Judicial Race Referendum on Courts

Ask supporters of Kevin McGee to sum up the race for Superior Court and they will say it’s about selecting an evenhanded judge who values the concept of public safety.

Ask supporters of Gary Windom to do the same, and they will say it’s about selecting an evenhanded judge from somewhere other than the top ranks of the district attorney’s office.

During the campaign, neither has challenged the other’s claim to that elusive virtue known around courthouses as judicial temperament.

McGee is almost universally seen as the low-key, hard-working prosecutor whose drive and intelligence have propelled him into his office’s No. 2 position. Likewise, Windom’s reputation as a diligent public defender and a passionate instructor at Ventura College of Law has gone virtually unchallenged.

Instead, the race has been cast not just as a choice between two accomplished attorneys but as a referendum on the court itself.

More than two-thirds of the Ventura courts’ sitting judges ascended from the district attorney’s office, Windom never fails to tell prospective voters at forums and campaign coffees. As a consequence, he contends, some judges needlessly tilt toward the district attorney’s office in decisions both large and small.

“I think there’s a clear leaning toward the prosecution,” Windom said. “It should raise concern about the independence of these two separate branches of government.”

Some attorneys echo the point, which has been a refrain in past judicial contests.

“I think the perspective of a criminal defense lawyer is drastically needed on the bench,” said Wendy Lascher, a past president of the Ventura County Bar Assn. “The influence of the district attorney’s office is far too strong.”

Critics Point to Severe Sentences

A lawyer who specializes in appeals, Lascher said she often sees cases that have been too severely charged by the district attorney’s office and too severely sentenced by judges who once worked there.

But McGee dismisses such criticism. Judges tend to be independent thinkers, he says. And some of the critics upset by imbalance on the bench are also quick to express their respect for former prosecutors, such as the late Frederick Jones, who went on to win acclaim as jurists.

Stressing his conservatism, McGee describes his beliefs and Windom’s as being “light years apart.” He suggests Windom would be less willing to impose the death penalty and the three-strikes law. At a recent forum, he questioned the public’s willingness to trust any defense attorney elevated to the bench.

Defense lawyers help people avoid responsibility for criminal conduct, McGee said. “I feel more comfortable as a prosecutor, holding people who have committed crimes accountable for them.”

Windom has said he would enforce the death penalty and three-strikes laws. He also has argued against demonizing defense attorneys, contending that public safety can’t be achieved unless the rights of individuals are protected.

The campaign’s heated rhetoric during the summer prompted an unusual resolution from the Ventura County Bar Assn., which urged all parties to recognize that defense attorneys “are no less qualified for judicial office than any other lawyers, including district attorneys.”

Even so, McGee’s assertions sit well with the county’s law enforcement leaders. All of them--plus a slew of other civic and political figures--have endorsed McGee.

“Kevin and I have worked together for years, and I have an incredible amount of confidence in his ability, impartiality and intelligence,” said Sheriff Bob Brooks, who is not bothered by the thought of another prosecutor-turned-judge.

“It really doesn’t make any difference,” he said. “To say he’s pre- programmed by his experience with the district attorney’s office is like saying his opponent is pre-programmed by being a public defender.”

At the heart of the issue is McGee’s boss, Michael Bradbury. Ventura County’s district attorney for 20 years, Bradbury can walk into 19 of the county’s 26 Superior Courts and see his former deputies dressed in black judicial robes.

Critics of both Bradbury and the courts have made the most of such numbers. In the June primary, family law attorney Cathleen Drury argued that most Ventura County judges were ill-equipped to handle divorce and custody cases because they had little if any family law experience. Garnering 28.5% of the vote, she finished a close third behind Windom.

Court Painted as Old Boys’ Club

More broadly, some of Windom’s supporters paint the court as an old boys’ club that owes favors to the district attorney.

The conflict most recently surfaced when the public defender’s office legally challenged four of the 14 judges who had signed a letter endorsing McGee in the primary. The Court of Appeal ruled that the judges--12 of them former prosecutors--were within their rights, but had exercised poor judgment by creating the appearance that the court as an institution supported McGee.

“It’s a dangerous situation,” said Public Defender Neil Quinn, pointing out that Bradbury contributes money and clout to subordinates trying to get a spot on the bench. “It’s like Daley in Chicago. You go through one man to be judge. It’s unhealthy, despite good-faith attempts at integrity.”

Quinn acknowledged that most judicial decisions are unbiased.

“But the cloud that this indebtedness may affect decisions constantly hangs over our heads,” he said. “If Bradbury phoned them for a favor, could they turn it down?”

Bradbury’s answer is unequivocal: “We wouldn’t ask for favors, and they’re the kind of people who would never consider it. There has never been a hint of that.”

In fact, Bradbury said, Superior Court Judge Vincent O’Neill, one of his former top deputies, ruled against one of the office’s first three-strikes prosecutions. “By no stretch would that be considered doing us a favor,” he said.

As for McGee, Bradbury spares no praise, painting him as “the conscience of the district attorney’s office.” Bradbury said McGee has occasionally persuaded him to rethink his positions.

