothing more than a soulless political machine who is more interested in preserving the statu quo than cleaning their own house. At least the Republicans, when one of their members does something like this (or much less, e.g. Akin in Missouri, who just spoke a weird woman/rape/pregnancy statement in an interview and was completely cut off from the GOP leadership and the money that came with it), they cut the politician off at the knees. Dumler has committed crimes against women (convicted of or alleged) over the past six years (which would make him a serial offender). The Democratic leaders in the Albemarle Committee are women! Not one has spoken out against Dumler, and in fact, one, Cynthia Neff, is a supporter and an apologist for him. This is so wrong! I have awakened in a bad dream where the Republicans are supporting the women and victims and THE DEMOCRATS ARE SUPPORTING THE SEX OFFENDER!

Quote by Rodney Thomas: I'm not going to be the one to appoint someone from the other party because there are a lot of things that we would like to do that are getting stopped because of the 3-3 vote and the only ones losing there are the public."

"There are a lot of things we would like to do that are getting stopped because of the 3-3 vote."

Politics. As soon as they gain control, that midnight meeting they had to run the bypass vote through will look like it was held at noon on a sunny day. It's going to be the least of Albemarle's unpleasant changes and no one can do a thing about it. Ann Mallek and Dennis Rooker aren’t fighting for their constituents, they’re just handing control over to the republicans with Dumler’s ouster. They should be thinking about what will happen politically. Scottsville knows if he is gone they will have NO voice. And those months without representation are going to affect us all.

Cvillian... so all people from the losing arty need to do is a get a reacll petition and get a judge to agree that the duly elected person should be reomved because
1) anonymous death threars
2) his enemies disruptong public meetings
3) some of his constiuents are "afraid" tyo have an email discussion with him.
4) He takes weekends off.

So if a Board member were an ER Doctor who got weekend rotations, had people from the opposite side of the aisle politically make a ruckus,at meetings some people from the opposite side of the aisle say they are afraid to email him and somoene makes an anoymous call agiant his life a JUDGE should remove him? I don't have the words but I have the letters FU.

This is America, a country of laws and due process, not revenge and retribution. The prosecuters had their chance and hmade a deal. Deal with THAT when it comes time to fill that post.

Sgt Halsey, Mussolini did not live by the rules he rewrote them and then acted on the revisions to kill peolpe he didn't like. That ain't me... Is it fun being a "troll"? .. actually it kind of hs.. In the begiining of all these threads I was pretty much alone save one or two others, and while there are still people who hate me I think some are queiely admitting that even though I am a persisent "troll" my assertions about due process and the need for it are not that far off base. Democracy ain't always pretty but its the best we have.

Ponce, with all due respect:

There are indeed two sides to every coin. Let us examine for a moment the side you present on behalf of the convicted (not accused; convicted, via his own plea of guilt) Mr. Dumler:

Your reference to Dumler's state of intoxication and impairment does little more than offer a thinly-veiled excuse for his egregious behavior--an excuse that carries with it no legal leeway.

You go on to say that "...stepping down was not a part of the plea deal..." Everyone reading here and following this story is well aware that stepping down was no part of Dumler's plea agreement. That is not in quesion. What is, however, in question is the reasoning behind Dumler's allusion (read: delusion) that it is in his constituents' best interest that he retain his position on the BOS. His decision in this regard is blatantly self-serving. That he persists in his refusal to step down, despite calls from members of his own party, former supporters, members of the public, and, most importantly, all other members of the BOS, bespeaks narcissism.

You suggest that "...she (the complainant) doesn't get a do over". The women who have accused Dumler are seeking not a "do-over" as you so cavalierly suggest. Justice in a court of law is what the first complainant sought.

Perhaps the most troubling of your statements are the following: "There are lots of women who would have gone along with his antics... it takes about ten second(sic) with the search filter off to find them."

Because certain other women would conciously choose to participate in what you dismiss as Dumler's "antics" does not make him any less guilty of the crime of sexual battery--the crime to which he pled guily.

To put a finer point on it, let us assume for a moment that you, Ponce, are male. if Dumler had sexually assaulted you in the same manner as he did this woman--that is, non-consenual, forced anal penetration--would you deem it acceptable for anyone to say, "Sorry, Ponce, but there are lots of men who would have gone along with his antics... it takes about ten seconds with the search filter off to find them."

I think not.

On a final, curious note: In referring to those individuals who have come out publicly to decry Dumler's criminal behavior and request his resignation, you say "...all of your antics won't faze him anyway."

Early on you describe Dumler's actions as "antics".
Here you describe the public's response as "antics".

How might you possibly characterize people's request for Dumler's resignation in the same terms as Dumler's criminal, sexual battery of another human being?

If that isn't good enough for all the people who want blood then go ahead and make his life miserable but at the end of the day the law is not on your side and if he is as bad a person as you say he is all of your antics won't faze him anyway.

[Note: The last pargraph above "If...anyway" was included in error, and was taken from Ponce's earlier comment.]

On what planet do the BOS and others think it is acceptable for someone to "force" others to perform or submit to sex acts? I am embarrassed to be a Democrat in this town if this is the type of behavior they condone.

Perhaps while Dumler is in jail, a few of the other male inmates could give him multiple hard-driven lessons in what it is like to experience forced anal sodomy. Would that help him refine his behavior in the future, because the way the BOS and others are acting, his behavior is acceptable, just a mere temporary indiscretion. BS. Listen to all of the reports - Dumler is a repeat sexual offender. Statistically, repeat offenders do not simply change their ways so easily, especially given the disturbing amount of support being given for his behavior.

Virginia needs to redefine their laws. Rape is rape. Forced sex acts of any kind must be considered as rape. Any elected official guilty of such crimes should be immediately removed form office. Period. No means "NO". I, for one, do not want my tax money going to pay the salary of a sex offender who is willfully minimizing the severity and wrongfulness of his repeated actions against multiple women.

What's the fuss and Boyd's not the only one. . .what they said. Boyd, Thomas and Snow are not from my district. I deplore what they did at the famous June midnight shootout at the OK corral, and continue to attempt to do to our county. Their joy at the prospect of being in control of the BOS makes me sick. I pray that qualified candidates step forward to challenge Snow and Thomas. The Republican candidates for every office in our state are an embarrassment, and these men can get in line right behind (sic) them. I'm just hoping the majority of the folks in their districts have been paying attention, and will do the whole county a favor by not voting to be represented by these slippery opportunists 1 extra day.

Diccerning listener:

She had her day in court. She chose door number two instead of taking her chances the same as dumler. Now she wants further retribution and is mad because she can't get it. Too bad.

Before we go to the question of anal penetration we need to know some facts. If he did a sneak attack on her backside without any warning or any consent and held her down to do it that would have been rape and he would have been chargrd with rape. He was not. So the presumption here is that she gave consent for the initail penetration and when she tried to stop it for whatever reasons (presumably because it hurt) he was either too slow to end it or conitinued on for an extended peiod of time before he stopped which is where the distinction between battery and felony sodomy blurs. (legally) so the DA allowed a deal.

So if i were having sex with a woman and she strapped on an implement of destruction and came after me with it because she was bigger than me that would be a felony. If however I gave permission for the act, but when I hollered out to stop she did not stop then at that moment it would be sexual battery. If she held me down and continued that would be the felony. And just like there are different fines for speeding under 20mph and over 20mmh there are different penalties. So if the police cannot prove the actual speed but think it was over 20 then the DA might just roll it back to 19 rather than lose a conviction. If the cop could swear that I was going 50 mph over (and not 21-25) then the DA would hold fast and bank on the jury. Either way, once the conviction is agreed to its over.

I heard her and her sister trying to vilify him on the podcast. They do want a do-over.

I also heard jami morgan whine on there and she sure throws a lot of rocks for someone with a glass house of her own. .

you also ask :How might you possibly characterize people's request for Dumler's resignation in the same terms as Dumler's criminal, sexual battery of another human being?"

Dumler apparently didn't think he was breaking the law until the girl and his ex go together and compared notes.

The people who want to somehow "force" him to resign or have him recalled when the statute does not provide an avenue to do so are not aware that they are simply as ignorant as he was about how the laws work and are applied.

Like I said... he should shut it down, do his job and do his time.

To "say this isn't really happeneing" nobody is "supporting" his behavior nor excusing it. I am just pointing out that those that are unhappy with the conviction and demanding "justice" are hypocrites. "justice" was served and you don't get do-overs when it doesn't go your way.

Chris Dumler is going to jail this Friday, March 8 at 6:00 p.m. He has tried his apology tour on the local media outlets and failed miserably. While trying to make his case, the one he forfeited by pleading guilty to sexual battery, his victims and witnesses have also come forth. He has succeeded only in creating a media and online frenzy, the kind that will follow him the rest of his life. You'd think a tech-savvy politician like Chris would realize that every negative word reported or blogged about him will live online forever. Anyone searching for him online, for his legal services, if he ever applies for a job, for military security clearance (he's in the reserves), anyone looking for him for anything, will find mostly ultra-damaging information. Most of it is his own doing, not just the crime he committed and resultant sentence, but his constant and continuing resistance to resigning and his continued attempt to prove his innocence even after he plead guilty. 30 days in jail is a paltry sentence compared to the ruination of his reputation forever as a result of his own hubris.

