In this installment of our continuing series on the upcoming June primary election, we look at the election of Superior Court judges. When reading the frequent stories of sexual predators that get either a short sentence, or an early release, after which they are free to rape and murder again (see related story), we begin to wonder how judges are held accountable for their actions and conduct. In the June 8 primary election, voters will be asked to elect some new judges. In Part 1 of this election installment, we considered one of those races, while in this Part 2, we address the second such contest.

According to a spokesperson for the Superior Court, Orange County has 115 Superior Court Judges and 28 Superior Court Commissioners. All California Superior Court Judges are elected to 6 year terms. Of those,www.OC180NEWS.com was told by the Registrar of Voters, that 50 are up for re-election in June. But, you will only find 5 on the June 8 ballot.

The remaining 45 judges filed papers to run again for their jobs, but nobody file to run against them. Thus, these judges will not even appear on the ballot. Unlike other offices up for re-election, if the race is not competitive, it does not appear on the ballot. This proverbial “slipping under the radar” is unique to Superior Court judges. For example, John Moorlach is running unopposed for the County Supervisor representing the Second District. But, even though he has no competition, this race will still be on the ballot.

The other backgrounder about judges is office numbers. Appearing on the ballot will be something like “ Superior Court Judge, Office No. 16. Vote for 1.” The office numbers do not mean anything, they are only for record keeping. All of these judges serve the county at large and thus, office numbers do not refer to a specific district within the county. Also, the office numbers do not relate to any particular type of court case, or any other meaningful aspect of the jobs.

Not only do judges with no competition slip off the ballot, there are no races where the incumbent judge is being challenged. The only judgeships on the June 8 ballot are for offices where the judge decline to run. So, there are no contests where an incumbent judge is facing off against a challenger, and, as we are told off the record, that’s the way it normally works.

In three of the five slots on this year’s ballot, there is no competitor. Scott Steiner, Cheri Pham, and Nick Dourbetas, all Deputy District Attorneys, will be elected to judgeships on June 8 because they are running unopposed. Assuming there are no write in candidates, all these three individuals need to do in order to secure a six year term as a Superior Court Judge is vote for themselves.

The second of the two competitive races is for SuperiorCourt Judge, Office No. 50. In this matchup, Julian W. Bailey, Juvenile Court Referee, goes against Lon Hurwitz, Superior Court Commissioner. Part 1 of this election installment, published yesterday, covered the race for Office 16, between Andy Manssourian and Gerald Klein.

In the race for office 50, the people will select Baily, a Juvenile Court Referee or Hurwitz,Superior Court Commissioner. Mr.Bailyexplained towww.OC180NEWS.com in his current job, he hears two types of cases—juveniledelinquency cases andjuveniledependency cases. Since 1980, He has only judged juvenile cases. If elected he would be able to hear all types of cases.

We asked Baily if the limit of his judicial experience to juvenile cases would be an impediment to hearing all types of cases. He said “As a lawyer, I’ve tried a broad spectrum of cases—death penalty cases, homicide cases. I’ve tried civil cases in state and federal court as well.”

We tried to get Baily to provide his perspective on the death penalty and the recent sentencing of a CHP officer for attempted child molestation (see related articles below). Baily said “It’s inappropriate for a judicial officer to express an opinion on a matter that might come before him.” But, in reference to the death penalty, he added “It’s a constitutional remedy in our system and I certainly don’t have any personal objections to it, and if I were called upon to impose it as a judge in an appropriate case, I wouldn’t hesitate to do it.”

Baily was much harder to pin down when we asked him about the recent Orange County case in which a convicted child molester, who was also a former CHP officer, was given a light sentence against the strong objections of the Orange County District Attorney. (See our related article below.) In this case, the defendant’s position as a CHP officer at the time the crime was committed became an important issue in the judges sentencing decision. The DA’s position was that this was one of the reasons for a longer sentence, but the judge did not agree, and said the defendant’s service as a law enforcement officer should be given some credit towards a lighter sentence.

When we pressedBaily on this he said “I think it’s {service as a law enforcement officer} something that should be considered {in a sentencing decision}. Whether it comes down as leniency or increasing a person’s punishment, is something you are going to have to decide in a given case.”

The competition for Bailey in the race for office 50 comes from perhaps the person with the most judicial experience of any of the competitive judicial candidates. LonHurwitz serves as a Superior Court Commissioner, which we were told by a spokesperson for the Superior Court is essentially the same job as a sitting judge.

Hurwitztold us “A commissioner is someone that is elected by the judges to do judge work when there are not enough judicial positions to do all the work that the county needs.”

The official job description for a commissioner includes the following: “These duties mirror those performed by judges, although some (e.g., presiding over trials) require assignment by the Court to act as a temporary judge as well as a stipulation by all parties.”

Hurwitz indicated his current assignment is in child domestic violence cases. He said “I hear all the domestic violence cases involving children that don’t have already a divorce case or a paternity filing.”

He continued “For the last nearly 6 years, I’ve done basically the same job as a judge.” SinceHurwitz is a “sitting judicial officer”, he would not comment on our death penalty question, or our question about the sentencing of the former CHP officer for attempted child molestation (see our article below).

As for endorsements, they are more difficult to characterize then those for office 16. If we continue to group them into insiders and not insiders, we would have to conclude the insiders are more lined up behindBaily than they are behind Hurwitz. While it appearsHurwitzhas more judges and prosecutors listed as supporters on his web site, he doesn’t list the heavy political hitters. Baily has Tony Rackauckas, Orange County District Attorney; Dana Rohrabacher, Congressman, 46th District; Janet Nguyen, Chair, Orange County Board of Supervisors; William G. Steiner, Former Chairman, Orange County Board of Supervisors; Ken Calvert, Congressman; Diane Harkey Assembymember; Jim Silva, Assemblymember.

Thus, if you want the political insider candidate, even though he appears to have less relevant experience, Baily is probably your choice. However if you want the candidate who seems to be more of the court insider, Hurwitz is probably the one you want.

When considering DA endorsement and/or experience as a prosecutor in the district attorney’s office, keep in mind that the judge in the CHP/child molestation case, Marc Kelly, was himself a former Deputy District Attorney.