News-Record.com

Took due note of your column and thank you for helping me cast a conscientious vote. A nagging question that constantly pops up in my mind is how safe is it to publicly express negative opinions of a public figure such as a judge. One could find oneself in a court room face to face with a henchman. Haven't found the answer to the on whether there is such a creature in existence as an unbiased judge.

You're right. Lawyers take a chance when they support or oppose judicial candidates. On one hand, I think most lawyers want good judges on the bench. On the other, they have to get along with those that aren't so good.

I'll bet 75% of the informed voters in these judges races voted for Enochs and Hassell. The Democratic party endorsed Foster and Crump even though the seats are non-partisan. The winning candidates road the tailwind. I am a Democrat, but was supporter of the two losing judges. I hope in the future the Democrats will either offer a better slate of judges or stay out of non-partisan elections. As for me, I'll just vote my own mind and hope that others will take the time to do the same. The real loser here is the public.

Hassell is a Democrat, and the Democratic ticket I saw listed both him and Crump.

The Dems did endorse Foster over Enochs but I know staunchly Democratic lawyers who were supporting Enochs.

Avery Crump is going to do an outstanding job. She has met all the qualifications for the position. She is adding diversity to a segment of American society that was lacking it. Voters are informed and what they wanted was DIVERSITY.

Thanks for your comment.

As I said, Avery Crump probably will do fine, although I might take her years of experiences to catch up to Hassell's level of expertise.

But she is not adding diversity to the District Court bench in Guilford County.

For those who want to count, these will be the diversity numbers once the newly elected judges are added:

Six white females,
Five black females,
Two white males,
One black male.

If gender is the major factor in judicial elections -- where the electorate is generally uninformed -- why did Guilford County voters go for Bob Edmunds over Suzanne Reynolds; Jim Wynn over Jewel Farlow; and Sam Ervin over Kristin Ruth?

I wonder if the Democratic Party's endorsement of Foster wasn't the major factor in her win.

I'm not sure there's any way of knowing, but I'm not convinced that gender is as big of a factor as those at the courthouse convince themselves it is.

Hassell and Crump are both Democrats and both were "endorsed" by the Dem Party. But she was way ahead of him.

Edmunds led Reynolds narrowly in Guilford. He's a Guilford resident, and that could have negated the gender issue. In regard to Wynn, this should have been a shutout if decided on qualifications, but it was fairly close. He also had the Dem endorsement.

The Dem-endorsed judicial candidates did outperform those who weren't in Guilford with the notable exceptions of Edmunds over Reynolds (close) and Hunter over Arrowood (not close).

I'm open to any and all possible explanations.

FACT CHECK: Foster "resigned" from the Superior Court court appointment list. The indigent committee found that "the allegations against her were unfounded." Wow, its great to know that even in Guilford County the good ole boys don't always win! If Hassell and White had campaigned as hard as Foster and Crump they would be judges. Foster and Crump, with limited funds and no good ole boy support, campaigned and won the support of the people. They both have four years to develope their skills. If you recall, Enochs wife was fresh out of law school when she first became judge. GET OVER IT! Guilford County has spoken!

Sorry, your "facts" are not correct. As I reported last month:

On July 17, Angela Foster was notified:

"The committee for the appointment of indigent counsel for the Eighteenth Judicial District has unanimously decided to remove you from all criminal appointment lists."

There was no conclusion that allegations were unfounded.

This correspondence is part of the public record. Anyone can request copies of everything in the file from the Committee on Indigent Appointments. I have.

In her written statement, which she hand-delivered to me on Oct. 10, Ms. Foster did not claim that she resigned from the appointment list. You can find her entire statement at the link I provided above.

What does Enochs' wife have to do with Ms. Foster's performance as a court-appointed attorney?

I don't have a better explanation Doug. I just don't think the "female judicial challengers beat male judicial incumbents/office seekers on the basis of gender" hypothesis holds water over time.

It appears to be a pattern, but it's not reliable. It didn't show up in Guilford County's last round of District Court races in '06, where the opportunity existed. And it didn't show up in the higher court races this time around.

It's also interesting, at least to me, that Foster and Crump received nearly identical vote totals, but Crump won by a larger percentage. Less people voted in the Crump-Hassell race, for whatever reason.

I also find it interesting that nearly 100,000 Guilford County voters couldn't be bothered to vote in the judicial races. Perhaps that's a good thing -- an open admission that they failed to do their research and can't make an educated decision. Then again, it's hard to believe that all the folks who did vote took the time to educate themselves about the candidates.

Trends change over time, and the gender trend seems to have emerged in the last few years.

In 2004, women won the three female vs. male District Court races in Guilford County.

In 2006, there was only one. Tom Jarrell beat Susan O'Hale.

This time, women were 3-0 vs. men.

So that's 6-1 over the last three elections.

There are other factors that stir the current. I'd say party and race. To what extent, I can't tell.

Candidates' individual campaign efforts matter, but money sure isn't decisive. The candidate with less money won each race this year.

