 I am an associate dean in public policy here at ETSA and welcome to the students here. This is great, welcome to students, welcome to non-students, welcome especially if this is your first time at our downtown campus. We love hosting. Oh, I'm sorry, I forgot you're here. We have to be professional about it. Is this better, Charlene? Okay. I want to welcome Nalcast because we are doing a live stream of this tonight and we have to use microphones. So again, welcome to our judicial candidate debate for the criminal district courts. We think this is a really important forum. We have this every couple of years. We partner with the League of Women Voters who are the best partners on all of this. So all we really have to do is say, we want to do this and they do all the work. So I want to thank the League of Women Voters, the president, Madhu Sridhar is here tonight, right in front of me. Welcome. And welcome to all the candidates. Thank you for taking the time to come here tonight. And now I want to have Noelia in April introduce themselves and just tell you very briefly about their student organizations. Hello, my name is Noelia Villeda. I am the current president of the Public Administration Student Organization. We help connect and network students with professionals in the private, nonprofit and public sector. Hello, everyone. My name is April Dimondonka. I am currently the vice president of Alpha Phi Sigma. It is the National Honor Society for Criminal Justice here at UTSA. And what we do as Alpha Phi Sigma members is we honor and promote academic excellence. We perform community service together. And we also encourage educational leadership. Yes. And also I would like to acknowledge all of our current members that are here with us today who volunteered if you can please stand up. Thank you. And we also have a free t-shirt giveaway. If you would look to the bottom right hand side of your chair, if you find a yellow sticky note. If you could please stand up and hold your sticky note. No, it's a yellow one. Sorry. Yes, that one's it. If you could please stand up. And then we have another one. If you would reach over to the chair on your right hand side to you. Unless there's someone. Unless there's someone. I know there's another one. So yes, it's to your right down at the bottom. I mean, if you want, I can come and get it. So we have some like people who are just sitting there. You don't want a shirt. Maybe we can give it to the person who's sitting closest to the seat where we know it is. Except nobody actually sat in the seat where it was. So all right, thank you ladies. So again, NowcastSA.org is live streaming this right now. And it will also be available later if you have not visited the Nowcast SA website. It has all kinds of great events and all kinds of great stories on it. And it's now my pleasure to turn you over to Phyllis Ingram of the League of Women Voters. I would like to thank Dr. Romero and the College of Public Policy here at UTSA. As Dr. Romero said, we've done many candidate forums here. They are great partners to work with. I would also like to thank Michelle Skidmore. If you'll stand up, Michelle. Michelle might please on here and she does a fantastic job for us as well. I would like to welcome all of the criminal justice students who are here this evening as well. I'm sure you'll learn some interesting things this evening. We have some candidates here who will not be participating in the candidate forum. But I would like to introduce them since they've made an effort to come out and get to meet you. First of all, Joelle Perez, who is a Democrat running for the 226th District Court, which is one of the courts, the people up here. Unfortunately, Mr. Perez's opponent could not attend this evening. And since we cannot just have one candidate from a race, he just wanted to come out and say hello to you and let you know that he is interested in talking to you. Also here is Rebecca Martinez, a Democrat candidate for the Fourth Court of Appeals. Ms. Martinez, I know you're here. There she is in the back. Also here, and I have been asked to introduce her in this way, please welcome Ms. Stephanie Boyd. She is a candidate for the 187th District Court, which is another race that we'll be covering, but she is the sole Democrat and as such cannot be included in the debate. And finally, Jennifer Penya. Ms. Penya is a Democratic candidate for the 290th District Court and as with Mr. Perez, her opponent was not available this evening, but she wanted to come and say hello to you as well. Thank you very much. Did any other candidates come in after I got this sheet? Yes, ma'am. I'm Veronica Lerner, I'm running for the one minute. Oh, we'll introduce you. Okay. That's okay. Excuse me. One more. Thank you. Okay. So the criminal courts, as you probably all know, there are both civil courts, criminal courts, county court law, supreme courts. We're dealing this evening with candidates for criminal district courts. Judges serve for four years hearing felony cases up to murder and the death penalty. So I'm going to start out since most voters don't thankfully know that much about the criminal system. I would love, sorry, sorry, sorry, I'm way ahead of myself. First of all, each candidate will have one minute to introduce themselves to you. So I'm going to run down alphabetically and begin with David Martin. Oh, I'm sorry. Mr. Martin, before you begin. Rachel and John are our timekeepers. You will have 60 seconds for your opening statement. When there is 20 seconds remaining, John will hold up the card that says 20 seconds. And when your time is up, he will hold up the card that says stop. And so that we can get to as many questions as possible. I would ask you to pay attention to the timekeepers, please. Okay. So Mr. David Martin, who is a Republican for criminal court to 26. Good evening. Thank you for having us and thank you for being here. My name is David Martin. I'm from San Antonio, born and raised. I have graduated from Clark High School, Texas A&M University with a bachelor's in science and psychology. Texas Wesleyan University School of Law, which is now Texas A&M's law school. And I graduated in, excuse me, only two and a half years. It usually takes three years. People I started with, I had passed the bar exam and been sworn in before they ever started studying for it. The felony district courts handle all kinds of violent crimes, child abuse, things of that nature that I have extensive experience in. I have the most trial experience of anyone in this race. And as we go forward in the debate, I'm sure we'll talk some more about that. I'm married, have two children, a nine-year-old son and a seven-year-old daughter. And before the stop sign comes, I just want to say, as a Martin, it's very rare that I get to go first in alphabetical order. So this is an honor. Thank you. It's okay. For the 226. Good evening and thank you for being here. Thank you for the League of Women Voters inviting us. I feel very thankful for that. And thank you to the university for hosting this event. And thirdly, thank you all for coming and being interested in our judiciary. It's a very important branch of government. My name is Todd McCrae and I am running for the 226 district court. I'm a third generation Texan. My undergraduate is in Austin at the University of Texas where I have a bachelor's of science, a bachelor's of business administration and finance. My law school is at St. Mary's. I graduated in 1990. So I have 28 years of experience. I'm board certified. I prosecuted in two separate district attorney offices. And with that, I'll close and ask you to remember to vote the McCrae way. Thank you. Next candidate is Kristen Mulliner, also Republican, also 226. Good evening. My name is Kristen Mulliner and I am running for the 226 district court. I am a graduate of UTSA. I was a criminal justice major, graduated with honors. I went to St. Mary's. I also finished early. I then went to work at the Bear County DA's office where I handled all sorts of things in the initial trial court and the mental health docket. I was eventually a felony prosecutor working in the family violence section. I left in 2010, ultimately went into private practice with my husband, Jeff Mulliner. We have a criminal defense firm here in town. We do state and federal criminal defense. I'm licensed all over the state of Texas federally, the northern, southern, eastern, western, fifth circuit and supreme court. I've been appointed as a special prosecutor by multiple judges here in Bear County on very serious cases, including murder. I've got three children that I've raised here in town. My oldest is a freshman at UTSA and I'm just asking for your support. Kristen Mulliner for the 226 district court. Thank you. Our final candidate is Libby Weiderman. Weiderman. I knew I would say that wrong. So as a Weiderman, I'm used to going last. I'm