We need new leadership and accountability in the District Attorney’s office. Los Angeles County has lost confidence in the current District Attorney to keep our communities safe. The mismanagement, dysfunction, and many claims of retaliation have badly hurt the operation of the District Attorney’s office.

With experience as a prosecutor, manager, and Chief of the Violent and Organized Crime Section of the U.S. Atty.’s Office, I would bring a fresh perspective and the change this office needs.

A District Attorney should make prosecuting crimes the first priority, and should be an effective partner with law enforcement to keep our community safe. But I also strongly support criminal justice reform because mass incarceration does not work. Although lengthy prison terms are appropriate for severe crimes, they should be otherwise limited because they put families and communities at a disadvantage for generations and lead to more crime and less safety.

I would encourage alternatives to incarceration, emphasize rehabilitation over punishment, and address systemic inequalities within the criminal justice system — all of which are important pieces of the justice system. There is also so much broken within our county — including juvenile justice, our jails, and our mental health system — and an energetic and active District Attorney should lead on fixing these and coming up with solutions.

As a federal prosecutor, and supervisor at the U.S. Atty.’s Office, I’ve exercised discretion over which crimes to charge and in sentencing recommendations. I have had many conversations with judges, defense attorneys, and prosecutors about trends and appropriate sentencing. This issue means a lot to me. I view compassion as part of the core responsibility of a prosecutor — since, as a prosecutor, the only thing I’m asked is to do the right thing and my only client is justice.

I support diversion programs and rehabilitation efforts, but I also recognize that certain offenses require more traditional forms of punishment to maintain public safety. Sentencing enhancements should be applied carefully, with a focus on public safety and rehabilitation. Gang enhancements, for example, have been disproportionately used against people of color. That is unacceptable. Misdemeanors are crimes, and while they do not merit excessive sentencing, we should develop guidelines for appropriate consequences, such as probation and community service depending on the circumstances.

I fully support Prop. 47’s reforms. I do not support rolling it back. I do not believe that Prop. 47, for example, is responsible for increased smash and grab robberies. There is a lot of misinformation about Prop. 47. The reality is that 38 states have felony thresholds higher than the $950 threshold in California, as set by Prop. 47. I do not believe that Prop. 47 hampers the District Atty.’s ability to prosecute crime, keep our communities safe, or hold people accountable.

Bail reform was desperately needed. On the whole, the data is clear that cash bail results in poor people being jailed (when rich people can afford to pay bail to get out), jail overcrowding, and does not make the community safer.

I spent years as a prosecutor and supervisor at the U.S. Atty.’s Office. In the federal system, each defendant arrested with a felony is brought before a U.S. Magistrate Judge who makes an individualized assessment whether the defendant should be detained, released, or given bond. The judge in making that determination can consider any relevant factor, including the seriousness of the charge, criminal history of the defendant, and any history of non-appearance.

I agree with much of the Los Angeles Superior Court’s bail reform plan, which went into effect on Oct. 1, 2023. I agree with the system of having a magistrate judge make an individual determination regarding the defendant, which is exactly what happens in federal court. I think adjustments may need to be made to the plan, but, on the whole, I think the new bail plan is an important step in the right direction. As District Attorney, I would be active in partnering with the courts to ensure the effective and proper implementation of this plan.

I really enjoy mystery novels. I’ve read every Harry Bosch novel.

My goal of integrating common-sense reforms into the legal system is an ongoing effort but one that is well worth the fight. Reform means reducing the major drivers of mass incarceration while at the same time increasing victims services, developing community partnerships, collecting better data so we can be guided by long-term solutions not short-term Band-Aids, and always working to be in dialogue with the community so people know what reform means and what it doesn’t.

As Los Angeles District Attorney, I am working to reform the system by ending mass incarceration, holding law enforcement accountable, addressing sexual assault and harassment in our community, protecting workers, prosecuting polluters, and investing in trauma-informed support for victims and families. I am focused on public safety, while also reforming the overburdened and outdated prison pipeline. I have made reforming our criminal justice system a top priority and I place community first when prosecuting crimes, while balancing the need for community safety that I’ve worked for in my forty years as a police officer and prosecutor. Because we need a system that is about more than punishment, we need a system that holistically addresses root causes of crime and aims to make our county both fair and safe.

For generations, severe and unbalanced sentencing policies have had a devastating impact on Black, Latino and Indigenous Californians, including the use of many excessively harsh sentencing enhancements that disproportionately harm people in low-income communities of color, keeping people in prison long after they pose any safety risk to their community and contributing to our massive and aging prison population. Los Angeles County residents want to see the government implementing solutions that actually work; for violent crimes and other serious circumstances, we still use the same prosecutorial tools that have always existed.

For non-violent misdemeanors directly related to mental illness, homelessness and addiction, we now have many more tools to help address the underlying issue while also pursuing accountability. Even as we deal more appropriately with mental health and addiction, and misdemeanor cases associated with addiction, we continue to take very seriously those misdemeanors where violence, and especially domestic violence, occur.

Prop. 47 — which I was proud to co-author and which received the backing of nearly 60% of California voters — reduced simple possession of drugs for personal use from a felony to a misdemeanor, and increased the felony theft threshold from $400 to $950 to keep pace with inflation. The goal of Prop. 47 was to help reduce our prison population here in California. Reclassifying certain crimes as misdemeanors rather than felonies does not mean those crimes are not prosecuted. They are and they should be. Some believe that this law passed ten years ago is the cause for an increase in property theft. This is false. Studies show Prop. 47 and similar laws in dozens of other states do not increase property crime.

I believe the money bail system is inherently unequal and wrong and I strongly support bail reform. I was the first prosecutor in the state to call for an end to money bail in 2012. Let me be clear: The court’s decision to end cash bail does not mean we have given away our ability to keep someone detained before trial if we believe they are a risk to their community or may flee. It means the court now looks at the actual threat level a person poses when deciding whether or not to release someone before their trial, not just the amount of money in their bank account.

When I can find the time, I love to cook. And no matter what, I make time for family.

