Print This Post Print This Post

Apr

24

OH State Rep. Matthew Barrett, nude photos on flash drive – fishier than ever


I thought so back when it happened but Ohio Daily Blog and the Columbus Dispatch indicate that that fish is still alive. From the Dispatch’s blog, The Daily Briefing:

Ohio House Democratic Leader Joyce Beatty announced this morning that she asked for and received the resignation of Rep. Matthew H. Barrett, D-Amherst, who had a picture of a topless woman pop up in front of a high-school class during a civics lecture last fall.

“It became clear that Rep. Barrett had not been forthright with me and his colleagues,” Beatty said in a statement.

Beatty said she acted immediately to demand Barrett’s resignation after he admitted he was not truthful about the photos displayed by Barrett during a classroom presentation at Norwalk High School. She did not elaborate.

Okay – how long until we get elaboration and any guesses on where will see that info first?

Bookmark and Share

By Jill Miller Zimon at 12:09 pm April 24th, 2008 in Politics 

Comments

4 Responses to “OH State Rep. Matthew Barrett, nude photos on flash drive – fishier than ever”

  1. 1 bonobo on April 24th, 2008 1:44 pm

    Openers at the PD is including a paragraph I haven’t seen anywhere else:

    A House member said Thursday he was told there were nude photos of two women from Barrett’s district on a flash drive used during the presentation. Neither were Barrett’s wife, the member said.

  2. 2 Jill Miller Zimon on April 24th, 2008 4:22 pm

    Thanks for that link, Bonobo – I noticed that too once that item was up. I imagine Aaron Marshall et al will be working this story until we know what there is to know. I’m not optimistic and I am concerned about the son and the family. Mostly, though – what kind of person gets himself or herself into a position like this? And how do we justify voting for them? Over, and over, and over.

  3. 3 Daniel Jack Williamson on April 25th, 2008 2:04 am

    How do we justify voting for them over and over and over? Well, I have to admit that I am one of those persons responsible for putting Matt Barrett into office. In my defense, I’d like to point out that I voted for him just once, not over and over and over. I had concerns about his opponent (that I still think are legitimate concerns), and so I crossed over to vote for Barrett. I had first met Barrett in the 2004 election cycle (he failed to get elected that year) when I was running for election in a neighboring district. His GOP opponent wouldn’t show up to debate him during that campaign, so, on more than one occasion, Barrett and Koziura (my opponent) tag-teamed me at the debates. I gained respect for Barrett, though I did disagree with him on several issues. On some issues, like abortion and gun control, Barrett had conservative positions, which served him well in 2006 when he captured this relatively Republican House district (the 58th). No doubt, some in my party who chided me for being a RINO for crossing over to vote for him are probably hoping I learned my lesson about voting split tickets. It’ll be interesting to see if the Dems replace Barrett with someone who is conservative enough to win the district in the fall, or if they appoint someone whose ideology is more in line with that of the Minority Caucus. Perhaps they might as well appoint someone who is in line with the Caucus, because I think the seat is highly likely to revert to Republican control no matter who the Dems choose.

    During my run in 2004, the Elyria Chronicle-Telegram had printed reports about my own personal foibles (financial foibles). When I met with the editors, they were quite thorough with their follow-up questions. I answered their questions truthfully. It didn’t help me gain the C-T’s endorsement, but I knew better than to try to cover things up. Three other newspapers did endorse me, as they didn’t think those foibles were of great significance. Had I tried to cover up things, I’m sure the C-T would have printed an expose that would have not gone unnoticed by the other papers, and they would have seen the attempted cover-up as being of very great significance.

    I think Barrett has compounded his original problem by not coming forward with the truth. If he had told the truth to authorities, he probably would have had to resign at the time, but he wouldn’t have jeopardized his ability to practice law and his party would have had more time to campaign for the election of the appointee that would have replaced him.

  4. 4 Bob on May 28th, 2008 3:36 pm

    Where can I find the photos?!?

Leave a Reply




"));