Libby Weiderman. I'm running for the 226 district court. I have been a licensed attorney for 22 years. I graduated in 1995, did law school in just the regular all three years. Sorry. In my 22 year legal career, I've spent about half of it as a prosecutor here with Bear County and the other half doing defense work. I've worked for three elected district attorneys, Susan Reed, Steve Hilbig and Nikola Hood, but I am currently in private practice. I've handled over 4,000 criminal matters here in Bear County. Most of them have been felonies. I have an extensive amount of trial experience. I've also taught criminal law here in the criminal justice department at UTSA. My last semester was 2011, I think. I've taught at San Antonio College, also in their criminal justice department. And I am the only candidate that's been a criminal magistrate judge. I was appointed to that position by the other criminal district court judges. Thank you very much. Okay. Now it seems I've caught up with myself. And so we'll start with what do you think it's important for voters to know about the criminal district courts? And we'll start with Miss Weiderman. What I think is the important thing to consider in terms of selecting a candidate to vote for really is their experience. And it's not just about the number of years, although I do have a lot of years in this area, but also what they've done during those years. You want a candidate that's had a lot of trial experience. Not just any kind of trial, but trial handling the most severe cases, which are the kind that are hurt in a criminal district court. So we're talking about sexual assaults, murder, assaults of children, child neglect cases, robberies. Those are the kind of cases that go to trial most often because they have the most serious consequences. So they're more likely to be fought. Most of my years at the DA's office were spent in the Family Violence Department handling sex crimes, child abuse, baby death, and adult murder cases. Thank you. Same question for Mr. Martin? I couldn't agree more. It's not about how long you've been doing something, but it's about what you've done in that time. Like I mentioned in my opening, I've tried more cases than anyone on the Republican side of this race. The sexual assaults of children, domestic violence used to be lumped into what's called family violence cases and child sex abuse. That makes up less than a quarter of a felony district court's docket. I was in that division. I tried the first super aggravated sexual assault of a child case. That person was sentenced to two life without parole cases stacked on each other. So once he dies, he gets to do it all over again. I've tried multiple capital murders, multiple murders, aggravated robbery, vehicular fatality cases where unfortunately someone was decapitated and their head was sitting on the side of the road. I've spent, excuse me, I've read and dealt with over 1,100 cases just last year alone. As a chief felony prosecutor, not only do I handle the biggest cases, but I'm also assigned to make sure all the other cases get handled appropriately by the people I supervise. Thank you, Mr. McCrae. So the question is about what's important about the courts. This is the judicial branch of government and the district court, the criminal district court. Here's all the cases that come out of the grand jury. So a grand jury indicts a series of cases and those cases eventually end up in the courts. What the indictment tells you is that the punishment range potentially ends up, potentially the person is facing time in prison. So I can't agree with the other candidates more. The most serious cases are in that court. I think what's important to remember is that the court not only protects the community, but the court also ensures that the rule of law is protected. So how do we protect our rule of law? That's a responsibility for a judge. That's a responsibility for the court. And I think in my experience, my 28 years of experience, along with the board certification and criminal law, along with the two different district attorney offices, comes boils down to experience, experience, experience. Thank you, Ms. Malner. I think what's important to keep in mind is that the district courts here in San Antonio are incredibly high volume courts. If any of you read the newspapers, you know that San Antonio has one of the highest rates of crime in the state of Texas. And that being said, I think it's important that you have a judge that can maintain an efficient courtroom. Sid Harle has been the judge in our court for 30 years, and he's leaving behind one of the most efficiently run courtrooms. And what would make somebody the best judge to step in in his place is, of course, experience, but you also need the type of temperament that ensures that people can work with you, the type of work ethic that ensures that you're going to be there to get the job done, the type of work card. I believe that I have the type of temperament experience to ensure that everybody that comes before me is going to receive justice due process and respect. And I think that that's important to maintain an efficient courtroom. Thank you. Ms. Malner, we're going to start this round of questioning with you. You've seen in the newspaper lately some story about unreported judicial misconduct. So my question is, discuss judicial temperament and the importance of impartiality. Sure. So judicial temperament is essentially how you treat people, how you present yourself, how you approach sentencing, how you approach the court, how you approach the defendants that are before you regardless of who their attorney is, regardless of whether they're court appointed, regardless of how much they paid for their attorney. And I think it's absolutely critical as a judge that you don't cater to somebody who is before you based on who they've hired or based on who they know or based on who their uncle is. I think it's essential that you have a judge that's going to be fair and impartial regardless of who's in front of you. Thank you. Ms. Riederman. Could you repeat the question again? Sure. Excuse me. Discuss judicial temperament and the importance of impartiality. So obviously judicial temperament of any kind deals with how you convey yourself, how you handle your interactions with other people. It is very important for a judge to have good judicial temperament. In the courtroom, I believe that means that you give both sides a fair opportunity to present their side. You don't make decisions about what you're going to do on a particular case until you've allowed both sides to present their case. And the importance of it obviously is the only way the system can work and be fair. Unfortunately, there are times you hear in the news about a particular judge that's gotten in trouble or taken a bribe or something like that. Thankfully, most of the judges that I've been in front of here in Bear County work hard, care about what they're doing and want to see both sides have their day in court. And that's what I would expect any judge to do and that's what I plan to do if I'm elected. Thank you. Mr. Martin. Judicial temperament is, like everyone has already said, it's kind of just the way you run your court and the way you treat people. This judge will have to, and every district court judge on the criminal side, has to make life-altering decisions, not only for the person in front of you as the defendant who committed the crime, but also the victims of the crime. I think a lot of times they get left out of the picture when the entire process goes by. You know, if somebody's stabbed, shot, lost a limb, lost a family member, anything like that, they deserve the utmost respect of the system just as any defendant would. And that includes having a judge who won't make a decision based on who a lawyer is or based on whether they're court-appointed or not, but who's shown a record of being tough on crime, never having asked a district court judge to not send someone to prison for committing a violent crime, but in just doing it in a way that everybody is treated professionally because we're all professionals in the courtroom and every defendant is a human being. And if you treat them that way, I think that's all you can ask for. Thank you, Mr. McCrae. Temperament and impartiality are pretty much the key of a judicial bench. The oath that a judge takes is to protect, preserve, and defend the laws of the state, the laws of the country, and our constitution. So literally what a judge does is sets the tone in the community. The executive branch is a little different than the judicial branch. The legislative branch is a little different than the judicial branch. Judges literally sit in the courtroom and they provide a sort of a tone and an example in the community of how the community should be. And so actually in a criminal district court what you have are you