The number one thing that needs to change in the District Atty.'s office is the re-prioritization of public safety. In the last three years, the current District Attorney has instituted irresponsible directives that have as their guiding principle the release of as many criminal offenders into our communities without a solid plan for success. Additionally, victims’ voices have been silenced and ignored.

First, I would enact policies that allow us to apply and follow all of the laws the legislature has given us to protect the community from crime. Case filing and sentencing decisions would be analyzed on a case-by-case basis, taking into consideration the facts of the case, injury to victims, defendant's involvement and criminal history and other relevant factors. Second, I would build upon the strong public safety base to incorporate thoughtful and effective reform measures that address mental health, drug addiction and homelessness in our criminal cases by creating a pipeline to other county departments and community-based organizations that address these issues.

The county justice system should always strive to change and improve as we learn more about criminal conduct and the causes of it. The county justice system can do more to fully incorporate the wide range of sentencing options available to criminal offenders suffering from mental health, drug addiction and homelessness. As District Attorney, I would actively engage with the courts, other departments and community groups to learn about, create and implement alternatives to incarceration that are thoughtful and effective and do not endanger our community. I would also expand diversion programs for both juvenile and adults who commit non-serious crimes that include educational and/or job components to discourage recidivism.

Sentencing enhancements are a vital part of our ability to protect the community against the most prolific and violent offenders. The application and imposition of enhancements should always be based on a thorough review of the facts of the case, the defendant's involvement and criminal history and an assessment of whether the enhancement is being applied appropriately and fairly. It is critical that prosecutors maintain the discretion to apply enhancements where the facts and the law support it.

It is also important to prosecute misdemeanors. Most misdemeanors are the types of crimes that most affect our communities and their quality of life. Without consequences, offenses such as retail thefts, trespass, and drug crimes continue to rise and negatively impact our homes and businesses. Consequences for misdemeanors do not necessarily have to involve incarceration, and this is where we can incorporate strong diversion and sentencing alternatives that can discourage recidivism.

Prop. 47 was passed at a time when it was believed that punishments for lower-level offenses were disproportionately high. While the intent may have been appropriate, Prop. 47 did not consider the long-term consequences of reducing consequences for recidivists. To address the current increase in theft related offenses in L.A. County, I would consider supporting some changes to Prop. 47 such as the reinstatement of Penal Code section 666 in instances where there are two or more theft convictions within five years of the current offense. I would also consider supporting the exemption of certain other crimes from Prop. 47 that are creating public safety risks to our county today.

I am supportive of efforts to continually improve the county's bail system and to ensure that a person is not being kept in custody simply because he/she cannot afford bail. However, I believe that cash bail serves an important purpose as a deterrent and as a tool to keep the most dangerous and high-risk defendants in custody through the criminal justice process. While the intent behind the reforms of the new zero cash bail system may be admirable, in practice there is a potential risk to public safety because the system is based on charges and not the individual offender’s risk of dangerousness if released. The new Zero Bail Policy also does not sufficiently take into consideration the recidivist who commits a zero-bail crime over and over again and who is repeatedly released into the community. There needs to be regular opportunities to re-evaluate and amend the Zero Bail Policy that includes all justice partners, especially the District Atty.'s office and law enforcement.

I love sports...attending games and watching on TV. I even enjoy watching golf tournaments! I am a die-hard fan of the Los Angeles Dodgers and the Los Angeles Rams.

The District Atty.'s Office has lost credibility in the eyes of the community due to the lack of leadership by the current administration. People who commit serious and violent offenses, particularly when using guns, need to be prosecuted for the harm they inflict upon families, businesses and our society. For instance, criminals who use guns to commit violent offenses need to be prosecuted for harming our communities. Gun violence is a serious epidemic that requires strong corrective action by the DA's Office. Lastly, individuals with drug addiction and mental illness need a new approach for rehabilitation and treatment — not be left on the streets of L.A. under tents and on top of tarps.

The justice system needs reform to better serve the needs of the community. We need a multi-agency response to address the myriad of issues facing the system. Victims of crimes, small business owners, large retailers, families and law enforcement feel as if their access to justice is being denied due to the lack of appropriate prosecution and enforcement of the laws. The District Atty.'s office must step to the forefront of reform by fairly prosecuting crime, ensuring justice for victims, and partnering with law enforcement to do the job because public safety is the number one responsibility of the office.

Upon my election as a Judge, I took an oath to uphold the law as written. As a former deputy district attorney, current L.A. Superior Court Judge and future District Attorney, I intend to follow the laws while exercising discretion when appropriate. Gun enhancements will be scrutinized and filed appropriately, particularly given the current epidemic of gun violence in the community. Strike enhancements will likewise be reviewed and applied judiciously in cases involving repeat and violent offenders. Misdemeanors will be filed, when appropriate, to ensure the safety and protection of the community. For instance, domestic violence and child abuse are often misdemeanor crimes yet harm some of the most vulnerable members of society. At the same time, I believe prosecutorial restraint is important when addressing other types of misdemeanors, especially for first-time offenders.

Lastly, certain drug offenses will also be reviewed for prosecution, if necessary, to achieve a rehabilitative program of treatment.

Because Prop. 47 is the law I will follow it as written when elected. I would support the proposed changes that include drug and mental health treatment programs for people addicted to hardcore drugs. I further agree with the more aggressive approach to fentanyl enforcement, especially for those responsible for trafficking this life-ruining and oftentimes, lethal drug. The provision concerning judicial discretion allowing drug dealers to go to state prison may be appropriate in certain cases. Lastly, I believe it is appropriate to increase penalties for "smash and grab" robberies and other theft-related crimes, especially for habitual offenders. This serves to protect the public, retail store employees, and business owners who are put at risk of both physical and financial harm due to these brazen crimes.

Bail ensures protection for the public and law enforcement officers on a daily basis, and it is central to maintaining the integrity of the criminal justice system by ensuring the accused appear in court. As both a prosecutor who asked for reasonable bail and a judge who imposed it, I will use a common-sense approach that assesses every individual's criminal history and the seriousness of the current crime.

