LA DA Candidates, in Their Own Words

A Round-Up of Q's and A's that Resonate Well Beyond LA

Feb 07, 2024

Thanks again to the California Globe for running this series. You can visit the website at: https://californiaglobe.com/

As we have done for a number of other important California political races in the past, we asked each of the candidates for Los Angeles District Attorney if they wished to take part in a question and answer series on the major issues facing the office.

Five of the candidates participated, while incumbent George Gascon and five others declined or did not respond.

We asked ten questions and here are the answers submitted – published verbatim.

These appeared as five separate stories in the Globe, but thinking that simply re-running each would be a bit much, email-wise, I’ve put them all together, keeping the question couplet/background explainer intro format.

Five candidates did not participate: Eric Siddall, John McKinney, Jon Hatami, Jeff Chemerinsky, and Craig Mitchell. Disappointing, and a missed opportunity for them, to say the least.

The first question couplet involves Prop 47 and misdemeanors. The passage of 47 and the failure to prosecute misdemeanors – often called “quality of life” crimes – have played significant roles in creating the degraded state of public safety in California’s cities. Smash and grab robberies and rampant shoplifting and increased street drug use and violence are just two of the consequences of these policies.

Questions about proposition 47 have continued to roil law enforcement circles and the public. Do you believe there is a direct relationship between its passage and the increase in property crime? Also, do you believe there is a direct relationship between its passage and increased drug abuse due to its removal of potential penalties? Would you support its repeal and/or amendment?

NATHAN HOCHMAN

I would support efforts to significantly modify Proposition 47. I think the public has become more aware of what happens to safety and security when you remove felony prosecutions for those who use certain dangerous and highly addictive drugs (like fentanyl) and increase the misdemeanor theft limit to $950.

While some aspects of Proposition 47 may make sense, like changing possession of marijuana from a felony to a misdemeanor, particularly after marijuana’s legalization, the rest of Proposition 47 has in no way lived up to its title as the “Safe Neighborhood and Schools Act.” On the drug side, by effectively decriminalizing not just the possession of marijuana but the possession of highly addictive/dangerous drugs like fentanyl, heroin, ecstasy, and methamphetamine, Proposition 47 gutted the very successful drug courts since drug addicts no longer faced state prison for these crimes and have unleashed a tsunami of drug-motivated crimes by those needing to steal to feed their drug addictions. When coupled with the raising of the felony theft threshold to $950 and DA Gascon’s prohibition or reluctance to prosecute juvenile/adult misdemeanor theft cases, we have seen an explosion of these theft crimes. To fix Proposition 47, we need to create, at a minimum, a serial misdemeanor/felony statute that makes clear that thefts under $950 can be aggregated over a certain time frame (180 days or a year), which then become felonies. We also need to revisit re-instituting misdemeanor/felony wobblers for certain drug crimes like the possession of highly dangerous and addictive drugs.

DEBRA ARCHULETA

There is undoubtedly a direct relationship between Prop. 47 and property crime because the current DA refuses to enforce the law as it is written. What started out as a well-intentioned way to reduce non-violent offenses from felonies to misdemeanors, the lack of any enforcement of these misdemeanors has led to an unfettered increase in serious thefts committed by repeat offenders without consequences. Current statistics show a startling increase in these types of property crimes despite protestations to the contrary. Further, the decriminalization of the personal use of drugs has discouraged individuals with drug addiction from receiving the court-mandated treatment they so desperately need to get back on the road to recovery.

DANIEL KAPELOVITZ

Property crime has risen because fearmongers have misled the public into believing that nothing happens to people who commit those crimes. Imagine if the fearmongers convinced everyone that the DA will not prosecute anyone who robs a bank. Bank robberies would obviously increase.

Gascón is prosecuting theft crimes. And they are filed as felonies because stealing, say, even one designer bag meets the $950 threshold.

The “rational criminal” who goes into a store and steals $949 worth of goods is a myth. One candidate recently claimed she saw videos of people going into stores with calculators to make sure they can’t be charged with a felony. I will donate $10,000 to her campaign if she can produce one such legitimate video.

As for mere drug possession, it should be decriminalized. People who are addicted to drugs need treatment — not punishment, and especially not up to three years in prison.

MARIA RAMIREZ

I support the amendment of Prop 47 to better address the current issues with public safety that the

county is experiencing. What Prop 47 has done, in conjunction with the current DA policies and the new zero bail system, is take away our ability to effectively prosecute repeat offenders. As we have seen in the recent smash and grab thefts, many of those involved are repeat offenders who are not being held accountable for their actions. We must restore our ability to prosecute these incidents as felonies after the offender commits two or three petty thefts. Our legislation must adjust to the increase in crime whatever the reason for it. I also believe that there is some correlation between the increase in drug abuse and Prop 47 in that it hindered our ability to get drug abusers into treatment as part of their case resolution. Again, no accountability leads to an increase in the conduct.

