Our Constitution guarantees that every person charged with a crime will have legal representation. The job of this legal representative (defense attorney) is to speak for the defendant and represent his/her interests in court. This means, even if we are guilty we still get someone to stand with us in a court of law to ensure that our rights are protected. It is the job of the jury to decide guilt.

There are rules of professional conduct that apply to every attorney. One of these rules requires that an attorney must represent and advocate for every client zealously. This is not the same as “trying to help the guilty go free.” A lawyer who competently performs in the courtroom is a skilled professional not an unscrupulous human being.

If you believe that a defense attorney cannot become an impartial judge because he/she has the mindset that “criminals should go unpunished” then you must believe that a prosecuting attorney cannot become an impartial judge because he/she has the mindset that “everyone is guilty.” Ridiculous. During their careers, both candidates, Craig Platt and Vickie Churchill, have represented clients charged with crimes. Therefore, following the above logic, neither candidate is capable of being impartial as a judge. Also ridiculous. If both defending attorneys and prosecuting attorneys are removed from the pool of potential judges then who is left to elect?

Although there have been personal endorsements of candidates in the newspaper by members of the local legal community, there has been no attempt by them to defend their profession and the integrity of our legal system.

This silence allows misconceptions and blatantly erroneous statements to be perceived as truths by the public.

Craig Platt is seeking to serve the community in the capacity of judge. He should not be penalized for doing the job of defense attorney well in the courtroom.

Frankie Snyder

Irene Puhr

Coupeville