Ombre Ga’chong: AG candidates on polar opposite sides of crime debate


By Lee Webber

Last week we took a look at the extremely weak turnout level for the primary election, only 40 percent of registered voters. 

This despite the spending levels of candidates overall. In particular, (we should not) the current administration’s level of primary election spending that totaled nearly $1 million.

We also touched on some of the larger, more serious issues in the litany of long-term problems this community has faced and all elected employees of the people of Guam have paid little or no attention to fixing. Or at best, addressed very weakly.

As I type this column the governor added another extension to her emergency order blanketing the island, making it just under two and one-half years now that she has been permitted to maintain such orders while the current limp-wristed, rubber-stamp legislature has continually refused to challenge and over-ride such sanctions on our freedoms.

It makes one wonder if the current legislature works for the people or if they are little more than a group of collective rubber stamps for the administration.

During this past week we were also afforded an opportunity to listen to the debate between the two competing candidates for the attorney general of Guam position, Leevin Camacho and Douglas Moylan.

This was an interesting comparison between the personalities of the two men as well as their philosophy as it relates to what an attorney general is really supposed to be doing. 

Things such as how to address the growing rate of crime on the island, how prosecutions and dealing with the courts should be handled as well as the candidate’s perception of what the job, in total, really entails.

In this writer’s opinion and as I listened, Douglas Moylan came across as a crime fighter and in his words, “a pitbull”, and Leevin Camacho came across as a gentler, yet aggressive individual who seemed more interested in raising and managing federal grants and working on criminal recovery as opposed to ensuring that bad folks were incarcerated to protect the community.

They also varied on their perception of where the responsibility rested as it related to prosecution and how criminals ended up in jail.

Attorney General Camacho blamed the courts for whether a criminal eventually ended up in jail or was released while attorney Moylan placed the responsibility squarely on the shoulders of the prosecutors and how well they presented their respective case to the court.

Moylan noted that while the court made the final decision it rested nearly solely on the prosecutor to establish the groundwork on which the judges would make their decisions as to whether the criminal defendant went to jail or was released back into the community. All of this based on existing law and court precedent.

In short it was the prosecutor’s job to convince the judge that the criminal in question deserved to incarcerated.

Any other position potentially places the community at greater risk in what has been referred to as the current “catch and release” situation with which the island is presently faced.

Another aspect of the debate was whether there was adequate space in which to house criminals at the current Department of Corrections.

On this subject it appeared that AG Camacho took this into consideration while AG candidate Moylan clearly did not. 

Moylan seemed to clearly project the reality that it was not the concern of the attorney general but rather one that rested squarely on the shoulders of the administration and legislature.

His position was that the attorney general was to prosecute crime, not bear responsibility for the maintenance and expansion of the Department of Corrections nor the responsibility for the social work side of the equation.

In fact, when it came to social work, while AG Camacho seemed to be knee deep in the effort, his contender attorney Moylan, placed that aspect on the shoulders of the administration and the Department of Public Health and Social Services.

While both attorneys agreed on punishing criminals, for much of the debate the two men were nearly polar opposite on the majority of how to address the overall responsibilities of the office of the attorney general.

Moylan was very clear that in his mind the primary responsibility of the attorney general was to protect the public and prosecute criminals to the fullest extent of the law.

Politics is a dirty game but criminal behavior is even dirtier and needs to be dealt with firmly yet fairly. 

While the criminals’ interests need fair and proper attention, the public’s safety and security should always be the primary concern of the attorney general’s office.

As for the housing, care and feeding of those found guilty and incarcerated for criminal activity, that responsibility rests squarely on the shoulders of the administration and legislators.

The courts should always be provided with the capability to place criminals into incarceration. The administration and legislature must ensure that proper correctional facilities are always adequate, well managed and available.

That part of the equation and process has essentially been ignored by both the administration and the legislature for far too long and appears to now be placing the public at unnecessary risk.

When you vote in the general election keep the safety of your family and our community at the forefront of your voting and decision making.

Esta.

Lee P. Webber is a businessman and civic advocate, the former publisher of the Pacific Daily News, a former president and publisher of the Honolulu Advertiser, and a former director of operations for USA Today International/Asia


Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Advertisement