D.A. Hopefuls Attack Absent Incumbent at Forum

The five candidates challenging Los Angeles County Dist. Atty. Steve Cooley for election attacked the incumbent at a forum Monday, saying he failed to aggressively prosecute police corruption and did not put enough resources into crime prevention.

But instead of answers from Cooley, there was an empty seat with a placard bearing his name.

“Even with the Thomas Guide, he probably couldn’t find anything south of the 10 freeway when it came to working in our neighborhoods about crime,” said former Councilman Nick Pacheco, prompting several chuckles in the audience.

Cooley had a scheduling conflict -- an appearance on a cable television show in the Antelope Valley -- and tried to persuade the organizers to pick a different day, his campaign spokesman said.

“He wanted to be there,” said John Shallman. “He is willing to debate.... We are disappointed that they made no effort to change the date.”

Cooley must receive 50% plus one of the vote next Tuesday to avoid a runoff.

His opponents are Pacheco, Head Deputy Dist. Atty. Tom Higgins, Deputy Dist. Atty. Denise Moehlman, former Deputy Dist. Atty. Anthony Patchett and public law attorney Roger Carrick.

The debate was moderated by the League of Women Voters and sponsored by the Youth Justice Coalition, a youth-led organization.

Nearly 200 community members and students attended the forum, which took place at All People’s Christian Church in South Los Angeles.

“We’re trying to get a D.A. that is really trying to help out the youth,” said 19-year-old organizer Rodrigo Vazquez. “We’re trying to open up their eyes and let them know what we need.”

The candidates answered questions on the use of gang injunctions, the California Youth Authority and the value of juvenile probation camps. In response to a question about the prosecution of minorities, Carrick accused Cooley of racial profiling, and Pacheco said the incumbent gives special treatment to friends and fundraisers.

The candidates agreed on the need to involve communities, families and churches to reduce crime.

They disagreed, however, on the use of Proposition 21, the initiative that allows prosecutors to directly file cases against juveniles in adult court.

Higgins said the district attorney’s office needs to uphold the law and prosecute serious and violent juveniles in adult court. But Patchett said the office has become draconian by sending too many youths to the adult system.

“It’s been abused by the district attorney’s office,” Patchett said. Carrick said juveniles should be tried in adult court only in “extreme” situations.

The candidates also suggested establishing more domestic violence courts, expanding crime prevention programs and improving witness protection.

“There’s more to this job than prosecuting people,” said Carrick, who said he would do more lobbying as the county’s chief prosecutor.

The opponents each tried to distinguish themselves, with Higgins and Patchett citing their management experience, Carrick maintaining he’s the outside candidate, Moehlman pointing out that she is the prosecutor in the trenches, and Pacheco saying he’s most qualified because of his experience in City Hall.