I love pickleball, particularly when I'm playing with my family!

The No. 1 priority under my leadership will be public safety. The mission will be taking violent offenders off the streets, protecting the public, children and vulnerable community members, standing up for victims by fairly seeking justice, following the law and implementing real reforms. Being fair, honest, just, and transparent will begin Day One. Justice is not a one-size-fits-all approach and the wholesale non-prosecution of certain crimes and enhancements has only made us less safe. You cannot fix past societal injustices by punishing current victims. We all want to address the over incarceration of low-income people and communities of color but not charging crimes, ignoring violence, refusing to provide basic public safety, and allowing criminals to go free only to commit more crimes and victimize others is not the answer.

I will never demean, humiliate, or abandon victims. Deputy District Atty.’s will return to going to parole hearings to ensure that victims are represented in the worst of the worst crimes. We will fully prosecute fentanyl dealers, hate crimes, organized retail thefts and all violent criminals. I will not allow people who remain a serious threat to our community to be free to commit new crimes and victimize others. I will seek reform, but never as a dictator, and bring all justice partners to the table. Rehabilitation is public safety as well, but first we must follow the law and have accountability, then give people the chance to reintegrate into society. I will bring a culture of transparency, honesty, integrity, and professionalism to the District Attorney's office. I will have an open door and supportive working environment. The office will be about public safety, victim’s rights, and accountability first, and you will have a District Attorney whose only ambition is not politics but to truly serve the community he lives in.

Criminal justice has the highest public burden; it must strive to do better. Reform means seeking justice, supporting victims, implementing proven rehabilitative programs, and making decisions for the right reasons, on a case-by-case basis, with transparency and accountability. Reform is not just a word or phrase to me; I have been a victim of child abuse and a parental kidnapping. I know what it feels like to be powerless. I have made mistakes as a young person as well. I am the product of second chances. I support proven preventative, rehabilitative, mental health and drug and alcohol programs, collaborative and CARE courts, and rehabilitation where safe and appropriate, so fewer people end up in custody. As a Deputy District Attorney, I have fought to have juveniles stay in juvenile court, so they have a chance; I have ordered rehabilitative programs to help those with drug and mental health issues. Rehabilitation is public safety as well, but first we must follow the law and have accountability, then give people the chance to reintegrate and succeed in society once they have paid their debt. 

The Army saved me. However, there are many like me that made one more wrong turn and didn’t make it to the Army. I’d like to see reforms that lead more of our youth to decisions that lead them to success. So, let’s also improve our public and social programs, our foster care system, and really invest in education. Pretending the District Attorney alone has the power to install reform or to have the hubris and ego to con the public into thinking so by implementing dangerous blanket policies, is not the District Attorney I will be. I will be a District Attorney who actually does the job, prioritizes public safety, but also helps implement meaningful and lasting reforms.

Case-by-case, applying the law, facts and evidence, not blanket policies. There is no one size fits all solution. We must follow the law, but with discretion. A District Attorney must respect the law, which is the will of the people, but act fairly and justly. If someone intentionally tortures and murders a child; uses a firearm to murder an elderly person; commits a mass murder; commits a robbery with a firearm; break a child’s arm or fracture a baby’s ribs; sexually molests and murders a child; commits a hate crime; goes into a school and kills children, or goes into a synagogue, church or mosque and kills innocent Angelenos — such crimes demand the District Attorney charge allegations, enhancements and special circumstances. Also, refusing to charge misdemeanors even if the evidence is there has negatively affected the quality of life of thousands of Angelenos.

Refusing to do the job of the District Attorney is not fair, right or just. It’s not a reform. Blanket policies are a violation of the law and are dangerous. A District Attorney should never ignore facts, evidence, the law, victims, and public safety for his own personal beliefs. Attempting to fix past societal injustices by instituting more injustice through punishing current victims and refusing to provide basic public safety is not the answer. Every case must work fairly and justly through the system. There must be accountability first, then rehabilitation. We must include the victim and surviving family members in the process. That is the essence of justice. Every victim, their family members and every Angeleno deserves equal justice under the law. As District Attorney, I will ensure that.

I don’t support Prop. 47 as currently written. Theft shouldn’t be treated like a traffic ticket. That’s not reform. This approach has caused property crimes to increase to such a degree, now most of it goes unreported. Business owners, their employees and patrons are suffering. That’s the consequence of Prop. 47. While Gascón was San Francisco District Attorney, he co-authored Prop. 47 in 2014, which decriminalized many drug crimes and reduced punishment on many theft crimes. The title, “Safe Neighborhoods and Schools Act” was deceptive. There was nothing safe about it. In 2023, Los Angeles ranked No. 1 for organized retail crime — the fifth year in a row. And San Francisco? It is an open-air drug market. That is Gascón’s legacy.

According to FBI data in 2017, the property crime rate significantly increased in San Francisco under Gascón. Gascón’s LA is worse — restaurant burglaries increased 103% from 2019 to 2023 while retail thefts increased 123%. Yes, I support a potential ballot measure. We clearly need a bi-partisan bill to amend Prop. 47 or repeal it, bringing back drug courts to help unhoused Angelenos addicted to drugs and reduce the theft threshold from $950 for a felony. I have been endorsed by both Democrats and Republicans on this issue. And as District Attorney, I can and will bring together a coalition of elected leaders who value public safety over partisan politics and make sure our approach to public safety works for all Angelenos.

The bail system needs reform. However, in order to do so we must collaborate with our justice partners. Currently we do have cash bail for some “violent” felonies in Los Angeles. What the court has implemented is $0 bail for ALL “non-violent” felonies and ALL misdemeanors. I oppose a blanket $0 bail policy based just on the crime itself. I believe that the first priority of bail should be public safety, not if you can afford bail. Currently home burglaries, human trafficking, sexual battery, organized retail theft, and other crimes are magistrate review and presumptive $0 bail. That’s unsafe.

