Comments on: 22nd Circuit Judicial Race: Kuhnke, Fink

By: Mark Koroi

Mark Koroi — Thu, 01 Nov 2012 20:42:57 +0000

Jim Fink’s campaign video is now on YouTube.

Just put “Fink Washtenaw Judge” in the YouTube search engine.

By: Alan Goldsmith

Alan Goldsmith — Thu, 01 Nov 2012 19:48:38 +0000

This is the kind of ruling you can expect from a candidate Tom Monaghan feels comfortable donating to: [link] The Thomas Moore Law Center doing what they always do with Monaghan's other donated dollars.

By: Dave Cahill

Dave Cahill — Thu, 01 Nov 2012 14:37:01 +0000

Fink’s background as a police officer, combined with his right-wing Republican views, lets you know just how he is going to rule on controversial cases.

Carol’s background is much more moderate, IMNSHO.

By: Alan Goldsmith

Alan Goldsmith — Thu, 01 Nov 2012 12:05:42 +0000

Fortunately, voters can look at Mr. Finks political associations, his campaign contributions and his list of far right supporters and make the right choice. If I recall voters get to decide this and not just attorneys.

By: Tom Hollyer

Tom Hollyer — Wed, 31 Oct 2012 22:52:16 +0000

Agree with 10 and 11. If law enforcement experience contaminates one, then so should prosecutorial experience and experience as a criminal defense attorney. Ridiculous.

By: Mark Koroi

Mark Koroi — Wed, 31 Oct 2012 20:13:24 +0000

@Joe Simon:

Agreed. Jim Fink, along with Mike Woodyard also, are superior candidates.

By: Joe Simon

Joe Simon — Wed, 31 Oct 2012 19:47:45 +0000

Of course a person can’t set aside their experiences before taking the bench. That is a main reason Jim Fink has my endorsement and support. His experience is not just in law enforcement. It is in all the areas of the law that a circuit court judge presides over, including criminal defense. Jim is anything but a “one trick pony.” He is not a career prosecutor, like many judges; nor a career police officer. He is a very experienced, well-balanced lawyer who has the requisite temperament and fair-mindedness to be a great judge. I’ve known Jim for over 25 years. I have been both his adversary and his colleague in common cause. I can say without hesitation that he has has always been willing to listen, respectful, and earnest in all my dealings with him. His decision making has been based on his honest reflection on the facts placed before him. I can’t think of a better criterion upon which to assess someone’s fitness for the bench.

By: John Shea

John Shea — Wed, 31 Oct 2012 14:27:07 +0000

I strongly disagree with my friend Dave Cahill. Jim Fink is a lawyer, and a darned good one. He has a breadth of experience as an attorney that rivals the field, including criminal defense representation. The fact that he was a copper at one time only enhances the real-life credentials that make him the best choice for this seat. The suggestion that he will be a shill for law enforcement is utterly inconsistent with Jim’s character and reputation, as evidenced by the many attorneys who have endorsed him, including me and other criminal defense attorneys and civil libertarians like me.

By: Tom Hollyer

Tom Hollyer — Tue, 30 Oct 2012 22:56:02 +0000

So Mr. Fink is “contaminated” by his former position in law enforcement?

Wow.

By: David Cahill

David Cahill — Tue, 30 Oct 2012 21:52:57 +0000

A police officer is an extremely unwise choice for Circuit Court. People may claim that can set aside their previous experiences when they take the bench. This claim is patently untrue.

Every lawyer knows what is likely to happen to her/his case when the judge is assigned. Judges are people, not robots. That is why we elect them.

A former police officer cannot possibly be unbiased in criminal cases.

I strongly support Carol Kuhnke for a variety of reasons – including the fact that she has not been “contaminated” by long service in law enforcement.