have young assistant district attorneys who will eventually become leaders in the community. And if you don't have an experienced judge, if you don't have a judge with the right temperament, and remember justice is blind to politics, then you end up training a group of young leaders in a way that doesn't preserve and protect our rule of law. Thank you. Mr. McCrae, we're going to start this question with you. Excuse me, and actually I'm going to combine two questions because they both have to do with gun control and how offenders are justifiably punished. And one of them, which is a very interesting question, I think, if someone was illegally carrying a handgun but used it to defend his or her life from an attacker, how would you handle that case? Well, I can tell you a little story about myself, instead of specifically saying however rule judges actually have a judicial code of conduct. So we're not technically supposed to say how we would rule in a particular case, but I can tell you that when I was a young high school student, I was an Eagle Scout and the Boy Scouts. Some prowlers decided to enter my mom and dad's residence. I called the police and I used my grandfather, my excellent great grandfather's double barrel shotgun, to hold the prowlers at bay until the police arrived. Police eventually arrived and they published this story in The American Rifleman. I can tell you that story because I was very young and I was simply using a firearm, which is guaranteed under our Second Amendment, to protect my parents' home. And I believe that our laws of self-defense, which are found in the penal code, speak directly to self-defense and they also speak to illegal possession. Thank you. Ms. Mulliner? And again, we can't really speak to how we would rule on something, but I can tell you that self-defense is absolutely an affirmative defense if it actually is self-defense and it's defined in the penal code. The last murder case that I tried last year was a self-defense case in which my client had some gang members in his front yard. They confronted him. He went inside his house, then back outside his house. They confronted him again and he shot them. So it was indicted as a murder. We defended it. He said, yes, I shot him. Yes, I killed him, but it was in self-defense. So self-defense is actually an affirmative defense if in fact it's determined that it was legally self-defense. Thank you, Ms. Widerman. Like Mr. McCrae said, as candidates for judge, we're not allowed to state how we would rule in any particular scenario. What I can tell you is I've handled plenty of cases that have either defended against, I've defended against somebody arguing that they were using a weapon in self-defense and I've also defended individuals that were claiming they fired a weapon in self-defense. It is a very specific statute and while many people claim it, it's not as easy to prove as you might think, but I do certainly believe in our Second Amendment rights and I guess I'll just close at that. Thank you, Mr. Martin. There's kind of two different ways you can look at it. How are you unlawfully possessing the firearm? There's a misdemeanor unlawful carrying of a weapon in the penal code and there's also a felony possession of a firearm and they'll be treated differently depending on things. I'll just go with the more serious one. If it's a felony possession of a firearm case, you may not have the same rights as everyone to possess a firearm, but you have the same rights to defend yourself under the law. Going back to what Mr. McCrae said, had he been unlawfully possessing a firearm in his situation, I'm pretty sure he would have rather taken that action and dealt with the consequences of that with a judge who could read all the facts and hear everything that happened as opposed to taking my chances with my hands and maybe ending up dead myself. But we can't talk about specific instances, but I can assure you here in Texas and in Bear County, in that circumstance, you might have a hard time getting that case passed to grand jury in the first place. Thank you. Mr. Martin, we're going to start with you with this next question. Do you have any innovative ideas for the improvement of the court? Innovative ideas. It's not really innovative, but I'd say try and keep it as similar to it's been for the past 30 years. Like I think Ms. Molliner said, Judge Harle has always had the best docket. He's always run the court the most efficient and takes care of business. That would probably be the hardest thing is to keep that going. The only innovative thing that I would look into doing is in the county courts they do what's called courts in school and they'll let some nonviolent offenders like marijuana possession, shoplifting, go out into the communities of schools and kind of pay off their community service by talking to the students about what they did and how that's affected their lives. I would definitely be interested in trying to take that to the felony level. Obviously we're not going to take murderers over there, but the big debate with marijuana legalization all over the country, there are ways down the road that if you start with marijuana, and we've all seen it in the courthouse, that you can graduate to worse things and I would just like to let them know that at an early age if we can. Thank you, Mr. Martin. Mr. McCray. Hard work. When I first started practicing as a prosecutor, again close to 30 years ago, I looked up to the judges in Bear County. They were very experienced. They had finished their careers. They weren't retired, but they were serving the community. They were serving the courts as a function of community service. Many of them had board certifications and they were simply hardworking people. Over the years I've noticed candidates running for benches and taking benches and they have very little experience. Some of them are still in their careers and there's always this sort of idea that we're going to come up with a new way to make the wheel. And really, ladies and gentlemen, what it boils down to is being there and working hard. Thank you, Ms. Mellonair. Sure. I'm not sure how innovative it is, but I can tell you what I'd like to see. Many people who are arrested are suffering issues. So they have a drug dependency and that's part of the reason why they're committing these crimes. They have mental health issues. That's a huge issue today in the criminal justice system. What I would like to see and maybe help put into place are more programs and services for people that make bond. Because once you're arrested, you can make bond. They get out and they're just awaiting their court date with very little services. So I would like to see more options for mental health services, for drug treatment, drug counseling and some of the other things that would get once that they're on probation, but while they're out on bond, because some of these serious cases go on for years. They're literally out on bond for a year and a half with serious mental health or drug dependency issues. So I'd like to do that to sort of cut down on the recidivism that occurs when they're out on bond. Thank you, Ms. Wiedemann. Kind of following along with what Mr. McRae said, it may not sound so innovative, but working all day. If any of y'all have been to the courthouse, you probably already know this, and if you haven't, you ought to take a stroll down there. In the afternoons, you're going to find a lot of courtrooms empty. And some of those courts, like the one that we are running for, the judge has done a very good job and the docket is quite small and he's run a very efficient court. But that's not the case for all of the courts. And so if this court were to get behind, for whatever reason, implementing afternoon dockets, most of the courts do not regularly have afternoon dockets. It doesn't mean the judge may not be there, but they're not making use of the lawyer's time, their courtroom time to have afternoon dockets, to maybe hear special motions that need to be addressed before a big murder case is coming up or something like that. So that would be the innovative thing that I would do is just be there all day and work all day, which is what the taxpayers and the voters expect of their judges. Thank you. And we'll start with you, Ms. Wiedermann, for this next question. Do you think partisan elections for judicial seats are helpful or would you prefer to move to a nonpartisan system if the law could be changed? I would absolutely move to a nonpartisan system. With respect to electing judges, it's very unfortunate that judges or judicial candidates like us have to pick a side and run on that side, because if you keep up with elections here in Bear County, you know that there have been democratic waves where only Democrats get elected and there have been Republican waves where only Republicans get elected. And as a result, some very