"30 days in jail is a paltry sentence compared to the ruination of his reputation forever as a result of his own hubris."

cvillian, glad to see something we can agree on...

The issue is not if Dumler will go, it's under what conditions he leaves that's important. Leaving Boyd and his wrecking crew in charge is not an option. As much pressure should be put on Boyd, Thomas and Snow to come to some agreement as is put on Dumler to leave. This has to be a negotiated settlement and the sooner the better.

Does Bill Marshall have a dictionary? Could we perhaps buy him one? His posts are rife with misspellings which paint him as a ranting, mad loon chasing his tail in a circle.

Secondly, look up "cad" in the dictionary. Dumler's admission to that really paints him as someone not suitable to serve on the BOS (unless there are no female constituents).

Boys and girls, politics aside, this guy will go. Only a matter of time. People like this at the local political level self-destruct, and that is what we are witnessing here. This is not Bill Clinton, where there is a huge machine and support system behind him regardless of who he assaults. Chrissy has virtually no one; only the freak show that is the fringe left is feigning support strictly to maintain some balance on the BOS. The question is whether his exit will be quick and painless or whether Dumler will wriggle on the track spastically after the freight train of public opinion is done eviscertaing him. It' s his call.

Happy trails kids!

R.I.P.: Kimberly Welch

Oops, sorry...it should be "eviscerating." Thanks kids!

Does Chris not get that the longer he stays in this, the worse this gets for his reputation, and I mean that long-term? Even the folks in Stone Mountain and Snellville where he grew up are reporting the bad news on him. See: http://snellville.patch.com/topics/Christopher+Dumler
Note the last paragraph about folks expressing concerns to the Snellville police.

Dumler is on this Sex Offender site: http://www.sexoffenderin.com/article681932/second_alleged_victim_comes_f...

Dumler is on this National military watchdog site: http://www.militarycorruption.com/dumler.htm

It gets worse every day. I hope Chris and his family, friends and girlfriend (collateral damage) are proud of what his recalcitrance has brought him.

Oh dear. I had a friend send this to me last night. Chris has made the news in Atlanta, and it isn't very nice. There was a time when a person of dignity didn't want their name in the papers unless it was your wedding or your obituary. What have we become? Here is the paste http://clasificadosatlanta.univision.com/GeneralCommunity/christopher-du...

Virginia,
your link is an ad posted by an individual in an attempt to smear Chris Dumler because they are upset that the courts didn't punish him enough for his crime.

Suppose he resigns from the pressure, they break the 3-3 split and Scottsville district gets stuck with a gun range... who do you think is gonna get the blame for that?
(hint: not Dumler)

Some of these folks think they are helping the victim... be careful what you wish for.

Way to go Meredith and Meredith's sister!

. . . says Republican Boyd, "I'm totally opposed to that. I'm opposed to anything but an open and transparent process.

What a hypocrite! He's the one who orchestrated the secret two-by-two, unofficial county meetings about NGIC at Wendel Wood's behest.

Betty is right. We should be putting as much pressure on the board to agree to a solution as we are in getting Dumler to resign. The people of Scottsville deserve uninterrupted representation. So for all those who plan to show up at the next bos meeting remember look for a solution not just a resignation.

A "cad"? Really?

A cad is a guy who breaks dates with short notice or flimsy excused...or schedules two in one evening...or brings his best buddy along...or fails to send flowers.

What Dumler admitted to was SEXUAL BATTERY - and that makes him a sexual batterer. Not because any of us says he is, but becuase HE said he is in a court of law.

What he should not be is a county supervisor.

A "cad"? Really?

A cad is a guy who breaks dates with short notice or flimsy excuses...or schedules two in one evening...or brings his best buddy along...or fails to send flowers.

What Dumler admitted to was SEXUAL BATTERY - and that makes him a sexual batterer. Not because any of us says he is, but becuase HE said he is in a court of law.

What he should not be is a county supervisor.

Chris Dumler and the Albemarle County Democrats are playing with fire. The story in the English paper was a shot across the bow. It is only a matter of time before this story is picked up by Drudge or Foxnews, or both. When (not if) that happens the national attention and the resultant pressure will be immense and relentless. "What were we thinking?" will be heard across the land. The democrats are seriously risking losing a generation of voters in Albemarle. I'm a life long democrat, but the longer this man associates with my party, the less I want to associate with them.

Ponce...please do your research before posting. In the state of VA the only time someone is charged with rape is when the attack happens vaginally. If a victim is pinned down with a "sneak attack" the accused is charged with forcable sodomy. If the victim asks him to put a condom on and refuses he is charged with forcable sodomy. If the victim tries to push him off of her and he uses one hand to pin her arm to the wall while using the other hand to strangle her and uses his elbows to pin her shoulders to the bed he is charged with forcable sodomy. If the victim asks then demands then begs for him to get off of her but has the hand around her throat tigtened every time she tries to speak he is charged with forcable sodomy. If he leans down and whispers "Who's in control?" while all of this is going on he is charged with forcable sodomy. The only difference between rape and forcable sodomy is location.

http://www.c-ville.com/albemarle-county-democratic-party-calls-on-dumler...

First official statement by local democrats since his plea...

And by the way...when someone is a liar...he lies. There is a chance he will say he was drunk simply because he thinks it will buy him some support or give him some kind of excuse. There is also a pretty good chance no alcohol was involved what so ever. Just sayin.

Meredith, thank you for your comments. The truth is a stubborn thing. People will look back on these days with respect and admiration for those that had the courage to speak out against this powerful man that would act so terribly towards other people.

Meredith, it was hard for me to read your words because that description is so very similar to things he did to me. I am sorry you went through that. I hope you can take some comfort in knowing that you are not alone. You are such a brave and strong person.

Albemarle and Charlottesville Democratic Committees have asked Dumler to resign! http://www.nbc29.com/story/21449471/democratic-committees-issue-statemen...

Meredith: I think Ponce is from Stone Mountain (Dumler's hometown) so assume lots of posturing and manipulation of the data and the case. Pay little attention as Ponce has a vested interest in defending an old friend. At least Ponce is loyal to Chris, which is more than I can say for Dumler.

I stand corrected, I am glad you have spoken up and presented some information that is relevant. but I ask you. Why are you going after his resignation after you cut a deal? Should the people of your district be denied very important voting rights so that you can seek retribution?

Comparing the law to your statement it seems that that this should have been at least "aggravated" sexual battery which is still a felony. Since you avoided a trial to avoid the mistretment in the cross but now want the punishment to be applied despite that then perhaps you need to continue your revelations and lay it all out there for the world to see what happened and let him tell his side. Despite your accusations he is still entitled to tell his side. Despite what you, and I am sure many others think, I am not defending him. I am pointing out that I believe in the rules of law or we all lose.

Perhaps the real story here is the weak law itself, the responsiblity of the victim to preserve evidence, and the gumption of the prosecuter to bring a case to a jury.

I am sorry for your injuries in this but I don't think the psyco vigilanties who think it is okay to run a duly elected official out of office is good for justice.

To set the record straight, I have never once called for his resignation. That being said, the laws are flawed. A misdemeanor pot offense would have resulted in his immediate removal, but a misdemeanor SEX offense does not?

Am I surprised he has not resigned? Yes. Am I royally ticked that the democrats who are calling for his resignation finally are doing so because of the distraction this is causing and not because of the values they claim to uphold? Yes. Is there anything I can do about that? No.

However, I have stayed silent while Dumler has claimed his innocence. I've stayed silent while people like you, Bill Marshall and a multitude of others have speculated about everything from my sense of vengence to how much I had to drink that night (nothing btw) to whether or not toys were involved!!!! Why should he get to speak in his defense over and over while I stay silent and listen to his lies?

Also, to question the lawyer's "gumption to bring the case before a jury" is nothing but more ignorant speculation on the parts of people who know absolutely nothing of the case. Mr. Haislip is a wonderful attorney and the people of Fluvanna are lucky to have him. When DUMLER'S LAWYERS CONTACTED MINE regarding a plea, he left the decision up to me. He was more than willing and prepared to move forward with it.

Meredith, the law is there to protect duly elected officials from being persecuted by false allegations which would be rampant if a misdemeanor sex offense could be used. It is wrong for people outside of his district to punish those in his district with a new person not elected by them. Politicians are a sleazy bunch and just waiting in the wings to pounce and curry favor. The law is sound on its face and nesasasary to protect the electorate.

All of that having been said.. when you are silent as to what happened then people like me who believe in the rule of law and are cynical play the devils advocate and go with the information thay have. I am one of those people and stand by those beliefs.

Assuming all you say is correct then the ball is now in his court to call you a liar. If he does and there are previous statements where he corraborated your side then he is open to a world of hurt. The board did censure him and technically that is the political extent that they should go. They need to stay way from the Scottsville districts business as it is a conflict of interest.

I am glad you are speaking up. Perhaps you should consider opening up more about the job the prosecuters did so that we can all make sure they the victims and the accused get proper protections under the law.