DAVID MILTON

I believe there is a direct link between its passage and increase in property crime. Since its passage, current DA George Gascon has used one of its provisions to undercharge certain criminal conduct such as “Smash & Grab” theft events as misdemeanors that result immediate release of perpetrators who should be charged with burglary and robbery if force or fear is used. Arguably there is a correlation because stolen merchandise likely is sold on the streets which, in-turn, allows for drug purchases.

And the second question:

While the term “misdemeanor” makes them sound minor, misdemeanor crimes clearly have a more direct negative impact on the lives of typical residents than far rarer high-profile crimes. Would you aggressively prosecute misdemeanors and/or “quality of life” crimes if you are elected District Attorney?

NATHAN HOCHMAN

Yes. Unlike our current DA, I would not play politics by selecting which crimes I would or would not prosecute. A crime is a crime, and I am obligated by law to enforce the law. I believe in the Broken Windows proposition that a spiral of lawlessness starts with the failure to prosecute small crimes (theft under $950) which then can quickly grow to bigger crimes (smash-and-grab robberies, home robberies, armed robberies). As DA, I would reverse the spiral of lawlessness to become a spiral of lawfulness by going after these smaller “quality of life” crimes.

DEBRA ARCHULETA

I will absolutely prosecute “quality of life” crimes when they impact everyone in the community.

When we allow crimes like vandalism and public defecation to persist in our neighborhoods and business districts, everyone in the area suffers. I have spoken with hundreds of Angelenos who agree that the issue of crime, along with homelessness, is a priority for them. Many feel that our leaders are not taking responsibility for the safety and well-being of our communities and their residents.

DANIEL KAPELOVITZ

Being charged with a misdemeanor can be quite serious. Facing a year in jail is serious. Losing your job or not being able to find one due to a misdemeanor conviction is serious. Losing your home because you can’t afford bail and are stuck in jail fighting your case is serious. And if you aren’t a U.S. citizen, having certain misdemeanor convictions is extremely serious. Anyone who thinks that being charged with a misdemeanor and facing months in jail is not serious has likely never been to jail.

Except for the most serious misdemeanor offenses, I will not oppose diversion programs where the

result is no conviction on someone’s record. For most first-time misdemeanor offenders, the process of being charged with a crime is enough to deter future offenses. Moreover, I will not prosecute many misdemeanors at all, such as drug possession, gambling, and crimes involving consensual sex between adults.

MARIA RAMIREZ

As District Attorney, our main responsibility is to prosecute the crimes that are affecting our

communities. The legislature has determined that misdemeanors are crimes and should be prosecuted. Our cities have demanded accountability for misdemeanors. As District Attorney I will prosecute crimes, including misdemeanors. Where we can be flexible and thoughtful is determining on a case-by-case basis what accountability means for the specific conduct. Accountability does not necessarily mean jail…there are other ways of holding misdemeanants responsible for their conduct, including community service, paying for the damage caused, and complying with services that may have affected their conduct.

DAVID MILTON

Any crime, whether misdemeanor or felony should be filed if it can be proven beyond a reasonable doubt. That is the filing standard that I would enforce as District Attorney.

As to George Gascon, he was asked different but related questions:

As the co-author of Prop 47, do you believe it has had a generally positive impact on public safety? If you believe a change needs to be made, what would that be?

The blanket non-prosecution of certain misdemeanors has unquestionably led to a feeling of lawlessness amongst the public. In your second term, will you begin to prosecute more misdemeanors and/or other “quality of life” crimes?

He did not reply to the request.

Couplet two:

When Los Angeles Mayor Karen Bass held a press conference to announce an inter-agency law enforcement task force to tackle the issue of smash and grab robberies, one person was noticeably absent: Los Angeles District Attorney George Gascon.

Exactly how bad does your relationship with the rest of law enforcement have to be to – as the chief prosecutor - not be asked to be a part of such an event? As a former elected official I can tell you: very very very bad.

Cops simply do not trust Gascon to prosecute people properly when they are arrested, a fact that has led directly to fewer arrests (that’s why Gascon can try to claim crime is down – pretty convenient, huh?)

As to the death penalty, it is an admittedly sticky ethical issue for some but not only is it state law but attempts to eliminate it entirely have been soundly rejected by California – twice.

How has George Gascon harmed the DA’s office relationship with other law enforcement agencies and can it be repaired and, if so, how?