Just an update. I spoke a while ago with Betty Brown, one of the victorious candidates. She said she had people tell her at the polls they voted for her because she's a woman.

She also said she worked hard, getting all around the county meeting people.

I don't doubt it. I saw her at a couple of candidates' events myself, including one where she was the only judicial candidate present.

Doug,
I am a Private Investigator who has worked with Angela Foster on numerous cases that were assigned to her by the Indigent Defense Service. At no time and let me say again, at no time did she ever miss a meeting with a client. When it became apparent that she would be running against Mr. Enochs, the evil head of politics raised it's ugly head. As for experience, it takes years for any judge to gain experience just as it has taken years for you to be a columnist. But, maybe you forgot about that.

Doug,
I am a Private Investigator who has worked with Angela Foster on numerous cases that were assigned to her by the Indigent Defense Service. At no time and let me say again, at no time did she ever miss a meeting with a client. When it became apparent that she would be running against Mr. Enochs, the evil head of politics raised it's ugly head. As for experience, it takes years for any judge to gain experience just as it has taken years for you to be a columnist. But, maybe you forgot about that.

Joel,

I've reported the action of the indigent committee which, as its notice to Ms. Foster stated, made a unanimous determination after its own investigation. The committee is made up of 13 attorneys, many of whom I spoke with personally about this matter. The time to dispute this issue was before the committee examined the evidence and drew its conclusions. Denials now seem rather meaningless.

It seems a shame for Guilford County to lose a great judge like Hassell. I worked the polls for him and had a sheriff's deputy come by on official business and stop to tell me what a great judge he is,

I admit to being uninformed about the judicial hierarchy, perhaps there is another more important judge position Robbie Hassell's talents could be utilized in?

I didn't mean to argue that gender is not a factor. I just remain unconvinced that it is the dominant one. I have no doubt that there are individual voters who make their decisions based on gender, as well as others who do so by ethnicity, age, alma mater, etc.

Anyway, I came back to this discussion after running across this interesting article about local races in Houston that posits another factor in judicial races: commonality of the candidate's name.

JJ,

What seems to be happening in Guilford County at the District Court level may not be so elsewhere or at other levels. It does seem complex and would be worth studying in depth.

Anyone with big money out there want to award me a research grant?

kb, there are opportunities for appointment to the bench that come up now and then but the competition is keen.

Heavy caseloads in Guilford County always argue for the creation of an additional judge seat. Maybe that will come up before the legislature next year, although probable budget cuts make it unlikely.

It is apparent to those of us who have read your article and your comments to those who commented on the race that you are not happy. All the people that you endorsed for judge lost. The paper does not have the influence that it once had when it came to influence on elections. Neither does the Simpkins-Pac. That organization made up of the so called all knowing and affluent people in Greensboro who think that they should be able to guide the voters into voting for the people that they feel should hold public office.
The people who won their elections worked hard and spent less money. The voters made a choice and put these women in office. I worked the polls on various days and did not see those who lost out there in the cold and rain, nor did I see anyone on their behalf. If you want something you have to work for it, you don’t get to just sit on you butt and then looked surprised when you didn’t win. Maybe they should have spent less and got out there and worked. If those persons work as hard on the bench as they did to get elected the people of Guilford County are going to be okay.
You sound as though you have issues with women. People didn’t put much salt into you opinion. Just as you don’t seem to care for those expressed by the people who have responded, it is evident that we don’t care much for yours either. What is done is done.

No question that in an elective system, candidates have an incentive to work hard. But it takes more than working hard at the polls to be a good judge. The best politician could turn out to be the worst judge, but that's the risk when we choose judges by political means.

You said all the judicial candidates we endorsed lost. Wrong. Most of them won. Here's the scorecard:

Supreme Court:

Edmunds (won)

Court of Appeals:

Wynn (won)
Stephens (won)
Arrowood (lost)
McCullough (lost)
Ervin (won)

District Court:

Burch (won)
Enochs (lost)
Hassell (lost)
Brown (won)
Sizemore (won)

So our endorsements coincided with the results in 7 of 11.

We endorsed four women in judicial races. I don't have anything against women on the bench, but I would not vote for a woman I believed was less qualified simply because of her gender.

My family early voted. The N&R didn't publish a concise list of endorsements (that I saw) that early voters could've taken to the polls (like the Dems yellow postcard or the mailing sent out by Simkins PAC).
My father & I were discussing who to vote for re: judges with the limited info we had and we agreed that when in doubt, always pick the female candidate.
I can't even say why, but my dad says he does that too, so I'm wondering if there are lots of voters out there who do the same thing.'
Maybe I should've just skipped voting for the judges if I didn't have enough information?
The ballot was so long, with so many different races, what are the "less informed" and time challenged among us to do?

Thanks, Cheryl. It sounds harsh, but I really think not voting is more responsible than voting on gender.

In Mecklenburg County, a female candidate who filed but then said she didn't really want to be a judge and didn't campaign at all won over a male incumbent who was considered a good judge.