good judges on both sides have lost their positions. And so because judges at this level do not make law, they do not make political decisions, they are required to follow the law, whether or not it goes with their party, then it would be better for voters to have the opportunity just to vote for the individual and not what letter is next to their name. Thank you. Excuse me, Mr. Martin. The simple answer is yes. Like Ms. Wiedermann said, the law is the law, whether you're Republican or whether you're Democrat. You should apply it the exact same way no matter what political affiliation you have as a judge. My concern would be how would we do that if there would be a efficient way of kind of getting to that process as opposed to I think Congressional District 121 has 18 people running right now. I don't see how that really helps anybody. If there were a way to do that and maybe limit the number of people that could end up on the ballot, maybe with the qualification minimums changing those, I think right now it's four years and you can run for a district court. If you increase those, put a mandate on a minimum number of jury trials, like that, then maybe we could get closer to getting that accomplished. The law is the law whether you're Democrat, Republican, independent, so the affiliation of a judge shouldn't matter. Thank you, Mr. McCry. So again, the symbol of our justice system is the figure of a lady justice. The question is how do we get to this impartiality? How do we get to this blindness, that we see in the symbol? It's in the laws. The partisanship that we see in our election process is actually part of our three forms of branches of government. Is it not? I would ask you to study that as political science students and criminal justice students. But I'll say this, we do have a judicial code of ethics and if our judges, whether they're elected one way or the other, were to strictly follow our judicial code of conduct, then we would have impartial judges on our benches. And I think it takes experience, a vast range of experience, not only in different areas of the law, but also over an extended period of time to develop the skill that's required of a judge to be impartial. Thank you. Ms. Mulliner. I absolutely think it should be nonpartisan. When we're campaigning the four of us, we can't answer policy questions, we don't make policy. If somebody were to ask us policy questions, we have to instruct them that we can't answer them. So it leaves us campaigning as a party and an entire group of people, Democrats can't even consider us in the primary despite whatever our credentials are, our personality is, our temperament is. So I think it's bad for the voters, I think it's bad for the candidates because like Ms. Wiederman said, there are some fabulous judges that come from both parties and the way that we do it kind of excludes them in certain cycles based on how Bear County votes, either in the presidential or the governor cycle. Thank you. And the final question before your closing statements, we will start with Ms. Mulliner. Being a defense attorney or owning a defense law firm, how will you make sure that doesn't create a conflict of interest when it comes time to sentence or arraign an offender or defend it? Ms. Mulliner. Oh, I'm sorry. Well, it's... I'll give you the example. When Nicola Hood became district attorney, any case that he had handled or somebody in his office had handled or somebody that he hired in his administration had represented or handled the case, he had to recuse himself from the case. The judges appoint special prosecutors so that there isn't a conflict of interest. I would do the exact same thing. So I've been a prosecutor, I've been a defense attorney, so you're going to encounter people that come back in the system or that are in the system that you've dealt with and handled, so the answer to that is to move them to a different court or to a different lawyer. My husband's also a defense attorney, so he would not practice before me or anybody that his firm handles would not practice in my court, so I simply wouldn't deal with somebody that I've dealt with before. Thank you. Ms. Wiedermann. My answer is actually the same as Ms. Mulliner's. I've been a prosecutor, I've been a defense attorney, so, you know, San Antonio is kind of one of those places, Big Town, with kind of a small town mentality. You'd be surprised how many people you encounter that you've had interactions with before. So it happens frequently. There are many ex-prosecutors that are on the bench. Many ex-defense attorneys are on the bench. If that, you know, if there is a case filed in the court that I'm presiding over and I've either dealt with them as a prosecutor or defense attorney, I would move it to another court. It's something that's done routinely and then some other case would be given to my court in exchange. Thank you, Mr. Martin. My answer is going to be a little bit different because I haven't practiced defense law in over 12 years, but I would say the laws laid out pretty well. I was actually a prosecutor in the 226 a couple of years ago. If people were placed on probation or their case went through the system while I was in there and may have even touched it, whether I did the plea bargain or not, I would be forced to send that case off to the regional administrative judge and have him assign it to a different court. The trade-off on that is if I send them one, they get to send me one. That way we keep the numbers even. If I've prosecuted somebody in the past then, you know, as long as I didn't have anything to do with the current case they're dealing with, the law wouldn't prevent me from dealing with that particular case. It does come up sometimes, not very often, but the law is laid out there that, you know, if that particular defendant wants someone else to hear their case, then they're allowed to do that. Thank you. And Mr. McRae? So the issue is a conflict of interest and it's actually addressed in our professional code of conduct. And so if you're a prosecutor and you previously represented an individual and you're elected, say, to the district attorney's office, then a special prosecutor is appointed and I have been appointed special prosecutor. I'm a designated special prosecutor in Bear County. So I've faced that situation before. I was also a prosecutor back in the early 90s in Susan Reed's 144th District Court. And so I prosecuted cases in there for years and when I left and became a defense attorney it was interesting because some of the cases I had prosecuted and I could no longer defend. As a judge, I agree with the other candidates. We'd simply have to either assign that case or transfer the case. Ask the presiding judge to take a look at it or simply transfer that case into another court so that there is no conflict of interest. But it is directly addressed in our professional rules. Thank you. We're now going to each candidate will have one minute for a closing statement. We will go in the reverse order of where we started. So we'll begin with Ms. Wiedermann. Thank you everybody that came tonight. As I stated before, I'm a 22 year lawyer. I've spent most of my career in criminal law. Half of that has been spent as a prosecutor. Half of that has been a defense attorney. I am the only candidate that has ever taught criminal law. I taught at San Antonio College and here in the downtown campus in the criminal justice department. I'm also the only candidate that's been a criminal magistrate judge and I think that's significant. I was appointed to that position as the judge's to fill in for them at night time weekends and holidays. I have an extensive amount of jury trial experience. I've handled some of the most serious and high profile cases in Bear County. I've handled everything from shoplifting cases all the way up to capital murder and when you're looking at judges or judge candidate resumes you want somebody that's kind of done it all and seen it all and I believe I've also been endorsed by the Bear County Adult Probation Officers Association and I believe that that also puts me in a very good position for this job. Thank you very much. Thank you, Ms. Mollinare. Sure, and I want to thank you all for having us as well. I think you're going to find a lot of similarities between us. Most of us have been defense attorneys. Most of us have been prosecutors. I've been a defense attorney where I've tried all types of cases from shooting to capital murder as well. I've been a prosecutor trying serious felony cases. I think what else is important to consider and I think that you ought to ask somebody who's in the system what people's temperaments are. What their work ethic is. What they were like when they were a prosecutor. Did they treat people fairly? Did they hide evidence? Were they forthcoming? Did they do what they were supposed to do? Because that's going to tell