League of Women Voters of California Education Fund
	Los Angeles County, CA June 3, 2014 Election
	Candidates Answer Questions on the Issues Judge of the Superior Court; County of Los Angeles; Office 117

The questions were prepared by the League of Women Voters of Los Angeles and asked of all candidates for this office.     See below for questions on Qualifications, Alternative Sentences for Non-Violent Offenders Click on a name for candidate information.   See also more information about this contest. 1. What specific personal qualities make you especially qualified to be a judge? Answer from Carol Najera: I have been an attorney for 28 years, sharpening my skills in court on a daily basis and have supervised attorneys of varying skill levels. This has prepared me to be patient and respectful of all who would appear before me, including witnesses and jurors. Answer from James B. Pierce: Our community deserves an experienced judge who has independence, integrity, diligence, competence, and impartiality. I have done this for the past 25 years and, with the voters help, hope to continue. The doors of justice must be kept open for all. 2. Do you favor alternative sentences for non-violent offenders in view of the current prisoner overcrowding problems, and if so, what options should be available? Answer from James B. Pierce: Yes. As long as public safety is assured, an experienced judge should attempt to save taxpayers' dollars by considering all of the following fully funded alternatives: probation, county parole, electronic monitoring, GPS, SCRAM alcohol monitoring, drug testing and live-in alternatives, mental health live-in alternatives, CAL TRANS, work furlough, and community service Answer from Carol Najera: In view of the current prison overcrowding problem, the citizens of California are facing some tough decisions. If we continue to incarcerate individuals at the rate we have in the past, we will simply run out of room to house them. We can build more prisons and continue to house them at great expense but this is only a temporary measure, because there is a huge number of repeat offenders who are essentially serving a life sentence in increments. When you add new offenders to this number, it is clear that building more prisons is merely a temporary panacea and does not address the real problem. A possible solution lies in getting non-violent offenders off this treadmill and out of the system. This may be helped through the prudent use of alternative sentencing, which should provide both incentive and support to end this cycle of incarceration. Split sentences is one such viable option. This allows for a defendant to be sentenced to both a specific jail term and mandatory post release supervision. If a defendant violates the terms of post release supervision, he/she will face jail for the rest of the sentence. The benefit of this program is that post release supervision will be more inclusive and the defendant will have a greater incentive to work toward rehabilitation. Another possible alternative to incarceration in specific "non-violent" cases is drug treatment programs with mental health components when necessary. The problem with many current treatment programs is that very few, if any, have mental health components yet many of the issues which lead to recidivism can be directly traced to mental health issues. Along with these drug and mental health programs, another possible alternative is wrap-around basic living skills and GED programs. If defendants are taught how to live right and when necessary, properly educated, they will have more opportunities and more of an investment in society. Once one is invested in society, there is less chance they will want to tear it down. All these alternatives boil down to a simple yet very old saying, " Give a man a fish and he'll eat for a day, teach him to fish and he will eat for life." We need alternatives that teach defendants to live in society for life and be able to feed themselves. Responses to questions asked of each candidate are reproduced as submitted to the League.  Candidates' answers are presented as submitted. The order of the candidates is random and changes daily. Candidates who did not respond are not listed on this page.