|
Hawk, Riley respond to questions
Published October 12, 2006
The Sand Mountain Reporter asked the candidates for circuit judge to give their thoughts on various issues. Each candidate — Democrat Howard Hawk and Republican Tim Riley — received the same set of questions, and each had the opportunity to submit written responses. Their answers are provided in their entirety.
1. Should Alabama’s judgeships be decided by partisan elections?
Hawk: I have long been a proponent of non-partisan judicial elections. I take this position for at least two reasons. First and foremost, judges must be fair and impartial. Judges should base their decisions on the facts of individual cases and on the applicable law. They certainly should not make their rulings based on political pressures or connections. In essence, judges should be above the partisan politics of the day. Second, party labels, in and of themselves, tell voters little about an individual’s fairness, work ethic, or knowledge of the law. In fact, if a candidate’s choice of party is based primarily on political opportunism, party affiliation may be more of a hindrance than a help in the selection of the most qualified candidate.
Riley: Presently, Alabama law requires judges to run for partisan elections for six-year terms. Most states have non-partisan elections and the reasoning for that is to remove politics and special interest (lobbyist) money from judicial elections. I think it would remove some of the pressure to use lobbyist monies and political connections to political parties if we had non-partisan elections. A great deal of lobbyist and special interest political action committee money has been spent and transferred in this Marshall County judicial election. I have decided to fund my campaign from myself, my family, my friends (including some attorneys), business people, doctors, teachers, even soldiers. If we have to run with a party label, the Republican Party views are closest to my personal views on the war on terrorism, marriage, immigration, capital punishment and belief in service to God, family and country.
2. As circuit judge, what new steps would you take to enhance Marshall County’s war on drugs?
Hawk: As a former FBI agent who worked crack cocaine in Washington, D.C., I firmly believe that any war on drugs must include a tough and well-coordinated law enforcement effort, and that the court system must be an integral part of that effort. This is why, as a district judge, I have worked closely with the county’s drug unit and all the other law enforcement agencies. My work in the FBI also taught me the true meaning of “an ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure.” This is why I have worked with others to obtain large drug prevention grants targeted at young people, start a faith-based mentoring program, and develop an early grade truancy program which has allowed us to drug test the parents and, thereby, identify children in bad situations before they become statistics. I want to take this balanced approach, which includes a judge doing more than just coming to the courthouse between the hours of 9 a.m. to 5 p.m., to the circuit court level. In criminal matters, district judges only handle juvenile cases, misdemeanor cases, and the pre-indictment work on felony (serious adult) cases. Circuit judges are the judges that handle felony pleas, trials and sentencing. I also want to thoughtfully reorganize the dockets and workload. This will allow our judges to work more efficiently, thereby getting meth dealers to trial sooner, and if they are guilty, getting them out of the community and into prison quicker. Too often, citizens see a meth dealer arrested one day and then back in the neighborhood the next. This individual may stay out on bond for months or longer before a trial. Many also continue their drug dealing during the protracted interval. This needs to change.
Riley: The drug problem in Marshall County has had a devastating impact. Felony drug case numbers in 2004 were 436 and in 2005 were 392. The drug problem has changed recently to include a more pure and addictive type of methamphetamine, cocaine and marijuana. Most of these drugs are imported from Mexico and Central America to Birmingham and Atlanta, and then here. Illegal drug use increases all levels of crime in Marshall County from theft and burglary to domestic violence. Organized crime gangs have started to take a foothold here. There has been a drug-related murder and three attempted murders on police officers in the last three years. In 1990, I left private practice to work for the district attorney and with the police chiefs and sheriff to start the Marshall County Drug Enforcement Unit. After I was elected district and juvenile court judge, I was a co-founder of the Marshall County Drug Court and served as the first drug court judge in Marshall County. The DEU and the adult and juvenile drug court have made a difference in enforcement and rehabilitation for first-time drug offenders. Lives and families have been saved as a result of these agencies and institutions. In the future, I want the Circuit Court to have a domestic violence/family drug court. This new court could be started within our present court system. Most of the domestic violence cases against women and children are due to a combination of anger and either alcohol or drug abuse. As long as the family member is addicted to alcohol or drugs, the cycle of family violence continues and gets worse over time.
3. This race got off to a heated start. If you win, what will you do to extend the olive branch to the loser? If you lose, do you think you will be able to work closely with a political rival?
