Currently the Express-News has about 5 minutes of footage from each of the candidates running for Bexar County District Attorney when they appeared before the editorial board.
A big caveat of course is that the conversations were more than 5 minutes, so it's difficult to gleam too much from just 5 minutes...BUT, if these 5 minutes are any example of the larger conversations we can easily sum them up this way:
Susan Reed: Vote for me because I'm Susan Reed
Nico LaHood: Vote for me because I have a plan for a better justice system in Bexar County
In the two interviews:
Reed is initially asked to make the case for why she should be re-elected. She says, "Because I'm good at what I do." Then she sorta rambles for a minute about improving mental health and some summit on gun violence. Never really making a case.
Reed is then asked about her office's use of pre-trial diversions. She states it only covers 17 - 21 year olds. When asked why not adults, like those who slip up later in life, Reed says, "I think by 21 your character is pretty well built." Again she seems to kinda ramble on bringing up deferred adjudication as a solution for the adults.
Reed is next asked about the Uresti case or cases. For anyone not familiar, check out Brian Chasnoff's column from 2013 where it looks like Reed did some favors for Sen. Carlos Uresti (D) in not arresting or prosecuting some potential cases against his son. She prefaces her statement with one of these classic politician lines of "What I remember..." So now if something is wrong, she just didn't remember correctly. For someone who seems to infer that she may not recall every detail of the case, she seems to remember it pretty well.
Reed is next asked about a backlog in the felony courts. She deflects the question by saying she cleaned up the backlog in the misdemeanor courts.
Finally, Reed is asked if has anything to say about her opponent Nico LaHood. I bet if she were hooked up to a blood pressure monitor, we would have seen it spike at this moment. She talks about we a big city and she sits on all these important national boards. She then questions putting someone in charge who dealt drugs.
LaHood starts out with a very good argument of Reed may be tough on crime, but is she effective on crime. He brings up the statistics about the low conviction rate in regards to crimes committed against children.
LaHood is then asked about the criticism against him that he lacks the experience or proper background to be D.A. LaHood then talks about his experience with various types of cases such as white collar crimes and felony cases.
LaHood is asked about pre-trial diversions. LaHood agrees with pre-trial diversions, but believes Reed is ineffective at it. The reason he cites in the interview is the age limitation.
LaHood is next asked about his personal views on the death penalty. He believes in the responsible use of the death penalty and cites how the last 5 times Reed has tried and failed to get the death penalty in a case.
LaHood is asked to address juvenile justice. He talks about how he'd like to do in the adult system, what we do in the juvenile system in terms of getting involved on the front end.
LaHood is asked about Reed's single minded focus on LaHood's drug past. LaHood points out that she doesn't want to talk about her record and speaks to an arrogance that Reed has.