DEBRA ARCHULETA

Gascón has actively and intentionally strained the relationship between the DA’s office and their law enforcement partners. Many officers feel demoralized because the DA’s failure to prosecute misdemeanor and felony crimes has rendered their efforts meaningless. Our law enforcement agencies feel disrespected, with some losing approximately twenty percent of their force. Our communities absorb these losses as they result in longer response times, a lower level of service, and fewer cases filed on behalf of victims. Despite the years he spent as a police officer and in police leadership, Gascón has abandoned those who have followed in his footsteps since becoming District Attorney. Restoring these one-strong partnerships will be a priority in my administration.

DANIEL KAPELOVITZ

I already work well with law enforcement, and in fact, treat them with more respect in court than many prosecutors. While I have no police-union support, many retired officers who have spent decades in law enforcement have endorsed me.

Instead of defunding the police, we need to increase funding to pay for more training and to offer higher salaries to recruit the best people. The same goes for our attorneys. We need to compete with corporate law firms and pay competitive salaries so new attorneys will work for us instead of soul- sucking law firms. And we need to be able to hire veteran criminal attorneys from other jurisdictions and offices and from private practice.

MARIA RAMIREZ

The relationship between the District Attorney’s Office and law enforcement is critical to carrying out our duties to keep the community safe from crime. From Day 1, George Gascon excluded law enforcement from his plan for a “reformed” public safety plan. Gascon has not listened to law enforcement when they express concerns about how to effectively carry out his policies without harming the public. Gascon hired and promoted a self-proclaimed “cop hater” to Chief of Staff knowing that this will further damage his relationship with law enforcement. It is clear that the relationship between Gascon and law enforcement is broken. I do not know if the relationship can be fixed because Gascon would have to first acknowledge that he made several mistakes and second would have to start including law enforcement in discussions about prosecution policies. It seems unlikely that Gascon has a sincere willingness to collaborate with law enforcement.

DAVID MILTON

Mr. Gascon has caused law enforcement agencies to lose complete confidence in the office. The agencies are aware that many of the cases will be handled with an eye toward filing charges that carry the least amount of penalty. That filing will be declined in many instances, and serious crimes will be downgraded to misdemeanors. Recently, Mr. Gascon appointed as his Chief-of-Staff, an individual who advocates for the disbandment of police agencies, including LAPD. She stated that they are “barbarians” “who are out to kill us.” I would restore the much-needed confidence based on my long-time experience as a deputy district attorney who worked on many serious and difficult cases with many police agencies.

NATHAN HOCHMAN

Collaboration is one of the most important qualities of a District Attorney and arguably is one of the current DA’s greatest failures. Gascon has made a point of putting special interests and politics over the needs and support of law enforcement, resulting in a deteriorated relationship and lack of trust between law enforcement agencies and his office. He has been more interested in prosecuting the police than partnering with them.

As District Attorney, I will always exercise an open-door policy with our partners and ensure their voices are heard on crucial matters regarding our justice system. I am in a unique position to restore the collaborative partnership between the DA’s Office and local, state, and federal law enforcement, having worked as a federal prosecutor and US Assistant Attorney General; led federal, state and local task forces; defended law enforcement officers in administrative hearings and court; co-founded the LA Sheriff’s Foundation; but also have personally prosecuted corrupt officers. This gives me credibility with all groups – law enforcement, victims, the public – that my calls will be based on the evidence and the law, not some political ideological agenda like Gascon.

California voters have repeatedly affirmed their support for the death penalty. Would you ever pursue the death penalty and, if not, why?

DEBRA ARCHULETA

The District Attorney’s Office has a Special Circumstances Committee that reviews all death-eligible and LWOP cases. This team, consisting of many of the most experienced prosecutors, meet to discuss the appropriate penalty in these types of cases. As a Deputy District Attorney, I appeared before this Committee. The death penalty is to be considered only in extremely rare instances for particularly egregious cases, such as a mass school shooting or murder of a police officer in the line of duty. As District Attorney, I would pursue the death penalty only under such severe circumstances. Ultimately, however, the death penalty is imposed by the jury in each case and is subject to multiple levels of appellate review.

DANIEL KAPELOVITZ

In LA County, where I’m running, the majority of voters in 2016 voted to repeal the death penalty.

Views have changed since 2016. People are realizing that the death penalty doesn’t work and

disproportionately affects nonwhites and the underprivileged. In a 2021 poll, 44% of Californians said they’d vote to eliminate the death penalty, with only 35% supporting it. Additionally, 48% supported Newsom’s executive order to halt executions, while only 33% opposed it.