you what type of judge they're going to be. But when they were a prosecutor and I think if you ask my colleagues and if you ask our colleagues they will tell you that I am in fact an absolutely a person that will treat everybody with respect. Like I have when I was a prosecutor. Like I have when I was a defense attorney. I think I have the experience. I think I have the type of discernment. The temperament that everybody that comes before me is going to appreciate. Thank you, Mr. McRae. I'm board certified in criminal law. I've been in criminal law for 21 years now. I think the key thing to ask when you're looking at a bench is what kind of judge do you want to see on that bench? I mean really what qualities do you expect to see in a judge if you have to appear in a courtroom? Are laws are sacred ladies and gentlemen and our laws are what keep our community safe. The judges actually are gatekeepers to the safety of our community especially these criminal district courts that hear the most serious cases. The criminal district benches also protect the rule of law. Our rule of law is very, very important and I think you need experience to do that. It's not something that you learn on the job. I think you should put a judge on the bench who's ready to start working today and doesn't need experience to learn what to do. Thank you Mr. Barton. I assume he's talking about me because I've probably been practicing less than all of them but if anyone would not need on the job training it's me. I've been on the job training for the past nearly 12 years as a prosecutor at the district attorney's office. I took a note that uphold the laws of the Constitution of the United States, State of Texas and all the laws in the state of Texas and I've been doing it ever since. As your judge I would continue to do that. When I look at cases I look at how can we help this person while keeping the community safe. I would continue to do that. It's a fine balance. If you send somebody to prison for drugs you have a good chance that a child molester might get out instead. You need a judge who's dealt with these cases day in and day out for a long time. I've tried over 30 jury trials over 300 total trials far more than any of my opponents and if there's one person who knows how to deal with the violent offenders in our community to keep the community safe trust me it's me. I've been endorsed by the Pastors Pack Texas Leadership Institute of Public Advocacy and I ask for your vote. Thank you. That concludes the forum for the 226 criminal district courts. Please join me in thanking the candidates this evening. Now we're going to switch out for another court. While we're doing that I would like to tell you that our president, Madhu Shreeder has included in the voter guide a Voters' Bill of Rights and some information on where to vote. Also I would remind you that we are currently in early voting that will last through March 2nd. The election is March 6th. During early voting you can vote at any early voting site. On Election Day you have to go to your precinct and your precinct number is on your voter registration card and you can also check that at Bear County elections. Is Monica Cameras Alcantara still here? That is a candidate for Bear County Democratic Party Chair. We thank her for being here this evening. Okay, so now we are talking about the 187th criminal district court and I'm going to start with the same questions that I asked the other court which is to talk about judicial temperament and the importance of impartiality and I'm going to start with Mr. Alexander. I'm so sorry my brain is here with me. Sorry. Each candidate will have one minute to make an opening statement and we'll start with Mr. Alexander. Good evening everybody and thank you for having us here and thank you to the League of Women Voters and UTSA. My name is Carl Alexander and I am as you heard running for the 17th district court. I am a native San Antonian. I graduated from Texas A&M University with a degree in all things forestry. Don't ask how I ended up in law. And then I attended St. Louis University where I got my Juris Doctor in 2002. I started off my career here back at home doing criminal defense and I did that for about three years until I joined the district attorney's office in 2005. I have been with the DA's office since then. I am currently a child abuse prosecutor and my docket consists primarily of felony level domestic violence, sexual assaults and all crimes against children. I am a husband as well as a father of a five-year-old girl and a two-year-old boy and my wife would get after me if I didn't tell her she is a UTSA road runner. Thank you. Thank you. And I should tell you that all of these candidates are Republican candidates for the 187th court. Don't look sad. Next is Jan Ishee-Prins. Thank you. Hi, everyone. I am Jan Ishee-Prins, candidate for the 187th criminal district court. One thing that you will get with me as a judge is the same thing my clients get right now. And that is whenever there is a an officer from Bear County Sheriff's Officer, a police officer, anyone who needs a warrant signed or anything else I'm going to be available. They're going to find me. Just like right now when there is a client that needs me and they're in a desperate situation, maybe they're getting arrested. Pretty desperate, right? They're going to be able to get a hold of me. That's something that's very important. I have spent 18 years as a prosecutor. I have spent seven years as a defense attorney. I have tried everything up to capital murder death penalty cases, which is important because this particular court, the worst thing that can happen to you is you can be put to death. Something that you cannot turn back. And so you need a judge who knows the law, knows how to apply it, and protects the rights of everybody. And that includes not just the victims, but also the defendants. Thank you. Thank you. Our next candidate is Veronica Legaretta. Good evening. Like she said, my name is Veronica Legaretta, or for our non-Spanish speakers, Veronica Legaretta. I'm going to be this one. I was a prosecutor. I've been a defense attorney. I've worked on about 3,000 cases from capital murders all the way down to speeding tickets. We're all qualified. We're all lawyers. We've all tried cases. But what sets me apart is I have a plan for this court. I'd like to start immigration court in Bear County. We do not have one surprisingly. Every criminal case where a non-citizen has committed a crime, an immigration issue is tied to it. And immigrations and customs will not come and speak with this individual until that criminal case is closed. And in jail for two to three years, well, we're paying $50 a day to house them. Plus, they're sitting there because they may not have qualified representation to explain their rights. So I would like to get all the proper parties in one room, work out these cases, whether dupli, trial, or dismissal, and move them from Bear County jail into the hands of immigrations and customs. Thank you. Thank you. Miss Mauer. Good evening. My name is Virginia Mauer. I have been licensed to practice law for over 24 years and have been practicing law here in San Antonio for that amount of time. I do both criminal defense and what they call abuse and neglect, that being representing children in states' care when children's protective services comes in and takes the children. I have been born and raised here. I graduated from Texas Military Institute, got my bachelors from SMU, my JD from St. Mary's Law School, and my master from American University. I am the only person in this race who has represented not only criminal defendants, but also victims of crime. My name is Virginia Mauer and I'm running for the 187th District Court. Thank you. I've gotten a couple of new questions here, so I'm going to start with those and we'll start with Miss Mauer first. Seeing as how many candidates have not had experience as a judge, is there some sort of training regimen for new judges and if there isn't, do you believe there should be? There is what is called the Baby Judges School and it's basically a week long, what they call Continuing Legal Education course where they teach judges how to be judges. There's also code books that judges use while they're on the bench and frequently what I've seen in the past is with judges who have to take the bench, you pick up the phone and you call your retired judges if you've got questions that pop up that you don't know the answers to, but the answer is yes, Baby Judges School. Thank you, Mr. Alexander. Well, as Miss Mauer said, yes, there is the Baby Judges School. There's also a course that is specific to capital crimes. A judge can't preside over a capital murder death penalty case until they've gone through that course, but I think the training actually begins before you ever are elected to office or put