What matters when you vote for a Justice of the Peace? Justice is such a tricky word – depending on which side you speak to. We create laws to define a somewhat universal fairness within our society. Still, I have seen judges ignore the law, ignore common sense and make a “judgment” based on personal feeling, and sympathy. Peace is also an interesting word but for most – so simple. Some may interpret it as “Piece” – meaning they are after their “Piece” of the pie. They have no intention of pursuing or promoting peace among the citizens of Ravalli County, they are only after power and a paycheck. Interestingly enough, they have caused turmoil and unrest within the very society, or small communities, in which they reside.
I have looked at the candidates for Justice of the Peace, specifically in light of this definition. Peace – defined as a state of tranquility or quiet; free from civil disturbance. However, which path will this judge take when Justice and Peace are in direct conflict with each other?
I myself have been faced with the choice of being silent in the face of serious wrong, simply to maintain the peace. Many people within our local churches and communities, or schools, would prefer to sweep conflict or violent acts under the rug and join together under a collective delusion. I have always found myself standing to the side, saying loudly – but the emperor has no clothes!!
I can only support and vote for a Judge that will gently but firmly choose justice over peace when that decision comes before them. This is an extremely difficult task and not one to be taken lightly. Even when off duty – this Justice must be emotionally balanced and respected within the community. While I may think a candidate is a “nice” person, that will not qualify them for the difficult task of evaluating their fellow citizens, people they may know well, against the words of the law, and potentially changing the course of that person’s life.
I have seen both candidates and while I know they are both trustworthy and honest individuals, I will be voting for Jim Pearson. Why? Jim has the ability to listen. After 25 years of marriage, I find this is a rare quality in a man (kidding). I have never seen Jim lose his temper. I have never seen him rush to judgment, or remain silent when faced with possible embarrassment for speaking out. His character is strong and he has the mental stability and toughness that it will take to be a judge among his peers. Simply put, I believe in him and in his ability to provide a balanced interpretation of our laws. I sincerely hope that you will as well.
Laurie Jakober
Darby