As such, all defendants should go before a judge within 48 hours for ALL felonies and violent misdemeanors such as domestic violence, child abuse, and sexual battery. At the hearing, where there is a judge, a defense attorney and a prosecutor, the judge can determine if the defendant is safe to be released without bail. That means looking at the defendant’s actual crime, the defendant’s prior criminal history, if there is violence, the defendant’s failures to appear, taking into consideration the safety of the public and the victim, and looking at alternatives to custody that still provide public safety. We will be guided by public safety, fairness to all and victim’s rights, not just the type of crime. We will actually work on each individual case. As District Attorney, I won’t believe in oppressive bail, but I also don’t believe in blanket $0 bail. I will file bail deviation motions when warranted, work closely with law enforcement to make sure there isn’t the constant catch and release of criminals, and actually work each case. The District Attorney cannot reverse the $0 bail policy, but the District Attorney can do her or his job and make sure the community is as safe as it can be.

My favorite thing to do is spend time with my family. Riding bicycles with my kids. Going to the beach. Playing soccer or football. Reading my kids a book at night and tucking them in. Walking my kids to school and kissing them goodbye. I love being a Dad.

Gascón has lost the trust of the public, his own prosecutors, and law enforcement. As District Attorney, the No. 1 thing I’ll change will be restoring that trust by going back to enforcing the law, not just the laws that fit a personal political agenda. I’m running as an Independent and will make prosecutorial decisions based solely on the facts and the law and not political ideology. I’ll lead by example based on my over 34 years’ criminal justice experience.

Unlike Gascón who has never personally prosecuted or defended a criminal case, as a federal prosecutor, I prosecuted over 100 cases, from violent gang members, narcotics traffickers, and money launderers to corrupt police officers and public officials, and tax and bank defrauders. I led environmental crimes and disaster fraud task forces. In addition, I was presidentially appointed/unanimously Senate confirmed as the U.S. Assistant Attorney General leading the Tax Division with a $100 million budget and 350 lawyers prosecuting cases all over the nation. As both a former prosecutor and defense attorney, I’ll bring credibility in both worlds. 

Gascón believes in blanket policies, a lazy form of decision-making that demonstrates distrust in his prosecutors, which is why 97.8% of them supported his recall. I reject blanket policies on both extremes of mass incarceration and Gascón’s decarceration special directives. I’ll focus on the "hard middle," an individualized analysis of the defendant, the crime committed, and the impact on the victim to determine who the true threats are to our safety and those who aren’t. I’ll restore the law enforcement partnership that Gascón has decimated. I have unique credibility in this regard since I have personally defended law enforcement officers and co-founded the LA Sheriff’s Foundation to bring needed resources to the LASD but have also personally prosecuted rogue officers as well.

In many ways, our justice system needs reform, however not the type of “reform” Gascón has brought that has endangered our public safety. Instead, we must sensibly balance the priority of public safety with ensuring the system acts fairly and without any bias. Gascón’s “reforms” have released violent and serious offenders before completing their sentences and prohibited prosecution of such offenders to the full extent of the law. In addition, these pro-criminal, anti-victim “reforms” have banned prosecutors from representing victims at parole hearings.

Compared to the year before he entered office (2019), the current crime statistics are up in most categories. Importantly, polling shows that Angelenos — over 60% — feel less safe today than before Gascón became DA. Fentanyl murders are the top killer of young adults; and smash-and-grab and home robberies occur on an almost daily basis. Criminals are taking advantage of laws favoring them. My reforms: eliminate Gascón’s blanket, pro-criminal policies in favor of “hard middle” policies of individualized crime analysis; allow enhancements justified by the evidence; institute a risk-based assessment for bail; have prosecutors accompany victims to parole hearings; and address crimes generated by those with serious mental illness and drug addictions. As for fentanyl murderers, Gascón has refused to prosecute these fentanyl poison peddlers for murder, even those who are serial offenders. As District Attorney, I will fully prosecute as murderers those who knowingly sell fentanyl or fentanyl-laced drugs that result in deaths, lead a local-state-federal task force to target the fentanyl chain of sellers and suppliers, and work with local agencies to launch a massive education effort in schools warning students and parents of the dangers of fentanyl.

I reject blanket policies, like those of the current District Attorney, which preclude prosecutors from considering all legally available penalties, supported by the evidence, for crimes committed, such as sentence enhancements for using a firearm during the commission of a crime and/or special circumstances. The current DA’s policies send an incentivizing message to criminals, for example, to use a firearm in the commission of a crime since they face no additional penalty for doing so.

Instead, I believe in the “hard middle” that uses the 1,000s of years of collective experience of the District Atty.’s Office’s over 900 prosecutors, its investigators, and its law enforcement partners to make individualized determinations based on the evidence and the crime(s) committed, the impact on the victim(s), and the defendant’s background and criminal history. Under this approach, criminals will no longer think that if they commit a crime and certain sentencing enhancements apply, that such enhancements will not be brought. As for prosecuting misdemeanors, my central philosophy is that those who commit crimes will be held accountable. There will be no blanket policy stating that anyone gets a free pass no matter what misdemeanor or the number of misdemeanors they commit. Nor will there be a blanket policy requiring jail for any misdemeanor committed. Instead, I will use my over 34 years’ criminal justice experience as a prosecutor and defense attorney, working with over 900 prosecutors and law enforcement, to calibrate proportional accountability for every misdemeanor crime committed.

I’d support a significant modification or potential repeal of Prop. 47. When Gascón co-authored Prop. 47, with the misleading title the “Safe Neighborhoods and Schools Act,” he advocated that releasing drug offenders and thieves from prison and ending prosecution of many of those crimes would make communities safer. He was completely wrong. As Los Angeles County District Attorney, Gascón has doubled down on this philosophy. This proposition swept too broadly and has created many unintended consequences. For instance, possession of highly addictive, dangerous narcotics like fentanyl, heroin, and methamphetamine are now treated as misdemeanors as if they were marijuana. As a result, there is no longer an incentive for repeat offenders to go to drug court diversion programs to deal with their addiction and expunge their criminal record.

