(RSS)
Jim Reed, candidate for Shasta County Superior Court Judge
(Candidates’ statements are unaltered and published exactly as submitted.)
I have lived in Fall River Mills (Eastern Shasta County) for the past 15 years; my father and grandfather also lived there until their deaths. I have a general law practic in town and my wife, who is also and attorney, works with me. Our Fall River Mills office has one other attorney as well as a paralegal. Our daughter recently graduated from Hastings Law School and will join our practice as soon as she passes the bar exam.
I ran for election as a Shasta County Judge 2 years ago unsuccessfully. The single most important reason I lost at that time, was that all the sitting Shasta County Judges endorsed my opponent, who was a Court Commissioner. However this year, none of the Judges have endorsed either me or my opponent; I feel this gives our competition an even playing field.
Let me set forth the reasons I believe the voters should choose me over my opponent:
- Experience: I have practiced law 15 years longer than my opponent. I have handled many criminal cases; for years I was the conflicts attorney for the Burney Branch of the Court, this means I was assigned all cases the public defender could not handle in that region. I have tried many criminal cases before juries including both felonies and misdemeanors. But my emphasis has always been on civil cases; I have tried over 450 civil trials before a judge or a jury including breach of contract, real property disputes, property damage, personal injury, dissolution of marriage, probate, and business litigation. I believe I am one of the very few attorneys in Shasta County that have had this kind of broad experience.
- Balance to the Bench: There are 10 judges in Shasta County and 8 of the 10 judges worked in a District Attorney’s Office before becoming a Judge. Only 4 of the Judges had extensive civil trial experience before becoming a Judge. Approximately ½ of Shasta County Judges’ time is spent doing civil work and the other ½ doing criminal work. This unbalance of experience before becoming a Judge results from most Judges being appointed by the Governor; 2 of the last 4 California Governors had a career as a prosecutor and generally appointed Judges who worked in D.A.’s offices.
- Comparison of the Candidates: My opponent has spent most of his career as a prosecutor. About 10% of the body of law a Judge must interpret and follow is criminal law, whereas the remaining 90% is mostly civil law. Shasta County needs an experienced Judge with a solid background in civil law. Surprisingly, my opponent in his brochure, radio advertising and website calls himself a “Civil Litigator” but recently on the Ken Murray radio talk show he was forced to admit that he had never handled a single civil trial.
- Commitment to Quality Justice: If elected I am committed to attentively listening to each party’s side of the story, making an unbiased decision, and being fair and just while strictly following the law in every single case. I have always worked hard in the 32 years I have practiced law and will continue to do so as a Judge.
Experience counts because our views of people and society are formed by things we have seen and done during our lifetimes. I have dealt with many wonderful people over my career but occasionally have had to work with those who are dishonest and want to hurt others. I am capable of dealing with all types. Visit my website at reedforshastajudge.com for more information.
- FALL RIVER MILLS ATTORNEY JIM REED WILL BRING BALANCE TO THE SHASTA COUNTY BENCH
174 views
1. Mr. Reed claims to be a 15 year Shasta County Resident: Really? Then why is his primary business address in Lafayette and his wife’s in Oakland (State Bar Website). Why didn’t he become a Shasta County Voter until 2004, and his wife 2006? Prior to that Mr. Reed was listed as Modoc County and his wife Contra Costa County. (Public Record) Why did his daughter graduate from high school 6 miles from his Lafayette office address in 2001? (Intermountain News)
2. He lost last time because the judges didn’t endorse him: Really? What about the fact that he wants to save the Burney Court: that was his slogan last time, and still an issue for him today. Do we really believe he wants to drive 160 miles everyday to go to work? Or is he looking for semi-retirement. Burney court sits 2 times per week.
3. Trials: Can you really compare court trials to jury trials? Mr. Reed admits to trying approximately 50 jury trials, only 12 of which were criminal matters. Most of his work is court trials which can last 20 minutes, and are often merely the means for collecting fees. Mr. Flynn’s trials last for months. Mr. Flynn has over 150 of these complex trials. Isn’t this a comparison of apples to oranges?
