The Olympian

Endorsements

Fairhurst shown to be qualified

Friday, August 1, 2008 — South Sound voters will find three Supreme Court positions on the primary general election ballots that arrive in area mailboxes this week.

Justice Debra Stephens, who was appointed to the bench last December by Gov. Chris Gregoire, is running unopposed in position 7.

Three candidates are running in position 4 — incumbent Charles Johnson and challengers C.F. "Frank" Vulliet and James M. Beecher. The top two vote getters, assuming no candidate receives more than 50 percent of the vote, will advance to the general election in November.

Voters should focus their attention on the Supreme Court race at position 3 where incumbent Justice Mary Fairhurst, 50, of Tumwater faces the challenge of 55-year-old Mercer Island attorney Michael J. Bond. That race will be decided in the primary.

The Olympian's editorial board encourages voters to re-elect Fairhurst on Aug. 19.

Bond has 28 years of trial and appellate experience, primarily in civil court, more narrowly focused on construction related claims, land use issues, and professional and product liability. He has no judicial experience.

In his campaign for the state's highest court, Bond takes direct aim at Fairhurst saying her decisions point to an insufficient regard for civil liberties, freedom of speech and protection of families.

While Bond certainly deserves credit for the courage to challenge a sitting Supreme Court justice, he simply makes no credible case for replacing the incumbent. His legal experience is woefully narrow when compared to Fairhurst's.

Where we find fault with Fairhurst is in her abysmal record on public access issues. Fairhurst has been a government lawyer or judge her entire legal career and we fear that it has colored her judgment on public access issues. Government is not always right in its decisions regarding the release or sealing of public records. But to read Fairhurst's decisions, you'd never know it. She almost always sides with government in these key areas. Fairhurst must ask herself whether she has an institutional bias on open records issues and adjust accordingly.

That said, we know Fairhurst to be an extremely intelligent and articulate justice. She understands that decisions she makes affect the lives of everyday citizens and takes her responsibility seriously.

Her 16 years in the state attorney general's office gave her exposure to myriad issues that come before the court — tax law, transportation issues, criminal justice and labor issues, to name a few.

Fairhurst has served as president of the Washington Women Lawyers association and Washington State Bar Association.

In addition to those statewide leadership roles, Fairhurst has demonstrated a keen interest in ensuring equal access to the judicial system, especially by women and minorities, and in educating the public in the workings of the court system.

With the exception of her public record decisions, Mary Fairhurst has proven herself to be a well-qualified and able justice. Voters should re-elect her to a second, six-year term on Aug. 19.

Re-elect Hunt to judgeship

Wednesday, July 30, 2008 — With primary election ballots arriving in Thurston County mailboxes early next week, it's time to offer the endorsement of The Olympian's editorial board in those races that will be decided in the Aug. 19 primary election.

We start with the Court of Appeals where Judge (Joyce) Robin Hunt, 60, of Kingston faces the challenge of Tim Ford, 43 of Olympia. Hunt is the obvious choice in this race, based on her experience and depth of knowledge about the workings of the appellate courts.

Washington has three appellate courts divided into multicounty divisions headquartered in Seattle, Tacoma and Spokane. A total of 22 nonpartisan judges serve in the three districts and they serve for six-year terms. The judges hear cases appealed from Superior Court before they advance to the state Supreme Court.

In the race at hand, voters in Thurston, Mason, Kitsap, Jefferson, Grays Harbor and Clallam counties will decide the Hunt versus Ford race in the August primary.

Ford deserves credit for giving voters a choice. Hunt has run unopposed for the past 12 years.

Ford is open government ombudsman for Attorney General Rob McKenna. It's an important job, advising government agencies on how to respond to requests for public records and how to abide by the state's Open Public Meetings Act.

In his limited time as ombudsman, Ford has proven himself to be a solid advocate for openness. His prior legal experience was with the solicitor general's division of the Attorney General's Office in which he prepared state cases for appeals. Prior to that he was in-house counsel for the Building Industry Association of Washington. He began his legal career as an attorney in private practice for one year, handling family law, criminal defense and other specialty areas.

While well-intentioned in his run for the Court of Appeals, Ford comes up woefully short when it comes to qualifications. He has no judicial experience whatsoever and has very limited trial experience. Those are serious deficits.

Hunt (not to be confused with Thurston County Treasurer Robin Hunt) has served on the Appellate Court for 11 1/2 years. Her legal experience includes a private practice in Alaska, service as senior deputy prosecutor in the King County Prosecutor's Office, law clerk in the United States District Court in eastern Michigan, land use hearings examiner and pro-tem municipal court judge in this state.

We have not agreed with every one of Hunt's nearly 1,000 decisions on the Court of Appeals. She does not have a sterling record on open government cases, for example. Hunt said she always "starts with the presumption of disclosure," and that's as it should be. But too often, she has sided with secrecy. That's a concern.