Consequently, drug courts, which used to graduate scores of people who had completed drug rehabilitation programs, have dried up since no one goes through the program and Gascón refuses to prosecute. As far as property crimes go, the increase of the felony threshold from $400 to $950 under Prop. 47, and Gascón’s blanket policies for no or lax prosecutions, have led to an explosion of thefts just under $950 and created lawlessness that has led to more serious crimes being committed, like smash-and-grab robberies and follow-home robberies. The solution is to modify or roll back parts of Prop. 47 by increasing the penalties dealing with possession of fentanyl and other dangerous and addictive drugs to reinvigorate drug diversion courts and bring back the $400 threshold for property crimes and/or allow for the aggregation of property crimes over a set time. Without reform, deaths from drug overdoses will continue to set new records, thefts will continue to be a fixture on social media, and Los Angeles County will keep losing tax-paying residents to other states.

The focus of the bail system should be on determining what bail can eliminate or significantly reduce the risk of a particular defendant committing future crimes if released or the risk of a person absconding and not showing up for court appearances. The current cash bail system has flaws but need not be completely abandoned to fix it. Those flaws stem from the lack of risk assessment. Since the cash bail system imposes cash bail based on a schedule determined by the crime committed rather than a risk analysis, it releases on bail some who otherwise pose a risk of danger to the community or flight and denies bail to those who pose neither risk but lack the funds to meet a minimal bail. The current zero cash bail system is not the solution because too often it allows criminals to be cited and released (and never arrested) or arrested and immediately released for crimes affecting public safety.

The solution is to implement a 24/7 magistrate review of arrestees and build up a pretrial services department that could provide the magistrate both with information concerning appropriate bail (defendant’s work experience, prior record, etc.) and then provide supervision to ensure that the defendant complies with his/her bail conditions and appears for future court hearings. I would also work to institute certain additions to cash provisions in bail like third-party affidavits of surety (secured and unsecured), placement in treatment facilities, work requirements, etc. to provide a means to obtain bail granted by a magistrate.

I enjoy anything that involves a racket — tennis, paddle tennis, squash, pickleball. Also, my family and I have raised funds for and personally delivered over 1,500 wheelchairs through the American Wheelchair Mission to those in need.

The current District Attorney has lost the public’s trust and support. From Day One, I will work to earn it back. That begins with public safety. I will implement an actionable violence reduction strategy focused on evidence-based practices. This strategy recognizes that a small fraction of criminals cause a disproportionate percentage of violent crime. By concentrating resources on those individuals, we can drastically reduce violence while minimizing negative community impacts associated with increased incarceration. 

We will also institute sustainable and responsible reforms to keep our communities safe and ensure that our system is both equitable and just. We will expand homeless courts to ensure that our unhoused population receives services and to transition them to supportive housing. We will humanely treat the mentally ill. For more than a decade, a plan to build critical and safe treatment facilities has gone nowhere because no one has shown the political courage to move it forward. I will lead this charge. These changes can only occur with a district attorney who has the right vision, political experience, and will.

Our county criminal justice system needs reasonable, sustainable reform. You can’t fix a system unless you understand it from the inside out. To that end, I will create a division in the office’s Bureau of Investigation to collect, aggregate, and analyze crime data from across the county so that we better understand the forces and factors that drive people to commit violent crimes. Once that’s done, I will work diligently to reduce violent crime in a fair, efficient, evidence-based way.

We need to reform the way our system interacts with people who have mental health disorders. I will use the District Attorney’s Office’s bully pulpit to publicly push the state and county to build a 3,500-bed locked facility so we can safely and responsibly house those who are both violent and mentally ill while they receive the supervision they require and the psychiatric treatment they deserve. I will work to depoliticize the office and rebuild its depleted ranks. That starts with listening to front-line prosecutors and ensuring they have sufficient resources to do their jobs and to keep our neighborhoods safe. I would also launch a national recruiting program to restock the office with the best and brightest legal talent from around the country. I will make the office’s operations and decision-making open and transparent to the public. I’ll be clear and direct about our filing decisions, especially with respect to controversial police-involved shootings. That’s what the public deserves. I’ll ensure that the office’s most experienced prosecutors review these cases. I won’t hide behind press releases, delay tough decisions to impact elections, or engage in other politically motivated maneuvers to duck responsibility. Further, we will no longer file cases just to collect politically helpful headlines, only to abandon them because of the lack of evidence or prosecutorial incompetence.

I believe that defendants should be held accountable for what they’ve done, not who they are. That’s why I support sentencing enhancements that target present and past criminal conduct. For example, if a defendant uses a gun to commit a violent crime or seriously injures someone while committing that crime, that person should be treated differently and more harshly than a defendant who does not use a gun to commit the same crime or does not injure someone while committing that crime.

I also believe that being a prosecutor does not always mean seeking a conviction or offering maximum custody time for an offense. I believe that we should work towards rehabilitating a defendant when we can. That’s why I am open to diverting criminal cases when it is appropriate. When diversion is granted, I would require the use of evidence-based programs with a high degree of supervision. I would also encourage judges and our prosecutors to impose consequences, up to and including jail time, if a defendant fails to hold up their side of the bargain. Finally, I am committed to expanding homeless courts so that we can engage our unhoused population in a positive and practical manner, promote supportive housing, and expand their access to targeted, efficient public services to help them get off the streets.

Prop. 47 needs to be modified to deter repeat offenders. I have worked on legislation to do so. That said we cannot simply blame every rise in crime on Prop. 47. We know that it had a modest impact on property crime, but less of an influence on violent crime. Nor can we excuse our lack of action because of Prop. 47. Existing laws, employed correctly, can hold smash-and-grab robbers and other habitual offenders accountable. This is where leadership and experience matters. Los Angeles needs a chief prosecutor who understands the law, knows where the resources are to employ a comprehensive strategy to break up smash-and-grab crime rings, and cares about protecting small businesses. As a 16-year veteran violent crimes prosecutor who has worked with the state legislature, the county board of supervisors, and federal and state law enforcement agencies, I know how to get this job done.

