VA-02: Dem Kellam Admits He Was Convicted For Assault
The campaign of Dem Phil Kellam has just admitted that Kellam was convicted for assault in 1978—and the scandal could potentially derail the promising campaign he's been waging against freshman GOP Rep. Thelma Drake. The Richmond Times-Dispatch reports today that Kellam was convicted while in college in North Carolina, in an episode Kellam's campaign claims was a case of road-rage.
Kellam claims he got cut off by another driver, a woman. He says the short stop caused his girlfriend, who was in the car, to get a slight injury when her head hit the windshield. He says he then got into an "argument" with the other driver—and that he was charged with assault in the wake of the argument. Kellam's then-girlfriend, now his ex-wife, confirmed his version of the story with the Times-Dispatch.
But in an Internet posting that has been circulating for the past month—well before the story was confirmed by the paper—a man claiming to be the victim's husband says his wife alleges that Kellam was drunk and exploded at her for taking too long at a drive-through.
Kellam pled guilty to assault, paid court costs and the whole thing disappeared—until today. The conviction has already become an issue in the campaign: Drake campaign manager Tim Murtaugh is calling on Kellam to disclose all the details of the episode. Can Kellam's campaign survive these new revelations?
Please correct the text above: Kellam was not "convicted" because the judge tossed the case out. Yes, he pled guilty, but no conviction resulted. (I'll also note that people often plead guilty to misdemeanors just to get the matter behind them, and not necessarily because the proof of guilt is overwhelming.)
On a separate note, let me suggest that if Henry Hyde -- who engaged in a four-year doubly adulterous affair in his mid-40s -- can slide by on a "youthful indiscretion" excuse, methinks Kellam -- all of 21 or 22 at the time of this momentary incident precipitated by a traffic run-in -- can fairly claim that it says little about his character today, 28 years after the fact.
September 29, 2006 11:52 AM | Reply | Permalink
Come again.
Kellam pled guilty, the judge threw the case out but fined him?
I don't think so.
On the other hand I can testify to the fact of people pleading guilty to get past charges. There are even those who have pled guilty to murder, though innocent, to avoid a death sentence.
My son told the judge in Chicago that if he was guilty of assault and battery the other fellow would have the bruises to show the court. Pat had many years of martial arts training. The judge finally agreed over the objections of the prosecutor after a number of appearances.
I spent hours on the phone myself trying to find a lawyer without success. An ambulance chaser hanging around the court had offered my son the chance to plead guilty for a handsome fee.
A friend told me she could get Barry Scheck for me. I told her nevermind.
I am making nothing up.
If reason prevails, the race will be unaffected. Of course, this is politics we are talking about.
Best, Terry
September 29, 2006 12:18 PM | Reply | Permalink
It must have taken some pretty serious digging to come up with a near thirty-year-old misdemeanor charge, and it's pretty obvious now where Drake's one note campaign style will tune itself.
In the end it doesn't matter. Phil Kellam has done an excellent job in elective office and the Virginia 2nd deserves the better representation he can give us.
September 29, 2006 1:37 PM | Reply | Permalink