- Quickdraw McLaw
- 2020 Judicial Primary
- 11 Comments
- 264 Views
With primary ballots set to start arriving in mailboxes next week, it’s time to talk about some of the contested judicial primary races featured on that ballot. We welcome your comments on the qualifications of the candidates as well as any information you can offer to help voters make an educated decision. Just remember to keep your comments appropriate and try to avoid defamation.
For District Court Judge, Family Division, Department M, the candidates are:
- Lynn Hughes
- Robert Kurth
- Amy M. Mastin
- Mandy McKellar
What are your thoughts on the race in this department?
Mastin would be pretty good. Performs well as aa hearing master. No always really user friendly or flexible, and not much of a bedside manner at times, but that may be explained largely by her adapting to the often horrific subject matter she is assigned to (TPO Court).
I think in general assignment Family Court, if she wins, she would have a pretty good demeanor. Again, the subject matter she currently serves in requires the patience of Job, which she admittedly does not always have.
She is definitely smart, a real hard worker, and is always looking to innovate and contribute to improving the system.
So, although somewhat flawed(who isn't?), she is by far the best of the lot, IMO.
As far as Lynn Hughes, you could do worse, but you could also do a lot better. There is some separation, in terms of quality, between Mastin and Hughes, but Hughes is still a passable selection in my opinion. Perhaps he'd surprise me and do a lot better than I think. I do believe he is a fairly bright guy. My concerns are more in the approach he might take, and I sense a certain rigidity, but I could be wrong.
But although Mastin I feel is the best of the lot, if Hughes wins(which he might if enough voters believe he is female based on his name) I think that would be okay.
As for the other two..
Let me put it this way. I hope people confine their choice to either Mastin or Hughes.
Mastin has a good demeanor??!! She is always angry and takes it out on the parties. Uggh, I cannot vote for her.
Ditto. Mastin is the only choice.
10:48–11:38 never said demeanor was her strong point, and in fact pointed out that is an area she has somewhat of a challenge with.
Kurth would be an awful option. Mastin is mean. I've personally witnessed her berating a woman in TPO court, told her she should have investigated whether or not her abusive ex was going to hurt her before she called the cops when he violated Mastin's own TPO. It was shocking. McKellar is a hard no. That leaves Hughes. Don't know him, but I know the other 3 so there you have it.
12:09. I realize her demeanor is not always the best, but your recitation sounds like these unbelievable horror stories that pro pers allege against judges, wherein they cherry pick and distort certain facts, while totally leaving out other critcal facts.
You would really have us believe that that is all there is to the story? Mastin grants a TPO. And based on how you relay things, subsequently the guy clearly violates the TPO. According to your story, such violation is not in question and Mastin is making no point about that. It was clearly violated.
So, the woman does what she should do, and what she is advised to do by police, advocates, hearing masters, TPO Dept.,and by the written materials she receives–contact the authorities if there is a violation.
And that all happens and you would have us believe that Mastin instead segued into a tangential, totally irrational and irrelevant tirade wherein Mastin demanded that the woman should have,on her own, conducted some sort of half-ass risk assessment investigation, rather than contacting the authorities upon a clear TPO violation.?
I am not taking for Mastin. instead, I am taking up for Family Court practitoners, who read this blog, and whose intelligence you just tried to insult.
That's still your story? Case#?
12:09 here – I'm an attorney, not a pro per. I practice almost exclusively in family court. I share your skepticism and likely would not have believed it either if I hadn't seen it with my own eyes. She issued the TPO. The guy violated specific provisions. The woman called the cops and he was arrested. Back in TPO court for an OSC hearing and Mastin told the woman she should have investigated if the guy was actually going to hurt her before calling the cops. Mastin has no business on the bench.
Amy Mastin doesn't have the needed experience. Four years ago, she didn't apply the law correctly, and Phoukeo Dej-Oudom and her children were killed by their father.
Mastin gets frustrated at the parties, gets angry, and then blows up at them. It isn't a one time thing, but a pattern of behaviour. It should be noted by all attorneys on here.
https://www.ktnv.com/news/contact-13/court-explains-why-protection-order-denied
1:02-A hearing master miss-applying certain facets of a law is not what gets people killed. An insanely jealous, control freak psycho., who finally had control taken from him, is, I assume, what far more likely caused these deaths.
So, a judge technically miss-applying the law is not what creates that dynamic. However, a bad discretionary call by a judge(and judges do misread or fail to accurately access the risk level, and it happens too often) could make such an event more likely to occur earlier rather than later.
Examples of poor discretionary calls might include not seeing the need for supervised visitation, or the need for a secure exchange point, etc.
But to imply(or, in this case, pretty much assert) that these people died because the hearing master was inaccurate at interpreting some statute, seems like a pretty wild conclusion to me.
I'm in no way defending the rulings in such case, but let's have at least some sense of proportion and fairness.
Mastin is head and shoulders above the other candidates. She is smart and applies the law correctly. When you are on the bench – be it in child welfare court or TPO's, you make real life decisions that have real life consequences. Anyone who has worked in those fields for any significant length of time has one or more horror stories to tell. It takes a tremendous amount of courage and fortitude to handle these cases. She should be commended for taking on these hard assignments.
Mastin communciates directly. She doesn't sugar coat things. If you don't like that, that's your issue. Not hers. She would make an excellent judge. She has my vote and the votes of anyone who asks me.
Completely agree. For anyone considering voting for McKellar, you should watch https://youtu.be/oMX4okSVt_w
she really comes off as a clueless Cooley grad.