I take umbrage to your use of the term psyco vigilanties. I have gotten to know a couple of the people you just unfairly insulted. Some of them are people who are standing up for women's rights and standing against violence towards women. Some of them are people who feel they were duped by Dumler...honestly...how many of them do you think would have voted for him if his campaign slogans included "I have a tendency to harm women both physically and emotoonally...but hey...vote for me anyway." Some feel like they need to work towards changing the laws to include sexual misdemeanors as a reason an elected official can be removed from office. Many of them were simply speaking up in my defense when I was too weak to do so myself. In any case, the media is going to take what they can to sell a story. Never believe you are getting the whole picture when you watch the news.

meredith's courage and honesty is absolutely amazing! downright heroic, if you ask me. thank you, meredith. and please dont feel the need to engage ponce. he's obviously one of dumler's friends. "ponce de leon" is a well-known street in atlanta. snellville, dumler's hometown, is a suburb of atlanta.

Meredith, it is gratifying to see your courage, and your swift ability to dispatch naysayers with your integrity, reason, and by sticking to the truth.

I would agree with Satchel. There is no need to engage with those that want to believe that a man that pleaded guilty has been falsely accused. Your courage has inspired me to attend the next BOS meeting that I can and speak up. Thank you.

Prosecution only occurs when a Commonwealth Attorney takes the case.

Meredith, use your influence with the Commonwealth Attorney's office and urge them to prosecute campus rape cases - then schmucks like Dumler will be off the streets. If he had been stopped when he was a UVA student, you would have been spared this entire incident. Unfortunately, the CAs are just as much fault as Dumler for keeping perps out there praying upon young unsuspecting women. If Dumler had been a Republican, I dare say they would have turned you away for insufficient evidence to prosecute.

Meredith, Did you file a civil suit with Mr Haislip?

In other words, if Dumler had been a Republican there is a very good chance we would not be having this conversation

"Some feel like they need to work towards changing the laws to include sexual misdemeanors as a reason an elected official can be removed from office."

So we can throw anyone out of office on the whims of some crazy trollop who has consensual sex and then later decides she was "taken advantage of" because of her psychotic emotional reasoning later, and it turns into a "he said she said" where there is no proof later on. You can't throw a rock without hitting that sort of woman in this town.

Nope, can't find anything wrong with this plan at all.

@The Cruncher...Except that this guy in the "he said/she said" indeed said: "I am guilty. I plead guilty." Small detail that the Dumler backers are trying to nuance.

Look, guys and girls, this is very basic: Legally, Dumler has no requirement to resign. The Dems, from the start, were just a political as the Repubs on this. Why do you think Rooker and Mallek abstained on the vote to remove him (even though it was a symbolic vote only)? Politics. The ethical and right thing to do is for him to quit. By staying on, he is showing he lacks ethics and judgment. His statements only amplify that.

The guy is toast and, I believe, he has violated several articles of the code of military conduct, so his military career may be toast as well. After Rooker held his finger to the wind, he had it right: This guy should go to another state and commence a law career. Now, maybe he knows he will make a lousy attorney and that is why he entered politics...who knows?

All of the hypotheses about what happened, (was anyone drunk?), etc., etc., are unimportant. He pled guilty to a sexual offense; no need to split merkin over that point.
Go away, stay away, and get some much-needed help.

R.I.P.: Jamie Gillis

Meredith, first and foremost, I applaud your courage and your candor. Finding your voice and having it heard will provide courage to others.

Sexual assault, rape, forcible sodomy--all are borne of a consummate, overwhelming, and compelling desire for power and control. These criminal actions are not about sex; sex is merely the vehicle used to exert control. This cannot be illustrated any more clearly or vividly than in a perpetrator's whisper of the words to his victim "Who's in control?"

That Dumler has been adament in his repeated refusal to resign from the BOS is completely unsurprising. Even in the face of the call from his constituents...other members of the public...members of his own party...to step down, Dumler again states "No, I won't; you cannot make me. *I* am in control."

"*I*, Chris Dumler, am in control."

To peel back the layers of this onion reveals an individual who, at all costs and beyond all reason, continues to state "I am in control". We should none of us be surprised that he is steadfast in his belief that he should remain on the BOS. After all, it is Chris Dumler who determines his own future; we do not. His pathology allows him to believe that he and he alone is in control...at least in his own, very troubled mind.

You know, Dumler, Snow, Thomas and Boyd are all guilty of similar things: deception, taking advantage of a situation, knowingly harming people, forcing people into doing something they have said they did not want to do. One went after young women, the other 3 went after the whole county. All were only thinking of what they wanted at the moment, all will face the consequences. You folks who say that Mallek and Rooker have also acted badly are missing the point. The Democrats and Independents are stuck between a rock and a hard place. They are just trying to figure out how to protect our county from those slippery small potato local small r republicans who just want to be a part of the Big Boys Club, and have repeatedly thrown us all under the bus to get there. Ugh, I feel so used - so violated. Hey, can I sue for that? Stay tuned.

Discerning Listener ... your words are spot-on. It's unfortunate that the majority refuses to acknowledge. This is a classic mental health issue that needs to be addressed.

@What they said...Thanks for confirming the altruism of Mallek and Rooker. I did not think they were trying to protect us, but you opened my non-nuance conservative eyes. Now I can value them both for the truly caring public servants they are. Thanks also for comparing legally tendered votes (with which you may disagree) to illegal sexual crimes against women. Again, I suppose my public school system--being so underfunded--did not adequately teach me critical reasoning skills. We need to fund those poor schools way more than we do.

R.I.P.: Bobby Astyr

@Liberalace. . . Sorry you feel that way, never mind.

discerning listener: great comments at 11:17! dumler's behavior is pathological, and this is what's becoming so fascinating to watch. that pathology is quite salient in his "who's in control now?" statement. and it's that pathology that is playing out in his refusal to resign from the Board of Supervisors. what we're dealing with here isn't a normal person at all--dumler's actions are those of a sociopath. if you dont know much about sociopathy, it's more common than you'd imagine. it doesnt mean you're ted bundy. actually, 4 percent of corporate CEOs are sociopaths. need for control of others is at the root of sociopathy. more symptoms include a manipulative nature, cunning, glibness, charming personality, inability to empathize with others, a pervasive pattern of disregard for and violation of the rights of others, repeated lying, aggressiveness--as indicated by repeated physical fights or assaults; reckless disregard for others; and chronic rationalization and inability to accept blame for one's actions.

sociopaths are also chronically stubborn people. sound like anybody we know?

@Satchel. . . Helen Dragas?

Satchel:
"inability to empathize with others"

This sounds exactly like him. He's cheated on pretty much every woman he's dated in his adult life - usually with more than one girl - and he has never felt bad about it when confronted. He never cared that it would hurt others.

This is the United States. We must not tolerate such abuse here. *Anyone* who FORCES others to perform or submit to sex acts of any kind should not be allowed to represent the People of the United States, or any of it's jurisdictions in any capacity. Such crimes should call for immediate removal from public office, military and defense positions, including contract positions. We send our military overseas to help defend and protect others from such human right violations. We, the United States oppose the rape and sexual submissions and violations being forced upon women and children in other countries. Why are we continuing to allow an elected official who has testified as committing such crimes to hold public office? This is a disgrace. An outrage.

"Discerning Listener's" insightful comments from above are worth repeating a thousand times. I will repeat it,

"Meredith, first and foremost, I applaud your courage and your candor. Finding your voice and having it heard will provide courage to others.

Sexual assault, rape, forcible sodomy--all are borne of a consummate, overwhelming, and compelling desire for power and control. These criminal actions are not about sex; sex is merely the vehicle used to exert control. This cannot be illustrated any more clearly or vividly than in a perpetrator's whisper of the words to his victim "Who's in control?"

That Dumler has been adament in his repeated refusal to resign from the BOS is completely unsurprising. Even in the face of the call from his constituents...other members of the public...members of his own party...to step down, Dumler again states "No, I won't; you cannot make me. *I* am in control."

"*I*, Chris Dumler, am in control."

To peel back the layers of this onion reveals an individual who, at all costs and beyond all reason, continues to state "I am in control". We should none of us be surprised that he is steadfast in his belief that he should remain on the BOS. After all, it is Chris Dumler who determines his own future; we do not. His pathology allows him to believe that he and he alone is in control...at least in his own, very troubled mind."

Meredith and any other victims that may come forward, I too applaud your courage. You are very brave. It is when victims are overwhelm with fear and intimidation, then choose not to speak out that we as a society lose their valuable voice. We lose, because the sex offenders and other abusive and violent predators will be allowed to maintain control, dominate and force others at their whim.