Currently, under the California constitution, bail is generally the only legal way to detain offenders who may flee to another jurisdiction or pose a risk to public safety. Given those legal constraints, I believe that prosecutors should seek bail any time that the defendant is a public safety and/or a flight risk. Unfortunately, the current efforts to reform that bail system have led to absurd results. Defendants charged with heinous crimes, like molesting multiple children, get released while less serious misdemeanor offenders get detained. In one recent case, a court released a defendant on five separate occasions for five different armed robberies. A system that permits courts to release repeat violent offenders while we lock up shoplifters simply does not work. In an ideal world, there would be a presumption of detention for defendants accused of committing violent crimes and for offenders who are habitual offenders. This would require a change to our state constitution, which I would support. 

I love “the outdoors.” Since I was a kid, I have sought solace in nature whenever and wherever I could from the Eastern Sierras to the “tip of the world,” the far reaches of my mother’s homeland in Patagonia, Argentina.

We need to actually implement progressive policies. The District Attorney's office is currently not implementing the policies that the people voted for when they voted for Gascón. Fearmongers blame him for an increase of crime when almost nothing has changed under his leadership.

I will recruit justice-oriented attorneys to fill the hundreds of vacancies. This will keep our deputies from being overworked and ensure that we have reformers who will implement progressive policies. Gascón came into office and issued many new directives (most of which I support) without first discussing them with his deputies, defense attorneys, law enforcement, or judges. As a result, many of the current line deputies refuse to implement these policies. We all need to work together to better the justice system.

When elected and before taking office, I will meet with all of the deputies and work with them to end mass incarceration and reduce crime. And I’ll talk to anyone before the election and incorporate any good ideas that will improve our office. I will promote veteran prosecutors who have a wealth of knowledge about the office. I am the only candidate who is in court every day all over the county and can see what is really happening. And I’m the only candidate whose practice is dedicated to representing indigent criminal defendants. I already work with prosecutors to try to obtain the most just result. As District Attorney, I know I can work with them to improve the justice system and therefore people's lives.

The District Atty.'s Office needs to truly seek justice in every single case. We need to get people into programs to prevent crimes from occurring in the first place. Not only will this reduce crime, but it will also help end mass incarceration.

We will stop seeking the longest prison terms allowed under the law (Gascón's current policy is to allege aggravating factors whenever possible, so defendants are facing the highest term of imprisonment). We will not seek bail for nonviolent offenders. We will not arrest victims who miss court and argue for them to be held in custody until they testify — sometimes for weeks (the District Attorney's Office currently does this). We will never file cases vindictively or to punish someone for exercising their constitutional rights (again something that I have seen happen). And we will not oppose meritorious motions for mental health diversion, veteran diversion, drug programs, and other alternative sentencing. And we will not oppose resentencing when a person is no longer a danger to the community.

Generally, I am against sentence enhancements. They can often more than double the sentence of the underlying offense. Even without enhancements, people convicted of serious and violent crimes receive extremely long prison sentences. Enhancements disproportionally affect people of color and the underprivileged, and they are often counterproductive. In terms of the proper sentence, each case is different, and alleging an enhancement may be appropriate. But we need to ensure that people who are similarly situated are treated the same — no matter who they are and no matter where in the county they are prosecuted.

Historically, 99% of gang enhancements have been alleged [against] people of color. Longer than needed sentences only fuel mass incarceration and have no upside. Mass incarceration actually begets crime. Children are often raised with a parent in prison. Three strikes has been a disaster, keeping rehabilitated people in prison for decades longer than necessary and destroying communities. I am also against the death penalty — the “ultimate enhancement.”

Victimless misdemeanors should not be prosecuted at all. Most other misdemeanors prosecutions should result in diversion so that a person will not have a conviction on their record. Even a misdemeanor conviction can have harsh consequences in terms of jobs, housing, immigration, and more. People who believe that being charged with a misdemeanor and facing a year in jail is not serious have likely never been to jail.

More than 60% of the voters approved Prop 47. Most Californians agree that someone shouldn't go to prison for relatively minor offenses. In terms of drug possession, drugs should be decriminalized. People need treatment — not punishment.

The fearmongers’ answer to everything is more incarceration. They’ve convinced people that theft crimes have increased much more than they have. Any increase in thefts is caused by copycat criminals who've been misled to believe that nothing will happen to them if they steal. Anyone caught stealing is criminally charged — often with felonies. I know. I am often appointed by the courts to represent them. If two people steal a pack of gum, they can be charged with a felony because, oddly, conspiracy to commit a misdemeanor can be charged as a felony. If a store employee grabs someone who steals a candy bar, and that person breaks free, they are often charged with robbery because breaking free is considered using force. My opponents are now advocating to lower the dollar amount threshold needed to make theft a felony and send repeat shoplifters to prison. But the “rational criminal” who goes into a store and steals $949 worth of goods to avoid a felony conviction is a myth.

We need to end cash bail. Bail creates a two-tiered system of justice. People are often coerced into pleading guilty to crimes they didn’t commit just to get out of jail. Some prosecutors will argue that a defendant is too dangerous to be released on bail, but then give a time-served offer the same day.

Today, people who can’t afford bail are given worse offers than those who can afford bail. People who are presumed innocent should not lose their homes and jobs because they cannot afford bail. The children of those accused of crimes should not become homeless or go hungry because a parent is stuck in jail and cannot provide for them as they fight his or her case. We will not ask the courts to incarcerate people unless there clear and convincing evidence that the accused is truly dangerous and a flight risk.

In addition to being a defense attorney, I am also an experimental filmmaker and video artist.

The number one thing that needs to be changed from the DA’s office is the tone. The LA DA sets the tone for all law enforcement operating in the county, and currently, because of Gascón, law enforcement is demoralized, criminals are emboldened and the public feels less safe. I would remedy this by having a clear message to criminals: playtime is over. To the public: your safety is my number one priority above anything else. And to law enforcement: it’s time to rebuild our relationship and I unequivocally have your back.

