The primary ballot this year presents Democrats with good news and bad. The good news is that going forward we can be assured that, regardless of the outcome of this election, the 6th Judicial District will have a competent, smart and experienced district attorney. The bad news is: We still have to choose between the two candidates.
Given that necessity, Democratic voters should pick Christian Champagne. While both candidates are capable, he has the advantage in focus, philosophy and enthusiasm. Champagne’s way of thinking represents the future of American criminal law.
First, this is a primary election and both candidates for district attorney are Democrats. There is no Republican running, and November’s general election will therefore be a formality. The winner of the primary will be the next district attorney.
That said, there is still the question of choosing. This race, which should be a collegial contest between relatively like-minded lawyers, has instead turned somewhat nasty, particularly among surrogates and supporters. But much of what is being tossed about is irrelevant or unknowable. There are, for example, countless reasons why mistrials or plea bargains happen, and absent the details of a particular case, their meaning is impossible to judge. Likewise, while tribal law may be impenetrable to laymen, there are any number of lawyers in this area for whom it is no mystery.
Nor are other measures always determinative. Benjamin Lammons has more years of experience. Champagne, having worked as a public defender, has more varied experience.
This is also talked about as if it were a race between current District Attorney Todd Risberg, for whom Champagne has worked, and his predecessor, Craig Westberg, seen by some as Lammons’ mentor. Risberg, of course, is term-limited, while Westberg died in 2009.
The comparison reflects perceptions that Westberg was overly harsh and Risberg has gone too far the other way. While that assessment of Westberg is accurate, the underlying either-or assumption misses the point.
In any criminal case, a district attorney has three interests to consider: the victim, including friends and family; the defendant, who has rights and deserves justice, whatever that may mean; and society at large, which includes the future. No approach that counts outcomes like a box score can address all those.
The too-often forgotten fact of the criminal justice system is that in all but a tiny number of cases, someone convicted of a crime is going to get out some day. Then what? Will that person have learned to be a better citizen, to make better choices and think before acting? Or will that individual have learned to be a more proficient criminal or been brutalized past the point of caring?
It is not an academic point. And it is not about coddling criminals. It is about putting the long-term health of the community ahead of racking up wins.
Again, this choice is not black and white. Lammons understands and supports restorative justice, rehabilitation and innovations such as drug courts. But Champagne is more focused on those fronts and other ways of preventing future offenses. His eloquence on the subject reflects a passion, not just for prosecuting crimes, but for bringing justice to all concerned – victims, perpetrators and the community.
Vote for Christian Champagne for district attorney.