@Ponce: What you and others call vigilantes running Dumler out of office, we call the "plaintiffs". You see, if Dumler hadn't tried this case in the court of public opinion, but instead in the court of law where both sides could be heard, then there would be no "other side" to counter his attacks against his accusers and his consistent (and we say untrue) testimony that he committed no crime that night. When Dumler played out his I'm innocent "apology tour", he incensed his victims and the victims' supporters. They testified online and on TV, and their supporters rallied and skewered Dumler in his chosen "court of public opinion". So, call us vigilantes if you will, but he should have resigned as soon as he was found guilty, not because it's the legal thing he *had* to do, but because it was the *right* thing to do. Dumler picked this fight the first time when he sexually violated those women, a second time when he said he would mount a vigorous defense and *lied* to the press about the charges being ginned up by two ex lovers, a third time by maintaining his innocence after pleading guilty in court, and a fourth time on his apology tour. He is still fighting to this very day - fighting everyone including his own Democratic party and Democratic political leaders. The opposition will fight back until he surrenders. Chris Dumler will *never* know a days rest from his detractors until he shuts up, hunkers down, quits lying, stops defending the indefensible, and retires from political life. His vigilante-fan-club will follow him beyond this day and this place. When he makes another mistake, they will pounce on him. He will from here-on-ever-after be looking over his shoulder. His reputation is present online and will remain there. He is a convicted sex offender now, and in a couple years when his sentence is fulfilled, he will be an ex-con who served jail time. It didn't have to be this way. He could have faced his accusers and the community with veracity and remorse, accepted his requested plea and regrouped. Please note, the plea was initiated by *him* and accepted by the accusers and the Court. Instead, he traded one fight for another. Women are fighting back, and he will never ever win. He is like a man trapped in quicksand: The more you struggle, the quicker you get sucked down. The "vigilantes" are not his biggest enemies. His enemies are arrogance, hubris, denial, and anger, and control issues towards women. What keeps him engaged in this fight is that his enemies are women. He cannot face that it is *women* who had him arrested, *women* who have placed him in jail, *women* who have bested him in the court of public opinion, and *women* who will determine that as long as he lives, he will have no peace, no forgiveness, and that his reputation will follow him the rest of his life. Only full surrender by Dumler will save him. Anything short of real remorse and resignation from public office will do. Not because of what he did to those women, the Court took care of that, but for what he did afterwards.

Meredith, God bless you sweetie. I understand how difficult this must be for you. Please be proud of yourself and of your courage. Because of you, Dumler's next victim...won't be. Please let that give you comfort.

This is just a thought, but the Virginia State Bar (VSB) has a process where one can file a complaint against a lawyer for behavior that is not ethical. If the ethics committee investigation finds his behavior was indeed unethical, they have many remedies at their disposal, up to and including taking his VSB license.

The position Dumler should take is one where he will resign from the board as soon as there is an appropriate replacement for him on the board. The residents of Scottsville deserve consistent representation. The fact is, despite his present actions he has done a good job in representing the Scottsville district. Once he makes such a statement the pressure will then fall on Boyd and his crew to work toward finding a suitable replacement and we'll see how much was righteous indignation and how much was politics.

I would think they would consider his planning commissioner. I do not know either of them, but the PC member will be acquainted with the county's affairs and his views on county issues.

NOT Ponce, Very, Very good suggestion. Mr. Dumler would not have picked him if he didn't think his views were consistent with his. As you mentioned he already has experience from the planning commission Now tell that to Boyd, Thomas and Snow. Time to plan on getting on with the county's business.

Cvillian,
Nope. He was attacked when he refused to resign and his apology tour was to defend that attack.
There are a bunch of idiot vigilantes out there who are seeking retribution. They want him to hang and destroy him and they say so very publicly. I don't particulary care about him and have said so but the rule of law is there for a reason and we all must adhere to it.
Meridtih said she didn't seek his resignation and that makes the others who are not in his district vigilanties.
She has spoken about what happened in print so we will see if he folds his tent and accepts that as fact or calls her a liar. If he folds then we can make some presumptions. If he challenges her then I suppose the battle will continue.

your own words:"Chris Dumler will *never* know a days rest from his detractors until he shuts up, hunkers down, quits lying, stops defending the indefensible, and retires from political life. "

If that is not the words of vigilanties then what is it? Virtually everyone believes everything Meridith has said and with her words even people who prefer the rules of law and due process have a hard time defending their position. As much as it will make everyone hate me i am not folding my defense of the constitution and the rule of law. Regardless of what he did, Vigilantes do not have the right to take away the duly elected representative of his district. The law is clear.

The law does not need to be changed. Sexual misdemeanors are too easy to falsely charge and set someone up and politicians should not be subject to an automatic firing by that. just because that is not the case here doesn't make the protections wrong The voters should be the one to recall them not people with an agenda outside the district.

as for this little diatribe:What keeps him engaged in this fight is that his enemies are women. He cannot face that it is *women* who had him arrested, *women* who have placed him in jail, *women* who have bested him in the court of public opinion, and *women* who will determine that as long as he lives, he will have no peace, no forgiveness, and that his reputation will follow him the rest of his life. Only full surrender by Dumler will save him......:

You sound like you need therapy as much as he does...

Ponce says, "I am not folding my defense of the constitution and the rule of law." When I compare what he's doing--hiding behind a computer defending an old friend of his--to what Meredith did--putting herself out there to stop the lies of a sexual predator--I'm reminded of this quote:

“You always know the mark of a coward. A coward hides behind freedom. A brave person stands in front of freedom and defends it for others.”

From OnTheOtherHand: "The position Dumler should take is one where he will resign from the board as soon as there is an appropriate replacement for him on the board."

The problem here is that Mr. Dumler has expressed there is no one better qualified that him to be the Scottsville supervisor. No one else can possibly do the job, so we mere mortals better get used to it.

His ego, along with his ability for denial, reaches epic proportions.

Amanda, I hear you, but Dumler just lost the support of the democratic parties in the City and County. Not Ponce's suggestion of letting Dumler's PC member is a good one and allows Dumler some degree of face saving when he leaves and the question is not if, but when he leaves.

I believe it will be interesting to see if Dumler and the other board members will consider the PC member. Although I can not stomach the thought, there are many difficult and important issues facing the board, and these issues are going to drive the actions of the other board members. I hate it. It should not make any difference whatsoever, but alas, it does.
But if Dumler agrees to resign, whoever is appointed will only serve until November, when a special election can be held and the Scottsville residents can vote for his replacement.

My locality went through something similar a few years ago. The accused was the BOS chairman. BUT, he resigned within 24 hours of arrest BECAUSE he did not want the protracted controversy to ruin his life forever. He understood his political career was over, but also that he needed to salvage what he could of his reputation for the future. (In that case, the charges were dropped because the entire event never happened. His 20 year old step daughter hated him had promised to ruin his career and she did).

That is not the case here. This man is GUILTY. Mr. Smith has collected more than the required number of signatures, and it won't be hard to show a judge that this has rendered him unfit to serve. But I don't think he'll let it get that far. I think he will resign before going before a judge. If he does not, he will loose far more than his reputation. Someone will turn him into the VSB, and his license to practice law will be in serious jeopardy. If he is arrogant enough to think otherwise, so be it.

The US Army has a Criminal Investigation Division (CID) with a crime-reporting website - including for sexual assault, if that's relevant:

"If you are the victim of a sexual assault and need assistance, call the Department of Defense Safe Helpline at 877-995-5247 or text a location or zip code to 55-247 (within CONUS) or 202-470-5546 (OCONUS) or online chat with a counselor at www.SafeHelpline.org 24 hours a day.

You should also contact your local Sexual Assault Response Coordinator (SARC), Victim Advocate (VA) or healthcare provider.

You can also contact the Military One Source Hotline, 24 hours a day at 800-342-9647. If you are overseas, click here for calling instructions for your specific international location."

http://www.cid.army.mil/reportacrime.html

satchel said :“You always know the mark of a coward. A coward hides behind freedom. A brave person stands in front of freedom and defends it for others.”

It sounds to me like ponce is the one defending the freeedom of the people of Dumlers district to handle their own business like the laws provide for.

It is people with no dog in the hunt (representative wise) that want him run out of his duly elected office on a rail.

If you want to post billboards warning women about his conviction go ahead but leave the people of the Scottville district out of it.

*All* Albemarle Co taxpayers pay Dumler's salary - ~$14,000. If Dumler claimed his 12,500 miles as official County business, that's another $7,000 *all* taxpayers ponied up for Dumler. At a minimum.

The entire County has a say.

The law DOES need to be changed. Some of you have been saying that it should be up to the voters of the Scottsville District to decide whether they want Dumler out or not, and you are absolutely correct when you say that. BUT, the fact of the matter is that Virginia law does not give Scottsville voters the right to remove someone from office due to a misdemeanor offense, as in the sexual battery conviction here. Even if every single voter wanted Dumler out due to the sexual battery conviction, there is no way they can force him out of office based on the conviction alone. Through the petition method, you would have to show either misuse of office or that the person is ineffective to serve, and it is not entirely clear whether Dumler would fit into these categories. I think that a fair method which would protect both an elected official from removal due to baseless allegations and the public’s interest in having a non-criminal in office would be to allow the voters to recall an official based on the misdemeanor conviction alone (without having to prove misuse of office or ineffectiveness). It would NOT be an automatic removal and would simply allow voters the option to vote the person out based on the conviction. If I were making such a law, it would require 10% of the number of voters who voted in the election involving the official in question to sign a petition to hold a recall election. In order for the official to actually be removed, the GREATER of the following two numbers would have to vote for removal: 1) 2/3 of the number of voters who participated in the election during which the official was elected, or 2) 2/3 of the voters participating in the recall election (in case more people vote in the recall election than the election during which the official was elected to office). Requiring such super-majorities would ensure that the vast majority of people are in favor of removal due to the misdemeanor conviction and that the removal is not political maneuvering.