on that black row because a district court judge needs to be well-versed in the law. They need to know the current laws that apply here in the state of Texas as well as be very familiar with the U.S. Constitution and most importantly, they must be willing to actually follow those laws. Thank you, Miss Ishiperins. Yes, and I would agree with both of the two previous speakers, but in addition to that, it is true that there are many times that judges, in fact, take the bench and never have a chance to go to baby school before they actually start practicing as a judge. And that is one of the reasons it is so important that you have someone who is qualified for that bench. I've handled over 6,635 cases last time I checked, and that's in state criminal court. The person who sits on this bench at this moment, the political appointment for this bench spent the last 17 years practicing federal law. And federal law is different than state law. And that's one of the reasons that it's really important to be sure that your judges are current on the law, as was stated. And I think that's going to be your best way to make sure that you get someone in the seat as judge who knows what they're doing from day one so that it's not practice on day one. It's the real thing, because like I said before, death is the worst punishment you can get in that court. Thank you. In addition to everything that we've just heard, going from court to court as a prosecutor and a defense attorney, I have seen dozens of judges all over Texas the way they practice. You can learn by going into different courts and actually practicing in those courts. You can see what works, what doesn't work. You can see how you're treated and how other people are treated. And you can learn what is needed to actually exercise justice, because let's be honest, justice is not blind, it's not. People can stand up here and tell you it is, but it's not, right? The people who actually get away with things are the people who have money. The people who get hurt are people who don't have money who are not educated. And you learn this. You learn it by going into the courtrooms and seeing it. Thank you. And we're going to start this next question with you, Ms. Legodeta. Do you think partisan elections for judicial seats are helpful, or would you prefer to move to a nonpartisan system if the law could be changed? I definitely think that we need to move the system that it is. Let's be honest, you go there, you guys hear Republicans and some of you guys are like, right? But the truth is, some of us may be more qualified than our Democratic opponent. So it shouldn't matter whether we're Republicans or Democrats, what matters is the person. And I always tell this to my best friend, who is my treasurer, she is a die-hard liberal. And I ask her, do not vote for the party, vote for the person. And that's the way it should be. Thank you. Ms. Maurer? I think nonpartisan, it's definitely the best way to go. The problem is trying to figure out how you can make it nonpartisan without having to set up a completely separate election cycle. Simply because the primaries are the primaries. You're either Republican or Democrat. In order for you to have nonpartisan, you've got to have a totally separate voting ballot that just says nonpartisan judicial candidates. And it's whether or not you can, number one, do it. Number two, afford to do it. And a lot of times, people aren't willing to make the effort to put the money into it. But I definitely think they need to be nonpartisan. I'm going to say that maybe if we could get to a nonpartisan election for judges, we could do them at the same time that the nonpartisan city elections are. That's true. Which would be changing it. Thank you. Mr. Alexander? I would absolutely support judicial races being nonpartisan. I think if you've already heard this evening, a judge's role is to follow and implement the law. It is not to make policy. It is not to legislate from the bench. I was raised in a Republican household. I am a Republican. I have my own personal political views. But if I am so blessed as to be able to don that black robe, that has to be checked at the door before I step up on that bench. Because the law is the law. And partisan politics have no business up on that bench. Thank you. When someone walks into the courtroom and they are accused of doing something or committing a crime, that person is not looked upon and the first question asked is that a Democrat or Republican? Same thing with the victim. When a victim is in there, the judge isn't that victim thinking, hmm, wonder if they're a Democrat or Republican. So most definitely. Because politics should have no part in the courtroom. Zero. And we definitely need to go to a nonpartisan way of electing judges. Some people talk about doing appointments. The problem with appointments is a lot of times someone's appointed and there's a political favor that needs to be done. That's not right. That's not justice. That's not taking care of our courtrooms. I'm some complete agreement. We need to go to nonpartisan. And I actually agree with Miss Mauer and believe that it actually needs to be done by way of election. And completely nonpartisan, its own ballot. It can be during the city races or it can be with the regular races. Just as long as it's nonpartisan. Thank you. Thank you. We're going to start this with you, Miss Ishii Prince, this next question. I asked the first court, what would you like voters to know about the criminal court systems? And how can they be made more efficient? Well, I heard one of the things that is important is that the judge actually be there to do the work. Another thing is oftentimes people need to reach a judge after hours and there's what we call MAC court that goes on. But at the same time sometimes a defense attorney may really need to talk to a judge or an officer may need a warrant signed. So why it's important to always have your phone with you, always be available to those who need you. That's one of the ways to make it efficient. But another way is with regards to specialty courts, there needs to be a specialty court that deals with anyone who is not labeled and helps them become rehabilitated. Right now we have rehabilitation if you have a label of prostitute, drugs, things like that. But it needs to be available to anybody who needs that special extra rehabilitation. In addition, I would like to see an attorney appointed who deals with only immigration law because there is a problem where people set in jail. I don't think we need a full-blown court. I've said for a few years we just need an attorney who can help us. Thank you. Ms. Legerata? Sure. Like I stated, we do need the immigration court. I personally get called by the district judges to handle those cases so I understand the importance. But more importantly, the judges when they do sentencing, they have so many resources to their at their hands to help someone. Right now we have blanket classes, blanket sentencing guidelines that are being followed and that does not help everyone. The same program does not help every individual or every case. So I believe that we should utilize more resources, more classes, different classes, different programs. Let's get involved so that way we can stop, repeat, offenders from coming back. Of course we have individuals who there is no help for them and they do need to go to prison. But there are young children or young adults who come in who they're just stupid, wrong place, wrong time, right? And they need help to get back on the right track. Let's turn them around and get them back into the community so that way they can be a functioning member of society. Thank you. I think as the others have said just show up and do the job. But the other thing is about the resources. There are a lot of resources that the district court judges do not utilize that go in conjunction with the abuse and neglect courts. This especially comes into play with people who are charged with a lot of drug charges and with injured children charges. There are programs through the CPS unit that can be utilized to help rehabilitate that person. To maybe not terminate parental rights. To allow a drug addict to get off the drugs. A lot of times the motivation of you're going to lose your kids unless you go into this inpatient changes the whole scheme of a person's perspective. But I think just utilizing all the resources that are out there is one of the best ways that we can make a change in our society. Thank you. Mr. Alexander? I believe the question was about the efficiency of the court. What you would like voters to know about criminal courts and how they can be made more efficient? Well, again, I think it really boils down to following the law. And what I mean by that is too often judges rather than follow what the law says will interject their personal preferences. And for example