I will never seek the death penalty. That people on death row have been exonerated is reason enough to eliminate it. Moreover, it doesn’t deter murder. People committing crimes assume they will not get caught. Otherwise, life in prison would deter them just as much as execution. Eliminating the death penalty would save California countless millions – money that could be used to address the root causes of violent crime. And, of course, killing people is wrong.

MARIA RAMIREZ

The death penalty continues to be the law in the state of California despite multiple attempts to repeal it. As District Attorney I must follow the law, but we have a responsibility to implement the law fairly and just. I will implement a thorough and robust process of review for the most heinous of murders and pursue the death penalty when appropriate.

DAVID MILTON

I have a great deal of experience with the subject matter. As a prosecutor, I achieved two death verdicts. As a judge, I imposed a death sentence. A district attorney’s personal view is not a relevant factor. A district attorney is duty-bound to follow the law. Californians have twice voted that the death penalty should be an option for the most egregious cases. If a district attorney is so opposed to the death penalty that he cannot follow the law, he should not be the district attorney.

I drafted two death penalty bills. Shooting from a motor vehicle causing death and shooting into an inhabited dwelling causing death. Because there is a moratorium on the penalty, the district attorney must evaluate on a case-by-case basis, collaborate with experienced deputy district attorneys and thereafter determine whether the penalty should be sought considering factors such as certainty of guilt, whether it likely will be imposed, budget constraints and other factors.

NATHAN HOCHMAN

The death penalty should be subject to the highest level of scrutiny by the DA’s Office, a jury, and the courts and should only be used in the rarest of cases. However, there are such extreme cases – for example, where police officers are assassinated in cold blood, where mass shootings at a school occur, where terrorists kill hundreds through a bombing -- when the death penalty should be on the table for consideration. I am well aware of the troubled history of the death penalty, of those who have later been vindicated, and of the philosophical issues concerning its implementation. However, as District Attorney, I take an oath to uphold all the laws, not just the laws I like. There is no asterisk in this oath, and any candidate who cannot fully uphold this oath to enforce all laws should be disqualified from being the District Attorney. As long as the death penalty is the law of California, I will honor my oath and subject it to the highest level of review, considering its charging in the most heinous of cases to which it applies.

Again, George Gascon, was asked different but related questions:

Your relationships with other law enforcement agencies are strained. Why is that so and what would you do to repair them?

California voters have repeatedly affirmed their support for the death penalty. You have an adamantine policy of never pursuing the death penalty. Is this not in direct conflict with the will of the public?

Again, he did not reply to the request.

And now to couplet three:

Besides presiding over a cratering sense of public safety, Los Angeles District Attorney George Gascon cannot, it seems, even run an office.

His own deputy district attorneys have sued him multiple times for retaliation and literally breaking the law himself, his former chief of staff skated on a drunk in public charge - https://californiaglobe.com/fr/ag-rob-bonta-lets gascon-minion-slide/ - , his current chief of staff is an avowed cop hater - https://californiaglobe.com/fr/los-angeles-da-george-gascons-ignites-more-controversy-with-chief-of-staff-appointment/ , and morale is lower than a Gascon misdemeanor sentence – i.e., zero.

This chaos is not just because Gascon is incompetent, but it is also related to his “justice reform” ideology. The office has lost hundreds of prosecutors due to Gascon’s overt politicization of criminal justice.

How does one best manage an office of professionals that both acknowledges individual expertise and experience while also ensuring continuity and overall adherence to the mission of the office?

DANIEL KAPELOVITZ

I will assign high positions to the best veteran deputy district attorneys, including a couple of my

opponents. They have a wealth of institutional knowledge that I would be a fool to ignore. I’ll also hire people who have unique perspectives. We will make the best decisions possible based on everyone’s input.

Morale is down. Prosecutors are overworked. I will hire people to fill the hundreds of vacancies.

Unlike Gascón, I will immediately meet with my line deputies to outline my plan to truly seek justice. Even as a defense attorney, I probably speak to more deputies each day than Gascón. I am in courthouses all over the County working with prosecutors trying to resolve cases. I’d be surprised if Gascón has even stepped foot in many of them. How can you relate to your line deputies if you’ve never tried a case and rarely, if ever, enter a courtroom?

MARIA RAMIREZ

Leadership that respects and relies on the knowledge and contributions of each and every member of the organization is key to managing the District Attorney’s Office. In the end we all share a desire to do the right thing. Recognizing that this is not a dictatorship, but a welcoming environment of a healthy exchange of ideas and information is what has been lacking in the last three years. The ultimate responsibility to adhere to the mission of the office lies with the elected District Attorney who must inspire her workforce to want to follow. To accomplish this, I will treat the workforce with professionalism and respect.