Since Dumler has been kicked out of the Democratic Party doesn't that make the board 3 republicans, 2 independents, 1 democrat? I have read that people are concerned about balance but any temporary supervisor appointment is for only a couple of months.

Of course it doesn't look like Dumler is going anywhere in the near future. I have a feeling that he won't do anything until the petition is certified and he has to go to court. This guy has no real ties to Albemarle and unless the Army throws him out Dumler might be best able to eek out a living right here.

There is probably no deal anyone could give him that would be financially compelling enough to resign. It looks like he's going to be around for quite sometime

Seems to me that if - as many have already pointed out - Crozet residents Hunter Lewis ($20,000) and wife Elizabeth Sidamon-Eristoff ($10,000), as well as North Garden resident John Grisham ($5,000), bought and paid for Dumler's election, shouldn't Crozet (White Hall district, for the topographically challenged) and North Garden (Samuel Miller district), at least, have some say in Dumler's fate?

And once we open it up to them, why not the entire county?

Sounds like Dumler's supporters say only Scottsville should decide, while welcoming megabucks from outside Scottsville...

http://www.vpap.org/committees/profile/money_in_donors/3333?start_year=2...

This conversation is better suited to adults who have passed high school government Azur.

Dumler for Albemarle County Board of Supervisors - Chris

Amount Name Location
$20,000 Hunter Lewis Crozet
$10,000 Elizabeth Sidamon-Eristoff Crozet
$5,000 John R Grisham North Garden
$5,000 Silvercrest Asset Management Group Charlottesville
$3,153 Albemarle Forward PAC Charlottesville
$3,000 Democratic Road Back PAC Charlottesville
$3,000 Kay Leigh Ferguson Charlottesville
$2,500 William A Edgerton Charlottesville
$2,500 Molly G Hardie Charlottesville
$2,500 Monticello Business Alliance Charlottesville
$2,000 Democratic Party - Albemarle County, Va Charlottesville
$2,000 Payne Ross & Associates Inc Charlottesville
$1,604 Dolores M Rogers Scottsville
$1,000 Robert S Capon Charlottesville
$1,000 Peter G Hallock Keswick
$1,000 Janet H Miller Charlottesville
$1,000 Marie Woodward Charlottesville
$750 Vivian Browning Sarasota, FL
$750 Bruce Reynolds Charlottesville
$635 Giovanni Hashimoto Orange
$635 Lonnie Murray Afton
$555 ALC Copies Charlottesville
$500 Richard J Brewer, Jr Charlottesville
$500 Democratic Party - Virginia 5th Congressional District Charlottesville
$500 Thomas Foster-Jones Earlysville
$500 Paige McGrath Charlottesville
$400 Fred W Hudson Free Union
$350 W Clyde Gouldman Charlottesville
$350 Susan K Payne Charlottesville
$300 Francis H Fife Charlottesville
$300 Nancy Gill Scottsville
$300 Valerie L'Herrou North Garden
$251 Sneathern LHospital Charlottesville
$250 Richard J Brewer Charlottesville
$250 Henry B "Brevy" Cannon, IV Charlottesville
$250 John Dumler Stone Mountain, GA
$250 Diana Foster-Jones Earlysville
$250 Ty Grisham North Garden
$250 Carol Johnston Charlottesville
$250 Jason Johnston Charlottesville
$250 Stuart M Lowson Charlottesville
$250 Lucia B Phinney North Garden
$250 David Slutzky Charlottesville
$250 Eric J Strucko Charlottesville
$250 Christopher L Yates Scottsville
$205 Ashleigh Rose Crocker Keswick
$200 Dianna B Abbott Free Union
$200 Constance Brennan Faber
$200 Jennifer S Gaden Charlottesville
$200 Valerie L Herrow North Garden
$200 Laura A Horn Charlottesville
$200 Valerie Long Charlottesville
$200 James W Newman, Jr Charlottesville
$200 Bella Shortt Lynchburg
$200 Toscano for Delegate - David Charlottesville
$200 Maryanne Denise Williams Scottsville
$175 Leanne Grove Scottsville
$150 Judith Trumbly Rasmussen Ivy
$150 Judy Y Rasmussen Ivy
$150 Elly Y Tucker Charlottesville
$130 Stephen Charles Davis Charlottesville
$125 William S Gray Charlottesville
$100 Lawrence W Barnett Scottsville
$100 George Dansey Scottsville
$100 Ms Karen G Davenport Charlottesville
$100 Llezelle A Dugger Charlottesville
$100 Afsaneh Shortt Lynchburg
$50 Cynthia Bruce Scottsville
$50 Cheryl Ann Oliver Scottsville
$50 Wren Olivier Schuyler
$35 James Savage Charlottesville
$25 Paul Belonick Charlottesville
$25 Amy Coffman Charlottesville
$20 Stots Peele Scottsville
$20 Tim Small Scottsville

The interviews on the Coy Barefoot show are very informative and provide much needed background and insight into the views and decision-making of the involved parties.

Coy Barefoot stated, "You are responsible for acts that hurt people, that can not be taken back, that cannot be ignored."

Chris Dumler stated, "To allow that wrong, that personal wrong to expand to the greater wrong, to expand to a wrong that could effect the lives of a 100,000 people of Albemarle County as we move to the critical negotiations... that exacerbates the problem."

It is my opinion that this is a manipulation of the intent of the law. By this logic, any elected official should be allowed to commit any crime and then be allowed to serve public office as long as the crime they commit is against fewer individuals than the number of constituents that they serve.
The decision as to whether any BOS member be allowed to serve in office should be decided by all of the voters who have a stake in decisions rendered by the BOS. This matter is not about the political views of any given locale, such as Scottsville; it is about the criminal behavior that is being rewarded by allowing the perpetrator to continue to serve in public office after they had been found guilty in a court of law. The BOS operates as a whole body, and as a governing body certain matters before the board must be considered by that whole - anyone with a current history of engaging in criminal sexual behavior while in public office should be immediately removed from office.

The controversy Dumler carries with him, as well as his clear lack of ethics by his dismissal of his forced sex act as being a mere "lapse of judgment" and "discourteous", disrupts the business operations of the entire BOS. The laws in Virginia are apparently such that they have allowed for this loophole where someone found guilty of committing a sex crime can remain in public office. Instead of residents, the Democratic Committee, the Tea Party and many others being "forced", like a victim, to allow Dumler to remain in office by such ill-defined legislation, they should take immediate action to change the legislation and 'force' him to step down.

This controversy is not going to go away, and the opposition against having someone found guilty of a sex crime, with multiple complaints from multiple women against him, as being representative of the needs and values of the community will only grow stronger with time. Perhaps members of the BOS should consider boycotting all board activity so as to further pressure Dumler to step down, or cause the Governor to intercede with a direct request for his resignation.

Signed: A Virginia Democrat

NO Virginia Democrat would ask the present Governor to interfere with a matter far beyond what his lawful authority allows. To even suggest such a thing underscores the point that Bill Marshall and others have been trying to get across about who lawfully does and rightfully ought to have the authority to determine what person represents the Scottsville district. That is the voters in that district. Not the governor, not campaign donors from outside the district, not commenters like "NOT Ponce" who admit they don't even live nearby.

If you want laws changed, get to work to change them. Until you get that change, respect the laws we do have.

What some people are willfully missing is that just because Mr. Dumbler can legally finish his term does not make it the right thing to do. Also, it is completely un-American to suggest that the people should not speak out against elected leaders.

Mr. Dumbler is an elected official. We are the public. This is America. Do the math. Any public pressure brought on this man is legal. Any speech used towards the goal of his removal from the board is legal. All comments on this forum, at the BOS meetings, all letters to editors, all signs, etc, are legal.

I request those that oppose the opposition to this sexual batterer to respect the laws we do have and allow the American people to speak out against this elected official.

Can you read Meanwhile? I can and I haven't seen anyone suggesting that Dumler "should" remain in office, whatever that might mean. The fact of the matter is that the law allows one means of removal if Dumler doesn't want to step down and he doesn't seem to want to.

Many of the comments so far don't seem to recognize that and as such are shouting at the wind. For example, the one above my own from "Say This Isn't Really Happening" which I was responding to. ---

"This matter is not about the political views of any given locale, such as Scottsville; it is about the criminal behavior that is being rewarded by allowing the perpetrator to continue to serve in public office after they had been found guilty in a court of law. The BOS operates as a whole body, and as a governing body certain matters before the board must be considered by that whole - anyone with a current history of engaging in criminal sexual behavior while in public office should be immediately removed from office."

If you want the law changed, like I wrote earlier, go and get it changed. Once you do lets get on with the business of recalling Charlottesville's city council. Now that the voters have seen their generally poor performance it shouldn't be too hard to recall at least a few of them, especially once we include whoever outside of the area we can recruit to the cause.