the Code of Criminal Procedure says if you have a case involving a child victim who's under the age of 14 that case is supposed to get preferential treatment. It's supposed to go to the front of the line. Unless there's good cause shown. But too often judges because those cases are icky and they don't want to hear it put it to the back of the line. And they deny justice to a child victim and their family. And what happens is they inefficiently pick on some other cases that think they can apply pressure. Especially if they think that defense attorney is weak. So number one follow the law parties with respect. Don't bully a defense attorney because they're appointed or because they don't like to plea out their cases and move your docket along. I think if you do that the docket will naturally flow and cases will work themselves out because the lawyers will want to work with you. Thank you. And we're going to start with you on this next question, Mr. Alexander. And you're probably not going to thank me for this. There's always a lot of interest in campaign finance. And judicial candidates get as I understand the preponderance of their funds from attorneys. How do you separate that when one of those attorneys appears before you in court? Or how would you? Okay. Well I am not funded by the defense bar. I will start right there. There are two attorneys I believe that have contributed to me and it's in my campaign finance reports and it's because they're both personal friends. Once a prosecutor, once a defense attorney. But if I find myself in a situation in which they're appearing before me again, you have to be able to remove yourself from that. If you even have the inkling that somehow you're going to give this person favoritism because you know them and really we all kind of work in a high position and we all know each other. We're all close in some way shape or form and so every day we find ourselves in that situation whether you're a defense attorney judge or prosecutor we have to remove yourself. So again it comes down to simply following the law, taking your oath seriously and following our code of ethics and if there is even the sense that there's a possible conflict then I absolutely would believe and I would voluntarily recuse myself from the case. Well this far for this campaign I have taken no donations from anyone. It's simply been all out of my pocket. But it's very important that if a judge is even going to be tempted to play favorites and let me tell you it happens then that person should not be judged. I think all four of us up here can tell you that we all received an email from someone who's not here tonight and that email stated hey defense attorneys if you've already given me or first if you haven't given to me please give me money and oh by the way if you've already given dig deeper. Not right. Not the thing you tell defense attorneys because how does that make the defense attorney feel when they go into your courtroom? It's like you're owed something right? Does that make sense? Okay so anyway so it's really important that the judge not at all be tempted by the defense to request money or to make anyone feel they're going to receive special benefit. Thank you. Sure about two years ago I had decided to run for this bench so I've been saving money to run so I've funded 50% the other 50% came from my mom and dad and that best friend I told you she better be giving me money right? I've been best friend for 15 years but honestly you know I see it every single day you know your friend comes in so and so give you money and they do do favors they do absolutely and it's something that I hate I do not like seeing it I don't like witnessing it I don't like seeing other attorneys pushed aside because a friend needs a favor it's not okay and that's what I'm saying when justice isn't in the courtroom so if elected I promise that that will stop just for the mere fact that it's just it's something that impuriates me. Thank you. At this point my campaign is completely self-funded I've written every single check for every single thing that's been bought I have given money to judges in the past and the reason I give them judges is because I believe they're good judges I do not expect favors in return I do not give favors in return as I stated I've self-funded this I don't anticipate taking any funds from attorneys I know what happens once you get past the primary all of a sudden they all want to give you money well if they weren't there with you at the beginning you know they're trying to come lately so at this point no taking funds from attorneys and no favors given to attorneys for giving you funds. Thank you. We're going to start this next question with you Ms. Maurer please explain your thoughts on recidivism and how your court can reduce repeat incarcerations The problem with recidivism is it does occur in fact there was a quote that I heard the other day from a judicial candidate who is not here tonight when a defense attorney made the comment that relapses part of recovery that response was hooey well like it or not relapses part of recovery you've got to be able to support them when they start their recovery as they go through the recovery and to get them to the part where they are back to the normal means of society like I said I would utilize all the avenues available to us all the programs available to us through Bayer County but all through CPS and the state there are a lot of programs out there that people don't use there are a lot of faith based programs that Bayer County doesn't use because it's faith based and they feel like they can't shove faith down people's throat like it or not sometimes the only way you can get clean is to get to God so from that standpoint that's what I would be using is all the programs available to us Thank you Mr. Alexander Well I've been called a social worker I think for my view on this but I think when you're looking at recidivism you really kind of have to look at it in two parts first of all I will say the ladies up here they know my reputation as a prosecutor and people often call me a pain in the you know what because I'm very tough on the violent offender and I think those who harm children I think those who are repeat offenders I think they need to be put away and they need to be put away for a long time because minimum sentences teach them nothing however when you're dealing with a class of people like to mentally ill and I've seen this as a prosecutor when I'm looking through their criminal history where no one gave them a chance and over and over again all it does is it puts them in a cycle and I think if we're going to do justice and we're dealing with people like to mentally ill we must first try to help them before we then go off and put them to prison if all other efforts have failed Thank you Ms. Isshie-Prins As I stated earlier we currently have courts that are specialty courts where you get extra assistance basically in rehabilitation some of those though are veterans court which is a great thing another court where you have a label of being a prostitute another court where you have a label of being a drug user but the thing is there are plenty of people who are arrested who don't have a label they don't fit into that specialty court and the truth is a lot of those specialty courts they really work and if you go over to the juvenile system you'll see how those specialty courts really work and so it's important that we have a court available that's a specialty type court but it is open to anyone who is qualified and anyone who needs that extra help at rehabilitation not just the person who has a label because we don't all have labels and like Mr. Alexander said there are those that there is no rehabilitation for people don't like to hear that but sometimes that's the case and they need to be locked up to protect society Thank you Ms. Legaret and like I stated before I'm going to use DWI as an example Bear County has a huge drinking and driving problem and they go into court and they're giving the same classes the same community service hours the same fine and it doesn't help it doesn't change anything it doesn't make the person stop it doesn't solve our problem and that's what's happening in the felony courts you get the same classes you get the same state programs that help we need to start changing the way we do things each individual will be able to be rehabilitated differently if we actually focus on protecting the community and rehabilitating that individual Thank you Thank you Ms. Mow I already went I'm sorry I can do it again if you like We finished that round I'm going to start the final question with Ms. Legaret Do you have any innovative ideas for the improvement of the court system? Like I stated in my opening statement yes, I want to start the immigration court we don't need one immigration attorney we need to use our