DAVID MILTON

I held three executive management positions in the past managing attorneys. Deputy-In-Charge, Chief Assistant Prosecutor and Assistant Chief Trial Counsel. My management style has been very effective because I believe that trained experienced professionals such as lawyers should be given as much autonomy as possible depending on their commitment to achieving the desired results.

NATHAN HOCHMAN

My management style is best described by this famous quote: “There is no limit to the amount of good you can do if you don't care who gets the credit.” The greatest asset of the D.A.’s Office is the collective thousands of years of experience and judgment the approximately 900+ prosecutors bring to their work. I will empower them, learn from them, and make decisions based on that collective wisdom to promote public safety, allowing the evidence and the law to dictate the result, not a political ideology. Together with the talented prosecutors at the D.A.’s Office, we will restore safety in our community, and the public will be the beneficiaries.

DEBRA ARCHULETA

The mission of the Office is to ensure public safety. The management of its professionals needs to be done to best serve the needs of the community by staffing the individualized units and offices with the best and most experienced personnel to serve the public. Deputy District Attorneys with specialized training and experience will be placed where they will provide maximum utility to the Office and the public. At a high level, I also intend to restore the Office to its previous staffing levels since approximately 20% of the attorneys have left during Gascón’s administration. The currently reduced workforce denies LA County residents the opportunity to fully pursue justice, including those impacted by the growing 14,000+ case backlog.

Do you believe the District Attorney’s office should be apolitical or should what could be described as an ideology be allowed to impact the actions of the office? In other words, what philosophical construct will inform your term?

DANIEL KAPELOVITZ

Of course, the District Attorney’s office should be apolitical. That is why it is a nonpartisan position. The office’s decisions should never be based on politics. Everyone, of course, has his or her own philosophy regarding the best way to seek justice. I believe in mine — preventing crime in the first place by addressing the root causes of crime. We know that throwing people in prison for as long as possible does not reduce crime. Let’s truly try something different. Gascón has failed to implement many of his reforms because he has no control of his line deputies. They disregard almost all of his directives. And now he is reversing course on some his policies for political reasons.

MARIA RAMIREZ

Until recently, the District Attorney’s Office has largely remained apolitical, focusing on applying the law to the evidence. However, today the District Attorney’s role has expanded into the larger landscape of the political and social issues that intersect with criminal justice. While the District Attorney must be a part of the conversation as we address improvements to public safety today, the District Attorney must never be guided by ideology alone. Ideology can certainly guide or inform your approach to the job, but the District Attorney must prioritize the fair and just implementation of the law above all else.

DAVID MILTON

I do not believe politics should play a role in administration of the office unless one’s political philosophy interferes in his or her ability to carry out the office’s core mission of public safety.

DEBRA ARCHULETA

The District Attorney’s Office must be apolitical. Crime is a non-partisan issue, as are the solutions to crime. The DA’s office is entrusted to seek justice for all regardless of political affiliation, and it must be flexible enough to adapt to the needs of different communities throughout Los Angeles County without regard for partisan politics. At the same time, the DA must be compassionate when administering criminal justice initiatives that places public safety at the forefront.

NATHAN HOCHMAN

Yes, the District Attorney’s office should be completely independent. I will be an independent voice in the DA’s office, always putting public safety and the rule of law over politics and personal agendas. Gascon has failed egregiously in this regard. My administration will instead focus on the “hard middle,” of the pendulum, which requires an individualized analysis of the defendant, the crime committed, and the impact on the victim to determine who are the true threats to our safety and need to be incarcerated and those who aren’t and can pay their debt to society by community service or a diversion program. As the only candidate running as an Independent (no party preference), I believe that my core belief in a DA being fiercely independent starts with my party registration.

Again, George Gascon was asked different but related questions:

Your management style has come under withering attack from both inside and outside the DA’s office. Do you believe there is any credence to the accusations, how did the situation develop, and how do you plan to address the clear and obvious problem?

Again, he did not reply to the request.

The fourth couplet:

California has a “three strikes” law. That should mean that if you do three very bad things you can go to prison for a very long time.

Los Angeles County District Attorney George Gascon is a decarcerationist, meaning he really doesn’t think people should be in prison – in fact, his preferred maximum sentence for pretty much anything would be 15 years.

In other words, he’s not a fan of strikes and has strongly discouraged their use in his office (he got sued for that position and lost.)

Gascon is also in favor of gun control, except, it seems, for people who use guns to commit crimes as he does not allow the addition of “gun enhancements” to prosecutions. Go figure.

Gascon is also a “criminal justice reformer.” To him that means the system is inherently corrupt and racist and bad and should be practically gutted and re-built(ish.) But reform can mean something far less insanely dangerous, too.

Will you allow the use of “strikes” and enhancements?