I'm so sorry to have offended you "not ..." but the simple fact that you seemingly ignore is that this is America. I have not claimed any legal right whatsoever, but I am absolutely free to express my opinion and/or lend any thoughts I might have to this situation. Maybe I have been friends with the petitioner for 25 years. I might have a personal opinion based on that friendship. really, my interest should not concern you. And guess what? Even though I don't live there, If I wanted to make a real difference, I could file a complaint with the VSB...so move on man. I'll do what I can to change the law, and then I'll even help you recall Charlottesville's Council.

Gee, I'm not sure why you're so opposed to Americans expressing their opinions. This area is where Thomas Jefferson is from and he believed that Americans should be free to express displeasure with government officials. I'm sorry this distresses you so, even to the point of asking whether or not I have the ability to read. I'm sorry you're so upset that an admitted sexual batterer would have those that oppose him. You appear to not like it that people are expressing their disappointment in Mr. Dumbler. Please accept my apology and condolences.

If you don't want us to express our opinions, go ahead and get the law changed that says that we are a free people. Once you do lets get on with the business of squashing all dissent.

Otherwise I suggest you move to a country where people are not allowed to express their displeasure with elected officials, such as Cuba, North Korea, or China.

Say this isn't happening.. your signature should be "Typical " democrat
Your understanding of basic civics is sad. It does not matter how many people come out of the woodwork and claim he abused them. He admitted to one. The others were not charged and would have most probabaly never been charged or this would have gone a different way. Just because YOU believe them does not make it factual evidence to use against the guy in a court of law. His criminal behavior is not being rewarded he is serving time in jail. Her is being villified in the press and at public meetings.

It is you that wants to manipulate the law to suit your need for retribution. Suppose a politician runs over a dog while speeding. Should that also end his carreer? I am sure there are plenty of dog lovers who might "feel" that way, but I am also sure the ones who have actually read a book about how the government works understand that rules and laws are there to ultimatly protect the indivduals right which in this care is the individual resident of his district who does not want to lose their duly elected representative because somebody in Crozet or Earlysville has a need for vengance.

The victim in this case had her rights protected and the prosecuters earned a conviction on her behalf. The system worked. They bought as much punishment as the available evidence would allow. Would you be happier if he had punched her so there would be more?

The people in his district signed the petition, the judge will review it, and if warranted by law he will be removed. If not he will stay. If the Democratic party, and the Republican party don't like it then they can just suck it up and put in the basket of other crap they don't like. Its not their place to call for his resignation. It is their place to condemn the act and move on. To do more is partisan politics and an atttempt to either capitalize on someone elses mistake or save their own bacon.

Perhaps the zealots would be more productive to womens rights by protesting at Yale...
http://www.thecollegefix.com/post/12838

i think a very solid legal argument can be made for his removal. one of the criteria for removal is that the board member can be removed if he is not effectively doing his job representing his district. 50 percent of that district is comprised of women. if you are a woman and have a business in scottsville, and you have some matters you need to discuss with your scottsville representative, you cant safely do that. what woman would feel safe meeting privately with dumler at this point? nobody should be forced to jeopardize their well-being just to meet with their local representative. and so, 50 percent of scottsville can not safely meet with this guy. doesnt that qualify as an example of how dumler can not effectively serve the people of scottsville, and thus should be removed?

The opposition to Dumbler is not going away. Comparing sexual battery to accidentally running over a dog only shows that those who oppose the free expression of citizen outrage against this elected official lack empathy and may share many of the sociopathic tendencies that Mr. Dumbler has shown.

This didn't happen at Yale and Mr. Dumbler didn't run over a dog. The facts are before the public and the public is repulsed by this elected official. The expression of this revulsion is natural and American. Trying to stifle this expression is un-American.

God Bless America.

Good point satchel. Another could be the CIP. From what I have heard ( THIS IS WHAT SOMEONE TOLD ME, NO MORE, NO LESS), some members of the school board are thinking about how to ban him from school property. If they did indeed pull that off, he would not be able to tour school facilities and would therefore be unable to participate with any intelligence on the capital improvements needed at the schools.
My only point is simply that I agree with you. I think there are many, many avenues available once they get him before a judge. If he allows it to go that far, he is a fool, and a criminal.

As a side mention to "Meanwhile", you are indeed free to express your opinions, however there is a distinction between voicing your opinion and making statements which may be deemed as libel, or your voiced opinions may be interpreted as slander. You should learn the difference as Mr. Dumler has already alluded on the Coy Barefoot show that the outspoken young woman could be charged with assaulting a police officer. It seems that a counter or SLAPP suit might indeed be something he would file. Just be careful as to how you express your opinion. For example, if someone committed forced anal sodomy, it is ok to say that. However, in Virginia, you should not call that forced act "rape", or call the perpetrator a rapist, as that would be making a libelous or false accusation under the law. Dumler, for example, could sue you for that.

For the record... you can hound him all you want.. you can follow him down the street with a beware of batterer sign. But It is wrong for the Boardt o allow important time to be used listening to people berate them for something they have no control over. If you want freedom of speech then use it as it is designed. You coulld not get free time in front of Congress to berate John Boener or Nancy Pelosi and the board has the right to set its agendas.

I still contend that if the justice recieved in this case is inadrquate for you then the advice I gave about reporting crimes and making them easier to report and preserve evidence will go way fatrher than chasing a neutered politician. If the guy didn't want to change his ways he would already have resigned and moved to set up shop somehwere else where he could blame the victim and get away with it.

Say this isn't happening, the truth is an absolute defense in cases of slander or libel. What this means is that if mr Dumbler were to charge anyone with either of these crimes, the accused slanderer would be allowed to enter all and any evidence that he did in fact perpetrate the actions that are alleged. Mr. Dumbler could not merely say, "well I wasn't convicted so therefore I did not commit the act." No, he would in fact have to prove that the alleged slander or libel was false. You see, once you accuse a person of slander, that person is innocent until proven guilty.

Marshall's post from 2:04 pm says it all: "...trying to capitalize on someone's mistake." Classic bedwetter's mantra, as we heard from Rooker early on ("youthful indiscretion").

Somewhere, somehow, Marshall has created in his mind the line between a "mistake" and a "crime."

Re: his last post, he tries to climb into the mind of a mental case, a sociopath who would "resign and set up shop somewhere else."

To paraphrase Marshall, "for the record," this guy is as good as gone. This is an old tale, and it ends up with the criminal either self-destructing under his own hubris or resigning a la Richard Nixon and going on his merry way.

This guy simply took the lesser of two evils. His finances were not the reason he did not fight the charge. If he could have fought it for, say, $75,000 in costs, he could have easily gotten up the funds. He is an attorney from a highly-valued law school and--assuming he hangs around earth for a while--could have a good amount of earning power in the future. He pled the deal because of what would have surfaced in a criminal trial.

The fact that he is 27 and still renting in the county is puzzling. Why doesn't he buy a house if he is so committed to this community?

There are so many odd things going on with this guy, he is starting to make Halfaday look palatable.

R.I.P.: Owen Hart

"Meanwhile," your inability to understand the basic concepts of a Democratic Republic does not make you right. It has nothing to do with lacking empathy. It has to do with preserving the rules of law so that idiots that don't understand the concept don't gain control and screw it up worse than it is. In the news today a 7 year old was suspended for biting a pop tart into the shape of a gun in the cafeteria and the school is offering "counceling" to any students who saw it. That is what happens when the idiots take over. The example of the dog would be the same... if you can get someone thrown out for whatever YOU want then so can a dog lover.

As for satchel making the presumption that because 50% of his district is women that all of those women are on her side and out for blood is false.. I would imagine that the ones who took a civics class or read a book once in a while understand that we cannot let mob rule overide written laws.. I am in fact pretty positive that the entire black community, men and women alike would prefer we not go back down that path. Remember there was a time in Virginia where had he been black he would have been hung before the cops arrested him based in a he said /she said scenario.

If you want to make his life miserable go ahead that IS your right. If you want to corrupt the rule of law by fiat then you will have more people like me speak up not less.

On the libel issue, besides truth being a defense to libel, please note that it is much more difficult for public officials to prove libel than private citizens. In New York Times v. Sullivan, the Supreme Court held that the First Amendment protects all statements (including false ones) unless they are made with actual malice (knowledge that the statements are false or with reckless disregard for their truth or falsity). Under this high standard, it is extremely unlikely that Dumler would be able to prove libel against the individuals speaking out against him.

Somewhere, somehow, Marshall has created in his mind the line between a "mistake" and a "crime."

Calling his "crime" a "mistake" gives a presumption of redemption. I realize that the people in glass houses around this county only believe in that if its anyone but a white male but thats their problem not mine.

Why does Bill Marshall keep ranting about the rule of law? The only person to have committed a crime in this entire fiasco is Mr. Dumbler. The rest of us are merely posting comments on the hook's article.

I really think Mr Marshall's grasp on reality might be a little loose...

Bill Marshall said, "Calling his "crime" a "mistake" gives a presumption of redemption. " It is Mr. Dumler that called his crime a mistake, a mere "lapse in judgement", rather than calling it like it is "a sexual assault" and "a crime". No redemption has been made, as he no longer has the trust or respect of his people, his district or others. No respect, no trust, and certainly no redemption as yet.