resources better defense attorneys are already being appointed to these cases we don't need to add extra funds we just need to use our funds smarter if we can go ahead and provide in the courthouse to you all the time a continuing legal education on immigration law for prosecutors they have no idea what's going on either and defense attorneys and then we get them in the courtroom with translators and I'm not only speaking about Spanish we also have people from Asian countries we have German every type of language if there is we need those interpreters into the courtroom so that way we can move the cases more efficiently and the rights need to be explained better and we need to move them out of the Bayer County Jail so number one we're not paying for it and number two the immigration and customs can go ahead and get going with their part Thank you Ms. Mahore I think from the innovative standpoint like I stated earlier really utilizing the the programs that are out there faith-based, community-based whatever to really help stop the cycle that has started with my CPS I will see the kids starting the CPS care and then gradually graduate into the criminal justice system if not in the juvenile then into the adult system we've got to stop this if any of you all have ever seen the movie Idiocracy that's what our community is becoming we're just dumbing everything down and it's not fair to the people that are coming behind that are not learning how to be productive members of society and just take take take it's not fair to you that you're working for somebody else to go out and use drugs we need to get them off drugs get them working let everybody help everyone be responsible members of society Thank you Mr. Alexander I wouldn't call it innovative but sadly in the courthouse I think it's novel follow the law one of the reasons I chose to run is because too often I see members of our judiciary that refuse to follow the law because their personal thoughts desires interests what have you get in that way an example I would give you is I already told you I'm a child abuse prosecutor and the code of criminal procedure explicitly prohibits the copying of what's called a forensic interview now what this is is a child who has been physically or sexually abused and they're interviewed by a special type of interviewer this thing is recorded it must be made available to the defense so that they can prepare but the law explicitly prohibits a copy being provided to the defendant so they don't have a trophy all right but judges time and time again because of their personal beliefs refuse to follow this law and in my opinion continue to victimize that child so my innovative idea would be follow the law and actually stay at work till five Thank you Mrs. Sheeprinz I have thought starts with you guys the voters and that is make sure that you elect someone into office who knows the law knows how to follow it and is experienced and is dedicated and has good character if you start with that you're going to improve that system down at the courthouse all whole lot right now there's some judges who go in they don't know the law they won't try jury cases because they're scared to all the defense attorneys know it in the cases get reset and they get logged and that's the first thing the second thing is right now the way if someone is arrested and they're non-citizen their defense attorneys normally do not know immigration law and aren't specialists the cheapest way best way and fastest way is to get just a few maybe 10 immigration specialists who are available and all they need to do is advise these people the defense attorneys this is what will happen if your client please this is what will happen if he receives his sentence once we do that those cases will move along and so it's a lot cheaper and that's all we need thank you thank you before we go to our closing statements I should tell you that there was there is another Republican candidate for this court Joe Contreras who had expected to be here and obviously had something come up I would like to thank League President Madhu Schreeter for great this event this evening I always enjoy doing this I want to thank Nowcast for once again coming and streaming the forum and if any of your friends or family have missed this evening they can go to NowcastSA.com and view it in a couple of days as soon as it's over so there you go oh that's right we're streaming sorry okay again thanks to the UTSA College of Public Policy and Dr. Romero for inviting us to do these forums I think that it's always very interesting I'm always impressed with how many students come out to these events I hope that you're all learning something I hope that you all are planning to vote in the election I hope you've all picked up a voter guide and with that we will go to the closing statements it will be one-minute statements and it will be in the reverse order of where we started so Ms. Maurer like I said my name is Virginia Maurer and I'm running for the 187th District Court I've been licensed for over 24 years I do both this both criminal defense and abuse and neglect I would like to encourage all of you to come down to the Barrack County Courthouse and sit in on some of the trials especially criminal justice majors this is the stuff that you're getting into it's like it or not it's fascinating it's also very heart wrenching from the standpoint of what you as voters need to know you need to be able to look at candidates and see what their background is I have a very unique perspective from all of my other candidates because of the fact that I have both represented criminal defendants as well as victims of crime that's not something that most of the judges can do and have ever done so I would simply request your vote for Virginia Maurer for the 187th District Court Thank you, Ms. LaGarrette I've told you all about my experience and I told you about my plan for the court but let me tell you why I chose to run for this court about two years ago a friend of mine was pregnant and she was assigned as a second chair in a trial in this court and she realized that she was going to give birth the same time the trial came so she went and talked to the judge and she reappointed one because she was going to give birth and she wasn't going to be available and the judge looked at her and said I guess women can't have it all and at that moment I knew that that was the mentality of this courtroom and at that moment I knew I was going to run for this court I've been planning for it I have a plan, I have the experience for it I just need your help to get there Thank you very much My name is Veronica LaGarrette please remember it's a leg above the rest Thank you This is your friends The San Antonio Express news endorsed me for this particular place the 187th district court because of my work experience my work ethic my judicial temperament and all of the experience that I bring to this court and that includes working with victims that includes prosecuting defending that also includes over 6,635 cases that I've handled that includes death penalty cases that I've tried that includes cases I've prosecuted such as a gentleman who is serving nine life sentences for sexually assaulting his child that's the kind of work that I've been doing here in Bear County and I'd like to continue doing that and continue serving this community Thank you very much and I would really appreciate your vote when you go to the polls on number four on the ballot and please remember Prince Wins Thank you Mr. Alexander I don't have a catchy slogan but what I will tell you is I think what's important when you go to the polls this year in the next few days that you look at the quality of a candidate's experience as opposed to simply the quantity, right? It's extremely important within the state system, right? Because these are state laws that are implemented in the 187th District Court As I told you before I've been licensed since 2002 I've been with the DA's office since 2005 I have done everything from juvenile to protective orders all the misdemeanors I've done both the criminal trial division of felonies, that's the ag robbers the drugs, the burglaries as well as crimes against children My knowledge and experience that has earned me the respect of law enforcement, child protective services as well as the child advocacy groups here in Bear County and they routinely seek out my guidance and counsel when it comes to these laws So I would invite you to please vote for me, I'm number one on the ballot Carl Alexander, thank you Thank you Please join me in thanking the candidates for coming out this evening That concludes this evening's candidate forum I should tell you that the League of voters is a non-partisan political organization that encourages the informed participation in government We never support or oppose any candidate or political party Thank you