Last Night's Good News on the Criminal Justice Front
There were a couple of results from last night that Reason readers with an interest in criminal justice should find encouraging.
The first was the reelection of Dallas County, Texas, District Attorney Craig Watkins. It was close, but it looks like Watkis pulled it out. Watkins is a former defense attorney who in 2006 took over one of the most notoriously ruthless DA offices in the country. He's also the first African-American DA in Texas history. Watkins set up a special unit within DA's office whose sole charge was to find innocent people who had been convicted by the prosecutors who previously occupied the office. It's probably of no coincidence, then, that Dallas County leads every county in the country (and most states) in exonerations. Watson actually had critics, who argued that it wasn't a prosecutors job to free the wrongly convicted. So it was good to see Dallas voters give him their approval, if only by a slim margin. (Read my interview with Watkins here.)
The other encouraging news from last night is that Colorado voters soundly rejected judges Terence Gilmore and Jolene Blair. Gilmore and Blair were reprimanded by the Colorado Supreme Court in 2008 for withholding exculpatory evidence while they were prosecutors. That withheld evidence helped them convict Timothy Masters of a crime he didn't commit. While Masters served a decade in prison, Gimore and Blair were promoted to judge. The reprimand and finding that they convicted an innocent man did not preclude them from sitting on the bench, where they presided over criminal cases.
Voters stepped in where the system failed. Masters' family and supporters started a campaign to get the two removed from the bench. Of the eight judges up for retention in Colorado's 8th Judicial District, only Blair and Gilmore were rejected, and both were rejected by at least 60 percent of voters. The other six judges were retained with at least 70 percent of the vote. It's pretty clear that the Masters case is why they lost.
In an age when there's far too little accountability for misbehaving prosecutors, Gilmore and Blair got some belated comeuppance. More of this, please.
Editor's Note: As of February 29, 2024, commenting privileges on reason.com posts are limited to Reason Plus subscribers. Past commenters are grandfathered in for a temporary period. Subscribe here to preserve your ability to comment. Your Reason Plus subscription also gives you an ad-free version of reason.com, along with full access to the digital edition and archives of Reason magazine. We request that comments be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment and ban commenters for any reason at any time. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.
Please
to post comments
Who are you and what have you done with the real Radley?
Always vote to recall every judge on the ballot. Judges are not held to enough scrutiny. Unless you know the judge personally and have reason to retain him, vote to recall. Recall should always be the default position.
Yep, because it definitely on average improves the quality of justice for the literally hundreds of parties with open cases before a typical Colorado state court district judge to have the judge who's already familiar with the case yanked off and replaced by someone who has no clue about what's been happening in the case for the past year or more. I agree Blair and Gilmore should have been voted off, but fuck you John for wanting my clients to be faced with surviving judges who have even more massive caseloads and who have to be reeducated about the background of the cases for no other reason than to satisfy your petty temper tantrum.
But how often are judges recalled?
Keeping their numbers for retention at a less-than-USSR highs would probably also keep them doing their job the best they can. Effectively recalling too many, probably wouldn't, for the reasons you give and others.
A rare piece of good news.
"it looks like Watson pulled it out. Watson is a former defense attorney..."
It's Watkins I believe.
In Vermont, the big issue in the governor's race was that the Democrat, Shumlin, had promised to help resolve upcoming budget issues by emptying the prisons of non-violent offenders. This led the Republican, Dubie, to go berserk shouting "OH NOEZ!!@!@!@ TEH CRIMEZ!@!#@#@ TEH DERUGZZZZ!!#@!" so I broke my streak of voting for GOP gubernatorial candidates and voted for Shumlin.
Shumlin won, so let the parade of released drug dealers begin!
I drove through Vermont on vacation in October. I heard those commercials on the radio. The one with the two women talking to each other about it was full on stupid. Even my wife and I who are both Republicans were like "what is wrong with letting non violent criminals out if you are out of money?" I am glad that guy lost.
Still, it hardly justifies cancelling Halloween...
Glad to hear that Fluffy. The authoritarian trend will not end until voters stop electing the tough on crime candidates.
Is a positive story from Radley a sign of the Apocalypse?
Keep at it Radley. You are perhaps the most consequential investigative reporter of my time.
Love it Radley!
Excellent news!
Had to say it because, yes, you rarely have good news to tell.
Wait, Radley, I thought it was offensive and incorrect to claim that exonerations are an instance where "the system works."
Obviously you have to examine the situations more closely. In this case, I'd certainly say that it is.
look
thank u
Thanks