Marshall forgets his own name? "Somewhere, somehow, Marshall has created in his mind the line between a "mistake" and a "crime."

Come on Gasbag- just give it up- we all know it's you

On the subject of working within the justice system, I am inclined to agree with Ponce and Bill Marshall.

But then I think about this knucklehead with an AR15 in Kroger. He was legally allowed to do that, but thank God most people have sense enough not to exercise that right. I fully support the 2nd Amendment but why scare the hell our of a bunch of old folks and housewives getting their bread and milk?

So Dumler is legally allowed to stay in office- unless recalled- but of course in terms of right and wrong, he should have resigned long ago.

I think a recall vote will take care of this long-term. Everybody gets due process, no matter how odious. And the legal system allowed Dumler to keep his seat...for now.

I can understand Mr. Marshall's points, and even appreciate some of them. The pop tart incident is WAY overboard. I had toy guns until I was old enough to get my rifle and I have never shot anyone.
My only question would be why does Mr. Marshall think those who believe Dumler should resign are "out for blood"? I'm not out for blood, but I do not believe someone who admitted to sexual battery is fit to hold public office. Dumler himself admitted he had "broken the public trust". That's it, that's all. It's over, or it should be.

One last thought (at least for now)...PLEASE think about this:

You are fooling around with a sexy woman. Somehow, she manages to tie you down and get a hand around your throat. Then she takes her favorite dildo and shoves it up the highway and whisper's "who is in control', ignoring your pleas for her to stop because it is tearing you up in so many ways.

How would you feel? Would you want someone that could do that representing you? If so, WHY?

Not Ponce, I realize that you don't believe that someone who commits sexual battery is fit for office. That is not my point at all. I just think that you have as much obligation to follow the law as people expect Dumler to do. The law , although in this case upsets a lot of people is there for good reason. If you could get a politician out of office with a misdemeanor sex offense politicians would be set up all the time. But, if people want to lobby the state to change that law that is okay with me. If you get the votes then it will change, Until then follow the law like the guy with the petition is doing.

To say there are not people out for blood you must be kidding? Have you read the comments? Did you not see the testimony of the girl with her own felony drug arrest and "orgasmic" art work? These people claim they will not rest until he is reduced to nothing. Their vengance has NOTHING to do with county politics or zoning or schools. It has to do with their need for retribution. I think the judge will see this when he is given the petition and will not allow these people to blackmail the courts to punish him beyond the scope of the sentence that was decided by a Judge who possessed the facts of the case.

If the real goal is to reduce the number of sexual assulat going forward stop chasing a neutered dog and lobby for some real changes in the way that the reports are handled, place more responsbility on the victims to come forward as soon as they can to provide the state with the evidence they need to make it stick and stop complaining that that is an "unfair" request. It simply is not. The fact that women are victims more often than men is unfair for all kinds of reasons, but to expect any victim if a crime to help society help you is not "unfair" . Horrible, sad, painful, humiliating all kinds of bad things.... but not unfair.

and I am not gasdog shifflet.

As someone who voted for Dumler, I would be appalled if he DID resign. I voted for him because he promised to work to protect Albemarle's Heritage while Encouraging Smart Growth with Appropriate Infrastructure weighed with Environmental Concerns.

The deal he cut to avoid distractions from what we elected him to do changes nothing. We in Scottsville need him to continue the work we elected him to do.

Bill Marshall said, " I just think that you have as much obligation to follow the law as people expect Dumler to do."

Bill Marshall, Not Ponce is not breaking the law, nor do I see that anyone else here is denying that they have an obligation to follow the law. In fact, people are willing to pursue legislation to change the laws so that an elected official who, for example, has testified and been convicted as to forcing a victim to submit to anal sodomy would not be allowed to remain in public office.

Bill Marshall stated, "I think the judge will see this when he is given the petition and will not allow these people to blackmail the courts to punish him beyond the scope of the sentence that was decided by a Judge who possessed the facts of the case. "

Surely you are not implying that as allowed under the law, a valid petition to remove an elected official, which has been signed by the constituents of the appropriate jurisdiction, should be denied consideration by a judge merely because the elected suddenly feels like a "neutered dog"? If the law allows the people of the jurisdiction with a valid petition to remove an elected official from office, then the judge should allow it as it is the voice of the people, the voice of his own constituents - as provided under the law, "neutered dog" or otherwise.

One would think if Dumler was really interested in the Scottsville District he would try to make to offer to leave if his planning commissioner could replace him. This would allow him to be replaced by someone who shares his values and more importantly if his planning commissioner did consider running for the board position in a special election the time he spends as the interim supervisors would help him with the voters. Then again if Dumler really wants to stay on the board all he has to do is say he wants to make a deal, because we already know Boyd and associates won't have any part of it.

Bill has quite an odd approach to logical debate, as evinced by his bizarre response to a point i made. How my point about women feeling safe approaching their representative when their representative is a sexual predator gets turned into this response by Bill...well, there's zero logic there on Bill's part. And to reference lynchings, Bill? Really?

Satchel: "i think a very solid legal argument can be made for his removal. one of the criteria for removal is that the board member can be removed if he is not effectively doing his job representing his district. 50 percent of that district is comprised of women. if you are a woman and have a business in scottsville, and you have some matters you need to discuss with your scottsville representative, you cant safely do that. what woman would feel safe meeting privately with dumler at this point? nobody should be forced to jeopardize their well-being just to meet with their local representative. and so, 50 percent of scottsville can not safely meet with this guy. doesnt that qualify as an example of how dumler can not effectively serve the people of scottsville, and thus should be removed?"

Bill Marshall: "As for satchel making the presumption that because 50% of his district is women that all of those women are on her side and out for blood is false.. I would imagine that the ones who took a civics class or read a book once in a while understand that we cannot let mob rule overide written laws.. I am in fact pretty positive that the entire black community, men and women alike would prefer we not go back down that path. Remember there was a time in Virginia where had he been black he would have been hung before the cops arrested him based in a he said /she said scenario."

If anybody else knows how Bill went from A to B on that one, please let me know. I'm not saying 50 percent of the women are "on her side" or "out for blood." What I'm saying is they wont feel safe meeting with their representative because their representative is a known sexual predator. But your interpretation of what I was saying actually says an awful lot about your inability to fully grasp any other perspective but your own. And your perspective--women choosing sides and being "out for blood"--strikes me as thoroughly paranoid. I view it as women being justifiably outraged that a sexual predator is in office and giving publicity tours to the media. They're not "out for blood," they just want him out of office. As a man, I share their view. Yours however strikes me as more of a personal issue you seem to have held on to for many years now. Seek some help.

satchmo, suppose the district were 49% black and had an active KKK member elected which is not even a crime. Would that justify a recall and a judge throwing him/her out?

It would not.

Suppose there were a convicted murderer who ran for office and won and someone was able to get enough of those who voted against him to sign the petition and go before the judge, should the judge toss him?

Doubtful.

Should the judge toss him out because people outside his district want him gone, people ouside his party want him gone, and some people in his district who may have been in the minority vote want him gone.

No!

Ponce said, "suppose the district were 49% black and had an active KKK member elected which is not even a crime. Would that justify a recall and a judge throwing him/her out? "

In this case, the citizens would know that the person is an "active" KKK member prior to the election. They would have had the opportunity to make an informed vote. This was not the case with Dumler, who did not disclose that he was a sexual batterer to his constituents prior to the election.

Ponce said, "Suppose there were a convicted murderer who ran for office and won and someone was able to get enough of those who voted against him to sign the petition and go before the judge, should the judge toss him?"

Yes, if the law allows for the constituents to recall an elected official under these circumstances. However, in this case again, the individual was convicted prior to their being elected, and thus the voters were afforded the opportunity to make an informed decision to elect. This was not the case with Dumler who neglected to disclose that he was an practicing sexual batterer prior to the election.

Ponce said, "Should the judge toss him out because people outside his district want him gone, people ouside his party want him gone, and some people in his district who may have been in the minority vote want him gone."

If the law allows for honoring such a petition, then 'Yes', the judge should rule to remove the sex offender from public office as the will of the people.

People outside of his district contributed to his campaign. Have they spoken? If they had been properly informed, would they have donated to an active sex offender? Doubt it. May he be removed from office and let the county move on with their business.

You all can continue to bicker back and forth on the case and Dumler's degree of guilt or what happened but I think there is a more enlightening view of this mere being not one of you has mentioned.

He has a law degree. If he had any sense, ethics etc about him, he would have resigned and move away from the area because this will follow him here. If he had any remorse, he would also have done so.

Quite frankly, it doesn't come down the politics are which political party you affiliate yourself with but ethics and remorse.

Quite obvious by his words and actions he has none and truly profiles him into the category of men that treat women as objects, are cads and will rape. I'm just sayin'...

Dear Ponce,

You say all these things that just clutter up the conversation. Are you a lawyer? Sometimes I think you are actually Chris Dumler. Well if you are, or if he is a friend of yours, please tell him he needs to go to a town where nobody knows him and start over. He won't be able to succeed here now. The well has been poisoned. He really needs to go and talk to his mother. The way a man treats his women has to do with how it was with his mother when he was young. Chris, you need to go see your mother for a while. She will set you straight.

