ELECTIONS / SUPERIOR COURT : Race for Judgeship Focuses on D. A.’s Role : Politics: Bradbury’s support of White’s candidacy sparks debate in legal community.

In the closing weeks of one of the county’s most heated political battles--the race for a Superior Court judgeship--the focus has increasingly been directed away from the candidates to a figure who isn’t even seeking the job.

Ventura County Dist. Atty. Michael D. Bradbury’s role as “honorary chairman” for candidate Colleen Toy White--his top assistant and longtime friend--has sparked widespread debate in the legal community.

Many lawyers believe that it is inappropriate for White, 50, to permit a sitting district attorney to have a role in her campaign against defense attorney James M. Farley. Others, however, contend that district attorneys should be allowed to support any candidate for elected office in whatever way they want.

“Lawyers have every right to support and oppose judges, period,” declared Ira Reiner, the former Los Angeles County district attorney.

San Francisco Bar Assn. President Ray Marshall disagrees. While he isn’t opposed to prosecutors endorsing judicial candidates, he believes that they cross “a fine line” when they serve in campaign staff positions.

“I’m just not aware of a situation where (a district attorney) has acted as a campaign manager or honorary chairman of a judicial campaign,” Marshall said. “It’s really the appearance issue and public perception.”

In addition to the support of Bradbury, some lawyers are criticizing White for not speaking out against the district attorney’s recent decision to disqualify a judge from criminal cases and for her past business associations with Bradbury.

Ethically, White stands on firm ground in allowing Bradbury to be her honorary campaign chairman, legal experts say.

Neither the State Bar of California nor the California Judges Assn. have rules prohibiting such activity.

And the latitude of that involvement is wide. Prosecutors can do anything from endorsing candidates to running their campaigns, although most stop at making an endorsement, State Bar board member Michael Case said.

Some lawyers say district attorneys and judicial candidates should set standards for themselves that are higher than those adopted by legal groups.

If not, elected officials and judicial candidates run the risk of losing public confidence, the lawyers say.

In the case of White, several attorneys said they wondered whether the candidate had compromised her independence by allowing Bradbury to be involved in her campaign.

White, assistant district attorney for 11 years, says she has not.

“Absolutely, I will be independent,” White said in an interview. “If I have any value to this office, it is because I have always given Mike my independent opinion.”

Bradbury said he threw his support behind White’s campaign because he has known her long enough to believe that she has the integrity to wear a judge’s robe.

He doesn’t deny that, as district attorney, he likes to see judges who are tough on criminals on the bench.

“That’s the way everybody thinks,” Bradbury said. “You want to support someone who mirrors your view of how things are supposed to be.”

White said that despite drawing some negative attention, she believes that Bradbury’s backing is well worth it.

“I am extremely proud to have him support me,” she said. “I think there would be a question if he didn’t support me.”

This is not the first time that Bradbury has been criticized for playing a role in a local judicial campaign.

He also served as honorary chairman in 1991 for Municipal Judge Ken W. Riley, who went on to win a seat on the Superior Court. Riley has not heard a case on the criminal court since his selection.

Bradbury said he does not get involved in the daily operations of any judicial campaign. His role in White’s campaign is largely symbolic, he said.

“It means that you lend your name to the campaign, that you sign fund-raising letters when appropriate,” Bradbury said. “It does not mean that you manage the campaign, and I do not. I am not a member of any strategy committee.

“I support her. I endorsed her. I made a contribution to her campaign. And that basically is the extent of my involvement,” he said. “She has her own campaign.”

Still, some local attorneys--mostly from the defense bar--argue that the prosecutor should stay as far away from judicial politics as possible.

“The appearance of impropriety is as bad as impropriety itself,” Farley said. “Mike Bradbury’s appearance of stacking the court, of pushing his own people in, is the appearance of impropriety.”

Farley and others said they do not believe that White would be capable of impartiality in trying cases involving Bradbury’s office.

“She should not be allowed to hear criminal cases until . . . Bradbury is no longer in office,” Farley said.

Others say they are concerned about what they perceive to be Bradbury’s desire to load the court with his former staff members. Already, more than half of the judges on the 15-member Superior Court once worked in the district attorney’s office.

Defense attorney Wendy Lascher said she is concerned about Bradbury’s role in White’s campaign.

“Here’s someone she owes a lot of gratitude to,” Lascher said.

She said she is also troubled by some of the letters that Bradbury has signed for White, including one that refers to Farley as an “anti-death penalty, criminal-coddling attorney.”

That same letter goes on to say: “I can’t recall when the public last had such a clear choice.”

Said Lascher: “The letter he wrote was outrageous and offensive--offensive to everyone in the county.”

At the same time, Lascher said she is not surprised that the district attorney wants like-minded people on the bench.

“In a perfect world, we would want more neutrality,” she said. “But it’s not a perfect world.”

Deputy Public Defender Neil B. Quinn said he also believes that White would be too indebted to Bradbury if she defeats Farley.

“Every action in her campaign suggests that the best way to be elected is to trumpet Mr. Bradbury,” Quinn said. “She is totally dependent on Mike Bradbury.”

Some lawyers are second-guessing their support of White for other reasons.

They are concerned about Bradbury’s move in April to disqualify Superior Court Judge Lawrence Storch from hearing any new criminal cases. Storch is the senior judge in the court’s criminal section.

Storch and Bradbury have collided over some of the policies of Bradbury’s office, including one that prohibits plea bargaining in most instances. Storch has said the policy unnecessarily bogs down the court. Bradbury considers Storch too lenient.

The judge and the prosecutor have disagreed on several high-profile murder cases in which Storch handed out rulings against the recommendation of the district attorney’s office.

Case of the State Bar--who personally supports White for judge--said he is “struggling” to make sense out of Bradbury’s actions toward Storch. He said he would not withdraw his support for White because of it, but would like to know where she stands on the issue.

White and Bradbury have refused to comment directly on the Storch disqualification. Bradbury has said he wants tough judges on the bench and not “touchy-feely, anti-death penalty types.”

“I happen to want a judge on the bench who has a similar philosophy,” Bradbury said. “What is so mysterious and problematic about this? As a district attorney, I certainly would not want someone philosophically opposed to the death penalty or, as Mr. Farley says, morally opposed to it.

“Why would I want someone like that on the bench?”

Bradbury and White, promoted to assistant district attorney in 1984, have been friends since the 1970s. White helped Bradbury on his first campaign for district attorney in 1978.

The pair’s friendship has also included business deals. In 1989, Bradbury and White bought a condominium in Camarillo as a rental investment. They sold the property last year, records show, and both now call it a bad business deal. Bradbury said he has also made investments with several other friends who wound up on the bench, including Riley.

He was always careful to divest himself of those interests, Bradbury said, before his partners assumed a judgeship.

White said she has had business deals with other members of the district attorney’s office--most of them successful. She said she is financially secure and described herself as “very frugal.”

She said she sees nothing wrong with her investment with Bradbury, but in hindsight wishes that she had not made it because the real estate market fell shortly after the condo was purchased.

“It was a real bad investment,” she said.