The county justice system does need reform, but it must be done carefully, without sacrificing public safety. We cannot eliminate a part of the system that has been functioning for decades without replacing it with something that functions better and increases public safety. I want to tackle reform by employing new technologies to reach our youngest offenders so we can more accurately intervene before someone becomes justice involved. We need to begin to dismantle the “us” vs “them” mindset many have about law enforcement and the public and instill confidence and respect for law enforcement.

This would be done by naked transparency combined with new levels and types of community involvement that have not been done before in Los Angeles County. I believe the future of reform is more expansive than just the justice system, and we need to build synergies between other county agencies that can address the underlying causes of crime in our hot spot areas of the county. Mental health, economic realities, and perception all are the future areas reform needs to take into account when forging a new justice system that people can agree is fair and efficient.

My philosophy will always take a back seat to what the county residents express they want from their DA. Misdemeanors must be vigorously prosecuted when they are not petty and are meaningful to the aggrieved party. I prosecuted many misdemeanors for LA City and am aware of how important some of these cases are even though the charges may not seem that grand. If you show the public that misdemeanors don’t matter, societal discourse coarsens, and it sends the wrong message to those who may be inclined to engage in them. 

As to enhancements, I will absolutely seek them when they are appropriate. Under Gascón, a drive-by shooting where someone is shot and seriously hurt, the perpetrator could see a max term of 7 years to life. With the proper enhancements charged, that crime quickly turns into 32 years to life potentially. That said, I would always apply enhancements judiciously and fairly. Merely being tough on crime blindly is just as bad as the current DA’s blanket policies. Enhancements need to be applied when justice calls for them on a case-by-case basis that is fair.

I fully support rolling back as much as possible from Prop. 47 because it is deleterious to public safety in a myriad of ways that isn’t reported. Reassigning so many inmates that were originally bound for state prison to local jail systems and also instituting a quasi-probational system at the local level was short sighted without giving the local agencies the necessary infrastructure and funding to handle this deluge of new cases.

I saw it first-hand cause the release of many individuals that otherwise would have remained in custody, and it overloaded existing infrastructure. It also removed the discretion in DA’s to charge some drug offenses as felonies where they should have been. This also destroyed an effective incentive to complete drug diversion programs and drug court. There needs to be a backstop to stop repeated petty thefts, and without that most basic incentive there is no reason for a career thief to stop what they do.

I support bail reform in so far as it addresses injustice. No one should be treated differently solely because they cannot afford bail if they pose no risk to public safety. Those with less means can have their entire lives destroyed over being in custody due to losing their jobs and expenses. However, I am strongly opposed to blanket policies in this area. Every individual and case is different, and the right decision needs to be based on their risk to the public, the circumstances of the crime and any other factors justice-related.

My guilty pleasure is a crispy quesadilla, and menudo paired with four Krispy Kreme donuts.

There are numerous areas in the District Atty.'s Office that require significant reform, making it difficult to single out just one. A key step for me would be to fundamentally transform the culture of the office from what it is today. Currently, the office struggles with severe understaffing, an overwhelming workload, and a lack of cohesion. The disarray that exists extends to a general confusion among staff and lawyers regarding the office’s objectives and our role in achieving them.

To address this problem, I would prioritize meeting with my staff and lawyers, expressing my appreciation for their dedication and hard work on Day One. I would outline my goals and vision for the immediate year, the following two years, and long-term objectives. I would solicit and appreciate feedback. A crucial aspect of this cultural reset would be to detach political motivations from our objectives, shifting our focus to prioritize fairness, justice, efficiency, and proportionality in our institutional practices. This approach aims to rebuild the office into a practical, unified entity committed to serving justice in the most equitable manner possible.

Our justice system is in dire need of reform, especially in light of recent changes. Rapid changes to our criminal law and procedures have been enacted by the legislature, voters, and courts. These changes often present overlapping solutions to the same issues, neglecting the interaction between new laws and the existing system. A prime example is the issue of disproportionately high sentences. A straightforward solution would have been to eliminate mandatory sentences and allow judges to strike enhancements if not warranted.

Instead, the legislature and voters enacted a law that allows prison officials to offer credits that reduce sentences by up to 66%. The legislature passed a law that allows people with a prosecution bias to serve on criminal cases. The District Attorney’s policies have further complicated matters by prohibiting the charging of enhancements and mandating the charging of least punitive charges. As District Attorney, I couldn’t roll back the laws, but I would roll back the policies that have a redundant mitigating impact on already reduced sentencing exposure. Substantial reforms are essential to establish a coherent and fair justice system. This includes more humane jails, bail system reform, and expedited trials to ensure a balanced and just legal system.

As a supervisor of the East Los Angeles Area Court, this question hits close to home. I believe in the broken windows theory of policing and prosecutions which means I believe minor crimes have to be prosecuted to prevent injustice to those victims, but also foster a greater sense of order in society. Misdemeanors are not the crimes of the century, but they occur with great frequency such that, in the aggregate, they can change the character of an entire neighborhood. These crimes affect all aspects of our daily lives, from road safety to the beautification of our neighborhoods.

While I believe in prosecuting these cases, I also believe that the prosecutions have to be reasonable and lean heavily toward using diversion programs to allow offenders to make amends without receiving a conviction that could hurt his or her chances for housing, employment, school, or other benefits or privileges. Generally speaking, enhancements define the nature of the crime and, for more serious acts or outcomes, merit stronger punishment than the base crime. I believe enhancements should be charged when applicable.

I have spoken out extensively about the perils of Prop. 47. Prop. 47 is particularly problematic for reducing most drug possession crimes to misdemeanors and thereby eviscerating our drug courts. I have already publicly called for the repealing of this proposition and would vote accordingly if a measure were placed on the ballot. I support amending the law to allow for felony drug treatment and prosecuting all thefts with two or more priors as felonies.

