"I thank the Court and Presiding Judge for affirming what I told Judge Canning via email--that my candidacy is neither ethically fraught nor unique within the state"

I ran the orginial letter by Judge Timothy Canning, the response by Humboldt Superior Court and today, there was a press release from the Ben McLaughlin campaign.

A clarification to press release sent out by Mike Evenson for those who don't read previous posts. Humboldt Superior Court sent me the letter because I had been the only one who had published Judge Canning's letter sent on May 22. Ms. Bartleson responded yesterday. 

Evenson thanked me for publishing both letters. Why wouldn't I? 

The most gracious response was from Ben. He has always been the kind, professional and fair and one of the few people in Humboldt Superior Court who understands what I do, appreciates what I do and treats me with the respect knowing I am just doing my job. 

Deputy District Attorney Steven Steward has also always treated me in the same manner as Ben. We are fortunate to have both of them running for Humboldt Superior Judge. They are both decent men. Both may have supporters who don't neccessarily reflect their style or character. Make your choice based on the candidate after meeting them and doing your own research to see who you feel is best suited for your vote.

Kym Kemp published Judge Canning's letter after my Humboldt Superior letter post and she linked my post  about the Humboldt Superior Court letter Thank you Kym.

I have yet to see the letter from Judge Canning published by other local media who received it days ago. 

Ben McLaughlin campaign press release:

Kim Bartleson, Humboldt County Superior Court Executive Officer swiftly reacted to a public letter sent to blogger John Chiv yesterday.

(https://johnchiv.blogspot.com/2022/05/humboldt-superior-court-ceo-disagrees.html)

The letter was issued by sitting Judge Thomas Canning.  The Humboldt County Court wasted no time determining that Canning was seriously in error in his claim that Ben McLaughlin violated court ethics with his candidacy for Judge when his significant other was also a Judge.  In consultation with the appropriate State authorities, Bartleson researched the claims and assumptions in Canning’s letter and found them to be factually incorrect.

“The Court has researched the issues and finds nothing under California law, nor the California Code of Judicial Ethics, that causes any ethical concerns for significant others serving on the bench at the same time. In addition, during the course of researching this issue, the Court learned there are other Courts within the state wherein a spouse of judicial officers in a close familial relationship have been serving on the same bench. Further, after discussion with both the Judicial Council and the California Judges Association Ethics Committee, they agree with the Court’s conclusions...

There is nothing in the law that would ethically prohibit Mr. McLaughlin from being a judge.”

Ben McLaughlin responded, "I thank the Court and Presiding Judge for affirming what I told Judge Canning via email--that my candidacy is neither ethically fraught nor unique within the state.  In my opinion, which the Court now publically supports, my relationship with Judge Neel is a non-issue.  Voters should only be concerned with electing the most qualified candidate.”

For more information, contact ben4judge2022@gmail.com or visit Ben4Judge.com

Previous posts:

https://johnchiv.blogspot.com/2022/05/humboldt-superior-court-ceo-disagrees.html?m=1

 https://johnchiv.blogspot.com/2022/05/of-particular-concern-is-that-mr.html?m=1