“He isn’t a yes man,” Bradbury said. “I don’t tolerate yes people around me.”

A native of Palm Desert, McGee was one of six children in a home where membership in the Boy Scouts was an unaffordable luxury. His father worked six days a week as parts manager for an auto dealer--a work-ethic reflected in McGee’s typical 12-hour days at the district attorney’s office.

After graduating from Loyola Law School in 1979, he took a job with an insurance defense firm in Los Angeles. He tired of the work after three years and started at the bottom in Bradbury’s office.

He rose quickly, making his mark with the prosecution of repeat sex offender Larry Decker, who had married a woman in order to molest her 13-year-old son.

As an administrator, McGee is proud of expanding his office’s services to crime victims, improving procedures in domestic cases, and successfully shepherding several high-profile cases through the legal system. The mother of Sherri Dally--the Ventura homemaker murdered by her husband and his girlfriend--was so grateful for McGee’s efforts she endorsed him in a radio commercial.

But for all that, McGee has not tried a case in 10 years--a record that Windom sees as a serious shortcoming for a prospective judge.

At a forum, McGee said he would want to study improving courtroom access for the disabled. He said he had talked with a hearing-impaired woman who complained she could not follow a court proceeding.

Lack of Court Experience Noted

Windom seized upon the comment.

“Those of us who have been practicing in court over the last 10 years know that there are amplification systems for the hearing-impaired,” Windom said.

McGee later explained that the court sound system had not been sufficient. Still, Windom had made his point: He is the candidate with the day-to-day courtroom experience required of a judge.

Windom grew up in Oxnard, where the entire City Council and County Supervisor John Flynn have endorsed him. He is active in the Black Americans Political Action Committee and founded a mentoring program for at-risk teens.

The breadth of Windom’s knowledge has been a cornerstone of his campaign.

“He’s a lawyer’s lawyer,” Public Defender Ken Clayman has said. “He’s forgotten more about the rules of evidence and how to try cases than most people learn in a lifetime.”

A graduate of UC Santa Barbara and Marquette University Law School, Windom spent 10 years in private civil practice. He represented clients as diverse as the Metropolitan Transportation Authority in Los Angeles and the TV show “Soul Train.” He also handled divorces, bankruptcies and other common civil cases.

In 1983, he was recruited by Clayman and took a 56% pay cut to join the public defender’s office--a move partly spurred by his ambition to one day become a judge.

Trying some of the office’s most complex cases, he has represented defendants in several widely followed crimes, including Silverio Ambriz, who was convicted after a rampage on California 118 that ended with the rape of a female motorist. Another client was Spencer Brasure, convicted in the torture-slaying of a young man at a remote Ventura County campground.

In a case involving a fatal shootout at a Newbury Park liquor store, Windom also took on the Los Angeles Police Department’s controversial Special Investigations Section, which has been repeatedly accused of allowing crimes to happen so officers would be justified in killing the criminals.

Windom bristles at any suggestion that defending dangerous clients is less noble a calling than prosecuting them.

“I represent clients not to get them off but to make sure they have a fair trial,” he said. “We make sure that the people mandated to charge properly do their job, that the courts do their job, that the police do their job--and, as a result, the system works.”

Ultimately, however, the voters should make their decision based on the candidate, not his current job, Windom said.

“We’d never want a prosecutor as a judge,” he said. “We’d never want a defense attorney as a judge. We want someone to make decisions that are just and fair, to be firm and show humanity.”

(BEGIN TEXT OF INFOBOX / INFOGRAPHIC)

Profiles

Kevin McGee

Age: 44

Residence: Newbury Park

Occupation: Chief assistant district attorney

Education: Loyola Marymount University, Loyola Law School

Background: After a three-year stint in civil litigation, McGee joined the district attorney’s office and worked his way up to second-in-command. In that position, he runs an office of more than 400 employees. Outside work, he has been active in his church, the United Way and other organizations.

Issues: McGee credits strong law enforcement with making Ventura County one of the safest places in the nation. Describing himself as a law-and-order candidate, he says judges also play an important role in keeping criminals off the streets. He vows fairness and courtesy to all who come before him.

Gary Windom

Age: 48

Residence: Camarillo

Occupation: Deputy public defender

Education: UC Santa Barbara, Marquette University Law School

Background: Raised in Oxnard, he was in the first graduating class at Channel Islands High School. He has served on several statewide criminal justice task forces and is involved in the local chapter of the Black Americans Political Action Committee. He helped start and run a mentoring program for at-risk teenagers in Oxnard.

Issues: Windom contends he is the candidate with the broader experience--10 years in civil law and 13 years as a deputy public defender. He says the bench has more than its share of former prosecutors and would benefit from the fresh perspective of a defense attorney.

*

‘I feel more comfortable as a prosecutor, holding people who have committed crimes accountable for them.’ Kevin McGee

*

‘I think there’s a clear leaning toward the prosecution. It should raise concern . . . .’

Gary Windom