MARIA RAMIREZ

The law requires that we allege applicable strike offenses to a criminal complaint. Whether to apply the strike punishment to a sentence should be determined on a case-by-case basis that considers the seriousness of the conduct, the impact on the victim, the offender’s criminal history and other social factors related to the offense. Similarly, enhancements should be applied fairly and equally and when appropriate based on the facts of the case and other relevant factors. Prosecutors should have the discretion to apply the laws the legislature has given us to keep the public safe.

DAVID MILTON

Mr. Gascon’s refusal to follow the law, thereby usurping the authority of the legislative and judicial branches, has resulted in a miscarriage of justice in many cases. His stubborn refusal to follow the law due to his personal agenda is one factor that prompted me to seek election to the office.

NATHAN HOCHMAN

I was proud to be part of the team that successfully sued George Gascón to ensure he enforced the “Three Strikes” law. It is the law overwhelmingly approved by the voters and the state legislature in 1994; it has survived numerous challenges since; and it targets the worst of the worst offenders providing them with a serious disincentive to continuing a life that victimizes residents of our county. If the evidence warrants a Three Strikes prosecution or other enhancements, such a prosecution will be brought under my administration.

DEBRA ARCHULETA

Unlike the current DA, I will emphatically employ the use of strikes in cases where the accused is a repeat serious and/or violent felon. However, these filing decisions will be made on a case-by- case basis. Weapons enhancements will be filed in every case deemed appropriate by the filing DA, which would penalize criminals who use a gun during the commission of a serious and violent crime.

California has some of the strictest gun control laws on the books, however, Gascón refuses to properly prosecute those who use guns in an unlawful way. I will not allow the use of blanket policies to prevent Deputy District Attorneys from pursuing the appropriate filing, bail, and sentencing decisions in each case.

DANIEL KAPELOVITZ

Three Strikes has been a disaster. People – disproportionately nonwhites – spend decades more than necessary to achieve the goals of incarceration. The maximum sentences for crimes are high enough already – and prior convictions have always been considered in terms of plea deals and sentencing. Every case is different, but we also must ensure that people are treated equally.

Enhancements can more than double a sentence. I had a case where my client rejected an 8-year offer. The maximum sentence without enhancements was 12 years. To punish this African-American man for exercising his right to go to trial, the judge maxed him out and gave him 29 years in prison, where he died from Covid.

Most enhancement laws were enacted when politicians were fighting to be the most “Law and Order” candidate. People have since wised up, but it takes time for the laws to catch up with reality.

Criminal justice reform seems to mean different things to different people, though the ideas of systemic race-based inequality and over-incarceration appear to be at the forefront currently. Do you see the justice system as inherently racist and what is your position on incarceration as a tool to promote public safety?

MARIA RAMIREZ

The justice system is not inherently racist. However, we must be mindful that criminal justice policies may disproportionately affect communities of color more significantly than others. The fundamental mission of the DA is to try and achieve justice for the victim of a criminal case and to hold the defendant accountable for his or her wrongdoing. That accountability can have varying results, again depending on the unique circumstances of each case and each defendant. While incarceration should never be the only option for punishment, incarceration serves as an important tool to address the criminal offenders that pose a significant risk to the public. The community expects that individuals who commit serious and violent crimes should be punished and removed from society for an appropriate period of time.

DAVID MILTON

I grew up in the State of Indiana during the 60’s and 70’s and suffered the indignities of a racially intense environment. I am sensitive to racial inequities. My experience as a judge and prosecutor has caused me to conclude that the term “systemic racism, “race-based inequity” and “over-incarceration” are terms that were created as a divisive tool to advance certain narratives.

While one may be able to point to anecdotal instances where race led to a decision, in my view it is not systemic. Cases are filed based on the strength of the evidence. Sentences are imposed based on the facts, egregiousness of the crime, helplessness of the victim, and prior criminal history of the perpetrator.

NATHAN HOCHMAN

There’s no question that ethnic minorities make up a disproportionate percentage of people caught up in the criminal justice system. We can and must do better. But the solution is not to simply stop enforcing the law, as Gascon has done. True threats to our public safety must be incarcerated, but we must find options other than incarceration for first-time, non-violent offenders. I am a strong advocate of diversion programs, where low-level offenders can receive counseling and other tools to help them turn their lives in the right direction. Our prisons must be more than warehouses; they need to be training grounds where incarcerated people develop job skills that give them a real opportunity to succeed after they are released. For example, I believe in the mission of The Last Mile, www.thelastmile.org, a nonprofit that teaches coding to incarcerated persons who leave prison with new skills that can translate into quality jobs.