But when it comes to the practical, legal experience necessary to be an appellate court judge, experience researching the law and writing legal opinions, Hunt wins the race hands down. Voters should return Hunt to the Division 2 Court of Appeals bench Aug. 19.

Two seats on county Superior Court

Sunday, August 3, 2008 — Thurston County voters have not one, but two decisions to make in Superior Court races for the Aug. 19 primary election.

That's unusual in a couple of respects.

First, sitting judges are seldom challenged. But this year Thurston County Prosecuting Attorney Ed Holm has stepped up to run against Judge Gary Tabor.

Second, the senior judge on the bench, Richard Strophy, is retiring at year's end, so he is not running for re-election. Two candidates — Carol Murphy and Charles Williams — have filed to succeed Strophy on the bench.

The Olympian's editorial board recommends the election of Tabor and Murphy.

Holm vs. Tabor

When Prosecuting Attorney Holm filed to run against Judge Tabor, it sent shock waves through the South Sound legal community. No one saw it coming. Tabor admits that he was caught completely off guard. Holm, who had announced that his current term will be his last as prosecutor, had not publicly expressed any dissatisfaction with Tabor or Tabor's rulings. When Holm filed, Tabor scrambled to put a re-election campaign together knowing that as a Democratic office holder Holm has a lot of name familiarity and party support — even though judicial races are nonpartisan.

Holm, 68, does not offer a lot of insight into why he ignored the open judicial seat and targeted Tabor. Holm simply accuses Tabor of not treating people the same, and says the unequal treatment is evidenced in three areas: domestic violence, victims and the environment. Holm declines to get into specifics, adding that he would treat all people equally and with dignity and respect. He says campaign laws prevent him from citing specifics.

The lack of specifics will leave voters scratching their heads.

But Holm, too, has a record to run on and it's highly unfavorable. He has not managed the prosecuting attorney's office well. Voters know that a jury awarded three of his female deputy prosecutors $1.52 million in damages because they were sexually harassed in the prosecutor's office. Holm tries to say it was the county that was the defendant in the case, but the fact is, the harassment happened in his office under his watch and that's unacceptable, The case still is on appeal, but costs associated with the claim have already surpassed $6 million.

Then there was the dismissal of the high profile cases against war protesters at the Port of Olympia in which District Court Judge Susan Dubuisson said "gross negligence" on the part of Holm's prosecutors gave her no choice but to drop the charges. She said prosecutors failed to turn over police reports to defendants and their attorneys in a timely fashion.

Again, that was on Holm's watch. Because his administration of the prosecutor's office has been so shabby, he has not earned a spot on the Superior Court bench.

Tabor, 61, has a reputation as a hard-working, fair-minded and well-reasoned judge. He has served on the bench since November 1996 and before that spent 18 years as a deputy prosecuting attorney, including 12 years as chief criminal deputy.

He has proven himself highly capable in civil cases, balanced in criminal cases and judicial in his demeanor from the bench. He's knowledgeable on the law and is committed to weighing the facts against the law in a fair and impartial fashion.

The fact that all seven of his Superior Court colleagues have endorsed him over Holm speaks volumes. We add our voice to theirs and encourage voters to re-elect Judge Gary Tabor on Aug. 19.

Williams vs. Murphy

Voters are fortunate to have two very well qualified attorneys seeking Judge Strophy's soon to be vacated seat. Both candidates have solid — but very different — legal experience. And both have solid records of community service.

Williams, 56, ran for judge two years ago. He finished with 11 percent of the vote — last place in a four-person primary election.

Williams touts his 27 years experience as a trial lawyer, in family law, criminal law and civil litigation. He points to his knowledge of the rules of evidence as a personal asset and says with that depth and breadth of experience, he would have a quick learning curve once elected to the bench. He also has some judicial experience, having served as a pro-tem judge in both juvenile and District courts.

Murphy, 43, has 17 years of legal experience, including trial experience, all of it with the attorney general's office. Since 2005 she has been a deputy solicitor general with a responsibility to prepare state cases for appeal in both the state and federal court systems. Her previous assignments in the AG's office gave her exposure to a broad range of issues, including torts, criminal justice and the Department of Social and Health Services cases.

It's that state experience that tilts the electoral scales in Murphy's favor. Thurston County, as the seat of state government, handles most state-related cases. They often are complex. The eight judges serving on the local bench have little legal background in state litigation. Murphy's experience, especially as deputy solicitor general, would complement the court and add to the depth of knowledge.

Murphy is personable, bright, thoughtful and committed to giving every person who comes before her a respectful hearing.

Thurston County voters should elect Carol Murphy to Thurston County Superior Court bench.

VotingforJudges.org, P.O. Box 1460, Silverdale, WA  98383
Write to [email protected].

As the election approaches, Votingforjudges.org will include ratings and endorsements from numerous organizations. We provide this information so that voters will be better informed about the candidates. We do not rate or endorse any candidates; the ratings and endorsements of organizations included at this site reflect the views of those individual organizations and not necessarily the views of votingforjudges.org or its sponsors.