I support bail reform. I believe the Superior Court should establish 24-hour arraignment courts and use remote video platforms and a risk assessment tool to conduct immediate arraignments to decide if someone should be released with or without conditions or held on an appropriate amount of bail, which takes the person’s ability to pay into consideration. Beyond that, I support moving to a bailless system altogether. We should employ a system like the one that was voted down in Prop. 25 but is currently working well in New Jersey that eliminates bail.

Bail is in some respects discriminatory against lower-income offenders and negatively impacts poor and working-class Black and Latino families who often turn over all of their wealth and even go into debt to bail bondsmen.

I am a pretty good amateur photographer, and I love to cook indoors and outdoors.

Reversal of failed George Gascón Policies which will be addressed on Day One, if I am elected. I will return the office to its core mission: “Public Protection.”

I do not believe the entire Los Angeles County Justice system requires reformation. The problems lie with elected officials such as Mr. Gascón who refuse to follow and enforce the law.

The legislative branch enacted the enhancement provisions for added public protection, “Hate Crimes” “Use of Gun” “Infliction of Serious Bodily Injury” and “Prior Convictions.” The executive branch is duty-bound to enforce those provisions. District Attorney George Gascón does not have the discretion to decline to file appropriate charges and enhancements based on personal philosophy. The test is whether a crime, felony, or misdemeanor may be proven beyond a reasonable doubt.

The test is “objective” not “subjective.” Mr. Gascón has usurped the power of both the legislative and judicial branches of government by his stubborn refusal to follow the law. Hate crimes lead to the degradation and health of our society. Of particular note, any offense against a group based on race, ethnicity, religion, gender is repugnant. Society should demand enforcement of laws that protect these groups.

Proposition is misleading in a number of respects. Parts should be rolled back for clarification. Most troubling for me is that Mr. Gascón uses the proposition as a basis for refusal to file burglary and/or robbery charges during “Smash & Grab” and “Flash Mob” theft events. The $950 limitation for theft offenses. The Penal Code provides, however, that if one enters any building with the intent to commit theft of any type, regardless of value, it is a burglary. If force or fear is used, it should be filed as a robbery. To advance his personal agenda, Mr. Gascón stubbornly refuses to enforce the law. In my view, he is part of a national movement to destroy our Democratic Republic. We have a duty to protect it.

As a judge for 24 years, (prosecutor for 12 years), I sat on the bail committee. We worked tirelessly to prepare bail schedules. They were well thought out after a very collaborative effort. It worked. After leaving the bench, I learned of the changes that have resulted in increased crime, and numerous failures to appear in court, bench warrants have increased. While I believe bail is necessary for many cases to insure a person’s return, (bail/bond agent is the engine), certain low-risk offenders perhaps should be released on their own recognizance, or electronic monitoring while awaiting trial.

I provide monthly support to St. Jude Children's Research Hospital and Shriners children's hospitals, the Tunnel to Towers Foundation and the Wounded Warrior Project. And annual support to the Pasadena Police Officers' Assn. I strongly support organizations that keep our communities healthy and safe.

Case resolutions must return to being fair and appropriate. This requires that in every case the defendant’s history be carefully reviewed — criminal history, educational history, employment history, whether addiction or mental illness played a role in the crime. Furthermore, the victim should always be consulted and their input seriously considered in fashioning a resolution. As well, the actual circumstances of the offense must be carefully reviewed (no crime is identical — for instance: there are minimally violent robberies and then there are horribly violent robberies). All salient factors must be considered.

I would work closely with all parties integral to the criminal justice system. Law enforcement, defense counsel, probation, parole, the Dept. of Corrections and Rehabilitation and with my own staff within the District Atty.’s Office. Reform within each of these entities is needed. For instance, the police need to be far better educated; the CDCR should move toward implementing the Scandinavian model of incarceration; all parties need to address measures that can reduce recidivism; we must insure that defense counsel is competent (regrettably, this is not always the case); workloads must be reduced in almost all circumstances to ensure that those involved in the criminal justice system receive the time and support they deserve. I am also mindful of the need to confront the bias that plagues our criminal justice system. We remain far from achieving the goal of equal justice under the law.

All sentencing enhancements that are factually supported should be alleged at the time of filing. If a just resolution requires the withdrawl of certain enhancements, then at the appropriate time they would be stricken. As to misdemeanors, they need to be prosecuted. For instance, I am mindful that there is often very little factually that distinguishes a felony domestic violence case from a misdemeanor domestic violence case. Both are serious. And too often, if misdemeanor conduct is not addressed, the conduct will escalate into felony conduct. As well, it is absolutely essential that misdemeanor drug use be prosecuted. If we are ever to materially address homelessness, mental illness and the crime that is rooted in those conditions, drug addiction must be addressed in the courts whereby the addict is encouraged to seek meaningful treatment. Given the fact that 90% of the chronically homeless suffer from addiction and 70% of the chronically homeless suffer from some form of mental illness, properly handling misdemeanor drug cases can be a powerful tool to move people from addiction into long-term sobriety.

I do support changing certain provisions contained in Prop. 47. Petty Theft with a Prior needs to be restored. Repetitive theft behavior should subject the perpetrator to a potential state prison commitment. And while I do not necessarily believe that possession of illegal narcotics warrants felony charges, possession should subject the addict to either meaningful custody time or participation in a drug treatment program. Bottom line: I want those who suffer from addiction to obtain treatment leading to long-term sobriety.

I believe that judicial officers need to decide when and if bail is appropriate. This should happen at arraignment — normally within 48 hours of a person’s arrest. To simply cite a person out at the time of initial police contact makes no sense. Police often do not have access to the arrestee’s criminal history and many situations are prudently in need of detaining a person for the 48 hours between arrest and arraignment. If the bail decision takes place at arraignment, the judicial officer can carefully review the accused’s criminal history, hear from the victim and consider any follow-up investigation that has happened between arrest and arraignment. Informed decisions are always better than uninformed decisions.

I am the founder of the Skid Row Running Club, an organization started 13 years ago to provide a sense of community and support for those experiencing homelessness and addiction. For the last 13 years I have gone to Skid Row three days a week. We participate in multiple marathons each year and travel overseas each year to participate in international marathons.