There have been several new developments this week in the story about Attorney David Paul Horan's last-minute surprise ad that viciously attacked State Attorney candidate Michael "Mick" Barnes just two days before the Republican primary election three weeks ago.
Barnes, who many thought had the best chance of beating 20-year incumbent Kirk Zuelch in November, subsequently lost the primary election by 105 votes to Tavernier Attorney Mark Kohl. In running the ad, however, Horan was not supporting Kohl. Horan is a Zuelch supporter. The purpose of the ad was to avoid the risk of a head-to-head Barnes-Zuelch confrontation in the general election.
The large ad, which appeared in the Key West Citizen on Sunday, Sept. 3, accused Barnes of virtually everything from falsifying his financial disclosure report to suffering the "somewhat unanimous disdain" of local lawyers and judges.
The day after the ad appeared was the Labor Day holiday. And the election was Tuesday. Barnes had absolutely no opportunity to respond. If the ad swayed only 53 votes that would have otherwise gone to Barnes, David Paul Horan decided who would face Zuelch in November.
Here's what has happened since our last report:
1. In a letter to Key West The Newspaper (KWTN) this week, Horan pled ignorance of the Florida election law designed to prohibit "unfair surprise."
"I did not have the slightest idea of any such limitation on my individual freedom of speech," he said.
2. Horan reported to the Supervisor of Elections Office last Friday that he had spent $975 on the ad. That's only $25 less than the $1000 threshold that would have required him to provide notice of the ad five days before it appeared— thereby giving Barnes some opportunity to respond.
3. Key West The Newspaper has asked the Florida Election Commission to investigate. We suggested here last week that if newspaper space costs were close to the $1000 threshold, production costs might have pushed the total cost of the ad to over the $999 no-report limit.
Horan denies that. He said that he wrote the letter and his wife, Karen, typed it. And the Citizen did the rest— at a total of $975. "Karen and I spent an hour— total" on the ad, he said.
It is likely, however, that Horan normally charges at least $25 an hour for his time— and, since the ad was a letter printed on Horan & Horan letterhead, the Election Commission may rule that a hour of his time as an attorney should be charged to the cost of the ad as an in-kind expenditure.
If the Election Commission does investigate and does determine that the total cost of the ad did exceed $999, Horan could face a fine up to $5000. And if the Election Commission does choose to look into this case, it will be done by independent investigators out of Tallahassee, not by Zuelch's office.
5. So far, no Monroe County Judge has responded to KWTN's request to comment concerning Horan's published characterization of their opinion concerning Barnes. Chief Judge Mark Jones, the logical spokesman for the judiciary here, is on vacation.
But in his letter to us this week, Horan predicted that no judge would comment on this matter. He didn't say how he knew that. But if that turns out to be the case, a serious question must be begged: Why might judges share their opinion about a political candidate with Horan, and then refuse to share it with the rest of their constituents?
Of course, what seems reasonably obvious here, is that Horan just made up his characterization of the judges' opinion of Barnes— gambling on the probability that none of them would publicly repudiate his published representation of their opinions. Is it at all credible to think that "most of the judges" stood around at various cocktail parties and discussed with Horan or others their choice for State Attorney? If they did, they violated the Code of Judicial Conduct. And that is, apparently, what Horan is saying that they did.
If the judges didn't do what Horan says they did, they should come down on him with both feet. In public.
Once again, the judiciary here is in a pickle. And Attorney David Paul Horan is the pickle maker.
We are hopeful, however, that when Judge Jones returns from vacation, he will publicly address the presumption of Mr. Horan to speak for him or any of the other judges. The viciousness of Horan's ad is not likely to be lost on Jones. When he was challenging longtime incumbent Judge Richard Fowler in 1996, Jones was also confronted with a vicious last-minute surprise flyer that characterized his wife and inlaws as criminals.