Hawk: For the benefit of your readers, the “heated start” referenced in your question sprang from the following two events: First, on Feb. 15, 2006, my opponent (at that time, a Democrat and member of the Democratic Party Executive Committee) looked me in the eye and told me that he would not run, and instead, would work with me in my efforts to better the court system should I get elected circuit judge. Second, on April 7, 2006 (the last day of qualifying), my opponent changed parties and qualified against me without even letting me know that he was going back on his word. Did it bother me that a colleague of mine did this? Yes. However, as I have said before, it was not the fact that my opponent ended up running against me that bothered me; it was the fact that he ended up running out on his word. I was raised that a man’s word is his bond and that a man is only as good as his word. I think that rule certainly should apply to judges. It is a bit hypocritical to require witnesses on the stand to be forthright if we on the bench do not hold ourselves to as high — if not higher — standard. Can I continue to work with my opponent? Absolutely. I have been a private attorney, a city attorney, a school board attorney, a municipal prosecutor, a municipal judge, a state legislator, a legislative committee chair responsible for spending four-fifths of the state’s budget, an FBI agent, and a district judge. In all of these capacities I have worked with people I agreed with and with people I respected. (For the record, I have never had to agree with someone to respect them.) Likewise, I have also worked closely with people I either did not agree with or did not admire quite so much. I have been working with my opponent since April 7, and I will certainly continue to do so after the election. The people of Marshall County deserve no less.
Riley: I will work with Judge Hawk and the other judges, no matter the outcome of the election. I have signed the judicial campaign pledge vowing to conduct my campaign at or to exceed the standards of conduct required to campaign for an Alabama judgeship. By following these standards, I will keep to the highest degree of ethical conduct. I want to promote public trust and confidence in the judicial branch of government.
4. What do you feel is the most important issue in the race?
Without question and above and beyond anything else, the most important issue in this race, and, for that matter, any judicial race, is fairness. If there is only one room in this country where rich and poor, young and old, powerful and weak, men and women, and yes, Democrats and Republicans, stand on the same footing, that room must be the court room. One of the glues that has held this country together for the past 200 years is our respect for the “rule of law.” That means that when an election is held, a law is passed, or a court order is issued, whether or not we agree with the final outcome, we abide by it and move on. This glue is weakened if any branch of government, and particularly the judicial branch, appears to stray from principles of fairness and justice.
Riley: Experience as a judge and commitment to serve as the circuit judge are equally important. It has been an honor to serve as district and juvenile court judge for almost 14 years. Before serving as judge, I served as a private practice attorney and assistant district attorney for 10 years. I have tried jury and non-jury cases in all courts of Marshall County. I have tried dozens of jury trials as both a private practice attorney and as assistant district attorney in state and federal courts. I prosecuted felony cases and capital murder cases while working at the DA’s office. I have written briefs for and presented personally many cases before the state appellate courts and federal court. I have always worked in the court system except for the time after Sept. 11, 2001, when I was activated for the war on terrorism. I am committed to staying and working in the court system until I can no longer work as a judge or after retirement as a local attorney.
5. If you win, what’s the one thing you could accomplish by the end of the term that would make you most proud of the job you have done as circuit judge?
Hawk: We must create a family court within our court system. Right now, every Marshall County judge tries one kind of case one day and then tries another type of case the next day. We have been doing it essentially the same way ever since I came out of law school in 1983. This county has experienced (and will continue to experience) massive demographic changes. Likewise, society has also changed greatly — and certainly not always for the good. A meth epidemic has ravaged our county, and unfortunately, the victims certainly include the county’s families and children — the next generation. All judges must be fair and they must know the law, but, in this day and time, the judges that handle family-related cases (particularly in a county with the challenges listed above) must know about the array of at-risk family programs and services in our area and generally be up on these issues. Allowing at least one judge to handle more of the family law cases will have the added benefit of letting other judges specialize in other types of cases, thereby causing all to be better at what they do. This also will end up making the system far more efficient. Efficiency is not only important in business; it is also important in government. I firmly believe the resulting efficiency will get criminal cases to trial sooner, get criminals off the streets more quickly, and keep the criminals in jail for longer periods of time. This all should result in a positive impact on the county’s current war on drugs referenced in question No. 2 above. I also firmly believe that getting at-risk families the services they need — by court order if necessary — will positively affect the county’s future war on drugs. The winner of this election will most likely soon become the next presiding judge of this county. That person will decide court schedules, the allocation of the judicial work load, and will generally set the tenor and direction of the court system. Therefore, this election is very, very important. In a democracy, you get no better government that those who participate. Please do participate by going to vote on November 7th, and please know that I would deeply appreciate your vote.
Riley: Reduce criminal and civil dockets. This will be difficult but achievable. As the population has grown, so has the crime level. We need more judges to handle the increasing caseload in all divisions of the court. We need to have a priority docket established by the presiding circuit judge. This was done before by Judge William Gullahorn. This docket would, for example, place murder cases at the top of the trial docket with attempted murder, child abuse, drug trafficking and dealing being the next priority. With a priority docket, the most serious cases could be pushed through the Circuit Court faster. This would also encourage a guilty defendant to plead guilty sooner. A priority docket would also help in the reduction of civil cases pending in the court. Many civil damages court cases could be sent to mediation and possibly reach a point to be settled sooner in the judicial process. Also, we need longer sentences for violent criminals and drug traffickers. This would create a deterrent to serious crime. I also believe in capital punishment for those convicted of capital crimes. I believe capital punishment is a deterrent to criminals.
Share |
Save |
Mail |
Print |
Letter
|
|
|
 |
|
Follow the Reporter on Twitter:
SMR News and
SMR Sports
|