DEBRA ARCHULETA

I am keenly aware that criminal justice reform is both necessary and appropriate after 35 years in a courtroom. There is clear evidence of systemic, race-based inequality throughout the criminal justice system, and I do believe we have made some progress towards righting these wrongs over the last couple of decades. I am concerned that many of the repeat offenders who commit serious and violent crimes with impunity prey primarily upon communities of color, yet do not face meaningful consequences. As District Attorney, I will provide the same level of service across LA County without regard for the race or socioeconomic status of any particular community. The LA County District Attorney’s office is the largest in the country and must demonstrate appropriate leadership to ensure that all communities feel they are receiving equal access and treatment throughout the pursuit of justice.

Incarceration can be an effective tool in promoting public safety by removing the most serious and violent offenders from the community. But, when people leave prison, they often end up homeless and unemployed. We need stronger re-entry and job-training programs to better integrate formerly-incarcerated people back into society so they may become stable, healthy, and productive citizens.

DANIEL KAPELOVITZ

There is no doubt that the “justice” system is inherently racist and discriminates against the poor.

People in prison are disproportionately people of color. People of color are stopped more often by

police, searched more often, arrested more often, charged more often, and given extremely high

sentences more often than so-called white people. Defenders of this practice claim that people of color commit more crimes than white people. Even assuming that was true for the sake of argument, doesn’t that say more about society than it does about the people who commit crimes?

Again, George Gascon was asked different but related questions:

Why are you opposed to strikes and enhancements and is your staunch anti-gun rhetoric not undermined by your refusal to punish people who actually use them in the commission in a crime?

Again, he did not reply to the request.

And now the final couplet and David Milton’s headshot:

ADD PIC

Los Angeles District Attorney George Gascon has not been a friend to victims. As Gavin Newsom would add: Period. Full Stop.

Gascon has barred prosecutors from attending parole hearings, he has been accused of using strong arm tactics on victims’ families to get them to agree to lower sentences, and he has even berated them in public - https://www.foxla.com/news/video-appears-to-show-george-gascon-accusing-crowd-of-not-having-enough-education-to-keep-their-mouth-shut .

That criminal good, victim annoying attitude is one of the major reasons Gascon has failed as a district attorney, no matter what the Los Angeles Times says - https://californiaglobe.com/fr/la-times-recommends-keeping-los-angeles-da-gascon-in-place/

How should the victim of the the crime be involved in the prosecution of the offender?

DAVID MILTON

As district attorney, I would reinstate the policy pertaining to lifer-hearings where victim’s families are notified and be given the opportunity to be heard. Surviving victims and victim’s families will be encouraged to participate in victim impact statement to the court at the sentencing hearing.

NATHAN HOCHMAN

Crime victims and their families should be treated with respect by the criminal justice system. Not only is it the right thing to do, it’s the law. The California Victims Bill of Rights Act of 2008, also known as Marsy’s Law, gives crime victims rights equal to the accused. These rights include being treated with dignity throughout criminal justice proceedings; being notified of their rights as victims of crime; being notified of specific public proceedings throughout the criminal justice process and the right to be heard during those proceedings. Under D.A. Gascon, prosecutors are prohibited from attending parole hearings and no longer work with crime victims to pursue the continued incarceration of violent offenders. That will change when I’m the District Attorney. My prosecutors will travel to parole hearings and support crime victims in opposing parole for violent offenders. It’s simply the right thing to do.

DEBRA ARCHULETA

The victim has a right to be heard and part of the process pursuant to Marsy’s Law. Long before the enactment of Marsy’s Law, I routinely involved the victims when discussing case settlement and other key decisions to make sure they felt their voices were being heard and their needs were being met. Likewise, I enlisted victim witness services in each and every case where I was statutorily allowed to do so. These resources are vital to the victim in order to make them whole, to the extent that it is possible. I frequently had to relocate victims of domestic violence and sexual abuse to shield them from their perpetrator. As District Attorney, I will continue to ensure those services are available to all victims of crime when appropriate.

DANIEL KAPELOVITZ

Victims should not be further victimized. I am the only candidate that represents victims and witnesses in criminal cases to ensure that their constitutional rights are not violated. The DA’s office should not have their own victims arrested and held on extremely high bail for missing a single day of court. Gascón’s office does this. Under the California Constitution, victims have the right “to be treated with fairness and respect for his or her privacy and dignity, and to be free from intimidation, harassment, and abuse, throughout the criminal or juvenile justice process.” All too often the current DA and his predecessors violate these rights. However, we must also make sure that attorneys without standing not be allowed to interfere with court proceedings. As for parole hearings, I have no issue with prosecutors attending them, so long as they are there to truly seek justice and be objective.