Don't know the guy. Never met him.
"say this isn't happening" you seem to be missing the point entirely. If he chooses to stay then it is for the people in his district to deal with not anyone else. Those that donated for him paid their money because they believed that his judgment on county matters aligned with theirs. If he lets them down in any number of ways they don't get a refund. The law deals with felony sex offenses not misdemeanor sex offenses and since technically the day he is placed in office he can legally never speak to a constituent his entire term, return a phone call or answer an email. He would obviously never get reelected but thats the way the cookie crumbles, A judge will rule within the law and if he removes him fine but zealots going after his job for non political reasons is probably not going to fly with the judge.

Suppose Obama released his transcripts and we all found out he molested a girl in college... should we be able to get 10% of the voters and get a judge to throw him out when those that signed the petition may have all voted for Romney in the first place and the judge could have been appointed by Bush?

The people of his district should not have to put up with a firing range or some other important issue because there is blood in the water from outside interference and he gets railroaded. Those trying to get him fired are seeking retribution because they are dissappointed that he didn't get the chair. Nothing more nothing less. It is wrong and while they have every right to speak thier mind I am confident the judge will look at the law and the Constitiution and let him stay despite their hatred.

Virginia Pollack... Women who read the best selling book "50 shades of grey" full of all that type of behavior... do they have "daddy" issues? Should they go home and spend some time with their daddy if they enjoy it when a guy mistreats them ? (and don't say these women don't exist cause we all know thats BS. )

People have a right to hound him, but it is up to the people of his district to deal with his elected position and all the politicians trying to get in to either save face or score a new face more to their liking are real scumbags.

I live in Dumler's district, am a woman, and have no fear of meeting with him. There's been no indication from anyone that he grabs women off the street or attacks them in offices. What a bunch of histrionics. His power trips in bed have absolutely nothing to do with meeting him in public or private to discuss county business.

The most most ludicrous thing about this mess are the people who are saying that he needs to go because he's a distraction, and then say they'll ensure that happens because they intend to create a distraction everywhere the man goes. This is ugly vengeance by an unruly mob, and many of the participants are being played by the Repubs and a couple of bored potheads who think of themselves as edgy anarchists. By all means, get out those pitchforks and torches, and keep dancing for the people behind the scenes who are pulling your strings.

Yes, he needs to step down as soon as a decent replacement can be found. But it comes down to it being his choice, or the citizens find a dignified and legal way to do it. All this screaming and rending of garments is ridiculous and won't get you what you want.

"Yes, he needs to step down as soon as a decent replacement can be found. "

Thanks for agreeing with us.

But, Been there, he's not going to do this. He's not stepping down without intense pressure. The pressure that's been brought to bear so far has not proven sufficient. You yourself agree he needs to step down, but saying nothing, not speaking out, not petitioning our government for a redress of grievance (which is a right guaranteed by the very FIRST amendment, by the way), is not going to compel him to step down.

As time goes on, the rumble for him to resign grows louder. HE is the one that has brought his personal life out into the open by giving all those interviews. HE is the one that offered to sign the petition, showing himself to be an unrepentant sociopath. HE is the one that treated his constituents (which his victim happens to be) so badly.

The only reason he's digging his heels in the face of this pressure is because he is like a child. He is incapable of truly accepting responsibility for his actions because he is a sociopath. You may feel perfectly fine with him representing you. I don't and it's my right to express that opinion.

Wow, Been There. You would be number one on the list of people who need to self-educate about sociopathy. Again, the problem with these people is their lack of conscience, which would necessarily extend to their political representation of you.
Please, google it. It is a a very real thing.

i should have said "60 years old, i'd imagine, from her picture on facebook."

satchel aren't you the same one who came up with the ridiculous idea that Ponce is from georgia because the name that he's been posting under here for quite a long time matches a street name there (not to mention an extremely well known Spanish explorer)? Seems to me like you don't have a clue.

This story has been updated and now appears as "County in crisis: Dumler digs in as outrage mounts" http://www.readthehook.com/109231/county-crisis-dumler-digs-outrage-mounts -- Lisa Provence

@not buyin' it: As someone following the case from Atlanta, having met Chris as an undergrad, my first thought was that Ponce was from Atlanta as well. It's not completely out of line for satchel to suggest it.

There are a couple of things that I haven't heard anything about that still bother me
about the Dummler situation (besides the obvious!).

I'm pretty sure that Dennis Rooker did not tell the truth in his interview with Coy.
It's bad enough that he goes on about how Chris should resign and move away and start his
life over; he never addresses the fact that what Dummler did was wrong and that he could
just move somewhere and do the same thing and that Dennis doesn't seem worried about the
victims at all. However, something else bothered me greatly: Rooker said that he'd
gotten a lot of emails about the situation and that most of the people emailing had not
voted for Dummler. (Hence, he was rather dismissive about the emails.) I called and
asked how he knew how people voted from their emails unless they specifically said one
way or the other. Rooker claimed that MOST of the people had their addresses on the
emails. First of all, I think it would be a VERY small percentage of folks who put their
address on their email (physical address); 2ndly, aside from then knowing if they were
from the Scottsville district or not; how would he know how they voted unless they said
so? I don't think that's the truth at all. It'd be interesting to see if FOIA showed
addresses on emails!

I also chided Mr. Rooker on his characterization of the Dummler situation as a
"youthful mistake". I pointed out that youth doesn't excuse that type of
behavior AND that the 1st victim who came forward did so in October which was NOT that
long ago!! (Hence, Dummler was already a supervisor and close to the age he is now.)
Mr. Rooker then claimed that the "youthful mistake" quote was something that
the interviewer in the Daily Progress said, not him. I looked it up, and the
"youthful mistake" quote was listed in quotes as something Rooker said. Would
he really let himself be misquoted like that if he had not, indeed, said that? Again, I
feel he was being less than truthful.

Mr. Dummler said that he's gotten "many more" emails asking him to stay than to
go. Again, wouldn't a FOIA check be interesting here?!

But the one thing that I've heard no one discuss is Dummler appearing to renege on his
vow to not run again. Coy Barefoot asked him what he hoped to gain by staying in the
position when he's said he wouldn't run again and etc. and I feel that Dummler clearly
began to backpedal! He said that he knew he had said that, and he meant it at the time
BUT. . ." "and gave a bunch of excuses and reasons why that might not be so.
If I didn't completely misunderstand this (and I don't think I did; listen to the
interview), then Dummler was saying that he might just seek reelection. Unbelievable!

There are a couple of things that I haven't heard anything about that still bother me
about the Dummler situation (besides the obvious!).

I'm pretty sure that Dennis Rooker did not tell the truth in his interview with Coy.
It's bad enough that he goes on about how Chris should resign and move away and start his
life over; he never addresses the fact that what Dummler did was wrong and that he could
just move somewhere and do the same thing and that Dennis doesn't seem worried about the
victims at all. However, something else bothered me greatly: Rooker said that he'd
gotten a lot of emails about the situation and that most of the people emailing had not
voted for Dummler. (Hence, he was rather dismissive about the emails.) I called and
asked how he knew how people voted from their emails unless they specifically said one
way or the other. Rooker claimed that MOST of the people had their addresses on the
emails. First of all, I think it would be a VERY small percentage of folks who put their
address on their email (physical address); 2ndly, aside from then knowing if they were
from the Scottsville district or not; how would he know how they voted unless they said
so? I don't think that's the truth at all. It'd be interesting to see if FOIA showed
addresses on emails!

I also chided Mr. Rooker on his characterization of the Dummler situation as a
"youthful mistake". I pointed out that youth doesn't excuse that type of
behavior AND that the 1st victim who came forward did so in October which was NOT that
long ago!! (Hence, Dummler was already a supervisor and close to the age he is now.)
Mr. Rooker then claimed that the "youthful mistake" quote was something that
the interviewer in the Daily Progress said, not him. I looked it up, and the
"youthful mistake" quote was listed in quotes as something Rooker said. Would
he really let himself be misquoted like that if he had not, indeed, said that? Again, I
feel he was being less than truthful.

Mr. Dummler said that he's gotten "many more" emails asking him to stay than to
go. Again, wouldn't a FOIA check be interesting here?!

But the one thing that I've heard no one discuss is Dummler appearing to renege on his
vow to not run again. Coy Barefoot asked him what he hoped to gain by staying in the
position when he's said he wouldn't run again and etc. and I feel that Dummler clearly
began to backpedal! He said that he knew he had said that, and he meant it at the time
BUT. . ." "and gave a bunch of excuses and reasons why that might not be so.
If I didn't completely misunderstand this (and I don't think I did; listen to the
interview), then Dummler was saying that he might just seek reelection. Unbelievable!

It's a pure case of Dumb and Dumler ... the Scottsville district must be really missing Lindsay Dorrier. Tommy Tapscott could do a better job than Chris Dumler. Possibly any other person from the Scottsville district chosen totally at random would be more likely to do an acceptable job than Chris Dumler.

The link to the podcast doesn't exist.