4. Mr. Flynn is endorsed by civil attorney’s who practice in the courtroom because they know that the rules of evidence and discovery are consistent in both civil and criminal matters. In fact the criminal rules are more stringent because there is more at stake. A person’s freedom.
5. Does Mr. Reed not really know the definition of litigation? Litigation is the process of carrying on the lawsuit, which includes discovery and pre-trial motions. I heard Mr. Flynn correct him on I-5 live.
These are just a few of the misstatements that Mr. Reed continues to make. Statistics can be manipulated. Do we really believe that criminal matters are only 10%. Read the paper folks.
Please allow me reply to your questions about James Reed. Having worked for Mr. Reed full time in Fall River Mills for the past five years (and having worked at the Burney Court), I think I can respond to some of your concerns.
1. James Reed loves Fall River Mills and has wanted to be here full time for many years. Unfortunately, the realities of practicing law here are that it is difficult to make a living in Eastern Shasta County. Most of our clients are not well off and Jim very frequently charges them much less than the going rate, if at all. He does a lot of pro-bono work for many community organizations also. Thus, while he commutes back and forth to the main office of Nichols, Catterton, Downing & Reed in Lafayette, he spends the majority of his time here in Fall River Mills. His wife also commutes back and forth. In the time I have worked for Jim, he has worked just about every weekend up here seeing clients. I can verify this as I make the appointments. He works 6-7 days a week every week, unless he is on vacation, and then he takes work with him.
2. The judges did not endorse him last time because they supported Judge Cara Beatty who was a Court Commissioner at the time. This time, the judges have not endorsed EITHER candidate. As a judge for Shasta County, Mr. Reed will be required to work in Redding and he knows this. The Burney Court is open only once a month right now (residents up here would love to have court twice a week) and Jim will try to advocate expanding those services but he would be only one vote among the judges. Shasta County is comprised of more than just Redding, as Eastern Shasta County residents try vainly to remind those in Redding, and Fall River Mills is 60 miles from Redding so a round-trip would be 120 miles, which Mr. Reed will gladly do.
3. Court trials require detailed knowledge of the law and the ability to apply the law to the facts with reason and impartiality. Jury trials are important, but they can also be very theatrical. A court trial can be as complex as a jury trial. Additionally, civil trials can be just as complex if not more so, than criminal trials. James Reed has done both and has experience in both. Mr. Flynn does not.
4. James Reed is endorsed by as many, if not more, civil attorneys as Mr. Flynn. The rules of evidence and discovery are NOT consistent in both civil and criminal trials. There are different standards. For example, in a criminal case, the standard of proof is “beyond a reasonable doubt”. In a civil case, the standard can be a preponderance of the evidence” (more than 50%).
5. Civil litigation implies that the attorney has been to trial on a civil case (litigation is defined as “the process of carrying on a lawsuit or a lawsuit itself”). While discovery and law and motion proceedings are part of the litigation process, they are only a small part. There is the drafting of the initial complaint, demurrers, summary judgments and “litigating” the case in court. While Mr. Flynn attempted to justify his claim as a “civil litigator”, having drafted motions and discovery requests/responses, he admitted publicly that he had not “tried” a civil case.
Additionally, Mr. Reed NEVER stated that criminal matters are only 10%. He stated that civil law is 90% of the body of law (meaning laws on the books) a Judge must interpret and follow.
I hope this clarifies these issues and the voters consider whether or not we need a “prosecutor” on the bench or a judge with diverse experience and the fair and impartial temperament required for this important position. In my opinion (admittedly somewhat biased), Mr. Reed is the best choice.
It is hard to find an attorney who is concerned with the needs of people in a day and time when most attorneys are all about billable hours.
Mr. Reed, you have my vote, because of the care and concern that I feel you show to those who otherwise would have no advocate in the system.
In response to the following question from JimG on May 27:
“How would our community be different if your opponent is elected rather than you?”
Before responding to the question about how our community would be different if I am elected as opposed to Dan Flynn, let me first say that I hope most of our judicial decisions would be the same, that is to say the correct and best decisions. Here, I am talking about the regular decisions that come before a judge in the courtroom.
