There is no question that the Kansas Commission on Judicial Performance’s new online evaluations of the state’s judges will help fill a void for many voters on Nov. 4. The information is drawn from confidential surveys of lawyers, witnesses, jurors, litigants and others with firsthand knowledge, and includes the commission’s recommendation on whether the judge should be retained. But type in District 18, Sedgwick County, and you get some bad news: “Kansas law provides that only evaluations of appointed justices and judges are to be disclosed.” That’s right — our county’s elected judges have been evaluated, too, but voters aren’t allowed to know the results. And that’s not right.
Registered?
Commenting on WE Blog now requires you to be a Kansas.com member. Use the links above to register, if you haven't already, or to log in.Contact us
Follow us
Daily Archives
-
Recent Comments
- Rage on Open thread 11/22
- Rage on Open thread 11/22
- Phantom on Health care reform would save state money
- Phantom on Health care reform would save state money
- Pleefer on Open thread 11/22
- cosmos_originally on Open thread 11/22
- Daniel on Open thread 11/22
- Rage on Open thread 11/22
- Rage on Open thread 11/22
- BlueJay on Open thread 11/22

6 Comments
Well, that’s bizarre.
Although you know the Commission on Judicial Performance’s evaluations would become a political football with accusations of favoritism and partisanship. I suspect a compilations of comments from lawyers, witnesses, jurors, litigants and others with firsthand knowledge of a judge’s performance would be valuable. But the potential for abuse is unavoidable.
There are plusses and minuses to have elected judges in the system. But it seems the qualities that make for a good impartial judge are inherently tainted by partisan electoral politics.
Don’t think I would know how to evaluate a judge or know what the evaluation stated after he/she was evaluated.
With that said, I would be interested in examining the evaluations of sitting elected judges. It may help in the decision process whether or not to re-elect them.
The rubber-stamp report card on Kansas judges is a complete waste of time and money and stamp pad ink. Even notorious soft-on-predators Judge Franklin Theis of Shawnee County got a favorable rubber-stamp, in spite of his sentencing a sodomite to PROBATION for raping a young boy on video tape. The only reason Theis got as high as 51% of the vote the last time he was up for retention vote is that shysters that appeared before his bench donated heavily to his retention campaign, seeing a chance to further their careers by stepping on the backs of raped children.
[Naturally, there were no survey questions on adherence to sentencing guidelines or adherence to duties to protect children from rape and violent abuses.]
Rhonda your own newspaper ran results on the judges in the 18th district a month or two ago.
How much do you want?
All the more reason why we should adopt the judicial article and select judges the way they do in CIVILIZED counties like, Riley, Shawnee and Douglas.
Politically appointed judges reflect a political philosophy that may conflict with some segments of society. Elected judges may allow for more diversity of perspective.