MARIA RAMIREZ

A victim’s voice should never be silenced. Marsy’s Law mandates that victims be informed about every step of a criminal prosecution. Moreover, prosecutors have an ethical duty to ensure that victims’ rights are respected. While the ultimate decision on the appropriate sentence for a criminal offender lies with the prosecution and the judge, a victim has the right to be heard on what they think is an appropriate sentence and to express how the crime has affected them. Prosecutors have a duty to support the victims of crime from the commission of the offense to sentencing and in parole hearings.

Why has George Gascon failed the community?

DAVID MILTON

Mr. Gascon has been completely derelict in carrying out the duties of the office thereby resulting in great public harm.

NATHAN HOCHMAN

There is no end to the list of George Gascon’s failures. He has instituted blanket, pro-criminal policies and taken actions that are not working and have made us less safe, has destroyed morale in the DA’s office, has endangered the DA’s partnership with law enforcement, and has damaged the DA’s Office’s credibility, trust, and confidence with the public.

I am running to remove politics from prosecutorial decisions and restore independence, honesty, and integrity to prevent crime, protect public safety, and ensure justice is served to all LA County residents. Unlike the current DA who has never prosecuted or defended a single criminal case in his entire life, I have prosecuted over 100 cases as a federal prosecutor, ranging from environmental criminals, narcotics traffickers, and violent gang members to international money launders and bank and tax defrauders. In addition, I was presidentially nominated, unanimously Senate confirmed as the U.S. Assistant Attorney General running the U.S. Dept. of Justice’s Tax Division; the President of the L.A. City Ethics Commission; the head of two major international law firms’ government investigations practices; and co-founder of the L.A. Sheriff’s Foundation. With my over 34 years of criminal justice experience on all sides of the aisle and proven leadership experience with government, private practice, and community organizations, I promise to restore public safety, reinvigorate the partnership with law enforcement, and rehabilitate the DA’s Office’s reputation with the public from Day One. This is my promise to our community.

DEBRA ARCHULETA

George Gascón has failed the community by abandoning critical priorities like public safety and victims’ rights advocacy in favor of weak leadership and empty rhetoric. The DA supports criminals by placing their needs first while blaming victims when they bravely step forward.

At the same time, Gascón has allowed pervasive issues like addiction, mental illness, and homelessness to fester, opting not to use his position of power to improve conditions for the citizens living under tarps and in tents throughout our county. Allowing our fellow human beings to live in these conditions is inhumane and will not be tolerated under my Administration.

Gascón’s unsuccessful reforms have damaged San Francisco now threaten LA County just 3 short years into his tenure. Unlike Gascón, I have prosecuted over 100 jury trials, attended more than 150 parole board hearings, and spent 35 years in a courtroom. He has done none of the above.

DANIEL KAPELOVITZ

I’m not sure why he has failed the community, but I can tell you how – by allowing his deputies to file

charges against factually innocent people, by opposing motions for mental health diversion that should be granted, by opposing requests to place people addicted to drugs in treatment programs, by vindictively seeking to punish people for exercising their constitutional right to go to trial, by opposing righteous Fourth Amendment motions, by failing to turn over discovery in a timely manner, by further victimizing victims, and by relying on officers who engage in racial profiling to prosecute cases.

Furthermore, he has failed the community by not filling the hundreds of vacancies in his office. This

slows down the criminal justice system, harming defendants and victims alike, and ultimately costing the county millions of dollars.

MARIA RAMIREZ

George Gascon has failed the community because he has failed to consider the real consequences of his policies on the safety and well-being of our communities. He has systemically failed to consult with his own employees and law enforcement to include them in decision making and the effective implementation of public safety policies. Despite being labeled a “reformist,” Gascon has failed in accomplishing real reform to improve the system. He has done nothing to incorporated real reform into the DA’s office approach to criminal offenders with serious mental health, drug addiction and homelessness issues. George Gascon is a failed leader who has prioritized his own agenda, personal ideology and politics over the law and the best interests of our community.

Again, George Gascon was asked different but related questions:

You have been roundly criticized for failing crime victims. Do you believe those criticisms are valid and should not the victim (and justice, of course) be paramount in any criminal proceeding?

What are you most proud of during your first term?

Again, he did not reply to the request.

Thanks for reading and I’ve left comments open for everyone as the scourge of the woke prosecutor is quite literally a worldwide phenomenon.

Also, is it just me or do y’all wish newspapers would run series like this for all their local big races? Besides being an informative public service, it’s actually really easy to do: think of questions, send questions to candidates, remind candidates of hard deadline, write short “topper” explainers, and then just cut and paste.

Knowing how lazy the media is, it would seem to be right up their alley.

Oh well.

The Point

Discussion about this post