It is the discretionary programs that the judges as a group decide to pursue, continue, expand or discontinue that perhaps will yield the biggest difference between how the community is effected, depending on whom is elected. Before I state which programs I will advocate that the judges should adopt, one must realize that whether Mr. Flynn or I am elected, we will be the junior member of the bench and our influence with the other judges will grow with time. In other words, do not expect instant results.
Shasta County has a successful drug and alcohol program overseen by Judge Anderson (who is retiring and whose position is the subject of this election). This is a voluntary program for repeat offenders who come before the criminal justice system. I believe that it is essential not only to maintain the program, but to expand it. It will take at least one of the other judges to step forward and to be dedicated to its success. I am willing to be that judge.
But I would rather have that existing program overseen by another judge, so that I can pursue a similar program for mental health patients who come before the criminal justice system. Other counties have a “mental health court” and I believe Shasta County should join those other Counties, especially considering the inadequate mental health programs that presently exist and the likely further cuts coming in this area because of the State economy and funding that is available. Basically, the mental court would operate in a fashion similar to the AOP program with stringent requirements for drug testing, required therapy and group classes, closely monitored by the Court. The program would be voluntary and only those who are most likely to benefit would be admitted to the program; in lieu of jail time the participants would undergo the requirements guarantying that they take their medication, see a mental health professional regularly, and become in most cases employed. In discussions with a judge from another County who has such a program, I am informed the program would require little if any funding beyond what already exists.
Secondly, I would be committed to visiting sites where community service is being performed to assure that it is beneficial to the community as well as the participant. It is common in minor criminal matter, for the person to be sentenced to community service rather than jail. With the crowed conditions in the jail, community service should be encouraged whenever possible. The purpose of community service is two fold; it allows someone convicted of a crime to work-off their punishment while providing labor to the community. There is a perception that community service is a lesser punishment than jail time. This is wrong. The community must benefit from this free labor, but even more importantly the participant should be left with the feeling of having accomplished something beneficial to the community; I believe this pride in labor will make the participant less likely to commit a crime in the future and encouraged to become gainfully employed.
Finally, I will advocate expansion of services in the Burney Branch of the Court. This Branch is in session only one time per month and almost all matters (other taking misdemeanor pleas and small claims) end up in Redding. I would like to see all matters originating in this part of the County handled in the Burney Court. Not only will it save the East County residents a 60 mile drive to Redding (120 miles round trip) but it will free up Court resources in Redding. More importantly, it will permit the two commitments I describe above (mental health court and community service) to work for the East County. Someone who wants to enter the mental health court program from East County probably will not do so if it requires getting to Redding regularly from their home; participants rarely can drive (since they usually will be taking powerful medication) and public transportation is difficult from this remote area. Monitoring community service programs in the East County by the Court as well, will be possible if a judge sits in the Burney Court at least one time per week.
These three matters are of immediate concern to me. I am open however, as I become an experienced judge, to other priorities that I will more easily recognize with time.
Obviously you don’t have much contact with the courts. Judge Anderson hasn’t been the AOP Judge for almost 6 months.
I am a resident of the Fall River Valley and have known Jim Reed for many years. His son was in my youngest son’s high school class over 11 years ago.
I am supporting Jim Reed for many reasons. He does so much for our community and helps many of the local non-profits with their legal paper work. Jim has a wide range of experience and is well-qualified to serve as a judge in Shasta County.
I would like to share one story that reveals much about Jim Reed’s character and ethics. Several years ago there was an elderly woman living in Fall River Mills that had been a professor at UC Davis for many years. She had also been a close friend and colleague of my grandfathers in the state’s university system. Her husband had passed away and she had no children. I would often visit the rest home where she resided to be sure her needs were being met. Jim had been named as her trustee and I witnessed his deep concern about her welfare. I was very impressed how professionally Jim handled her affairs, yet he also took the time to visit her often to make sure that she was being cared for properly. When she passed away, Jim and I planned her funeral and he was so careful that every detail was addressed. I know of other similar stories about Jim, where he goes above and beyond the call of duty to take care of his clients. He cares about people. I was very impressed with his professional and personal handling of this entire situation. This spoke volumes to me about the character of Jim Reed. This is the kind of man Shasta Co. needs as a judge.