Dem Public Defender got permission to run… AFTER winning the Primary!
/By Rubashov
We’ve been keeping track of the local politics in a handful of “bellweather” towns across New Jersey. These towns are representative of a part of New Jersey and are a good indicator of trends. One such town is Ringwood, in Passaic County.
On Thursday, we reported that a Democrat candidate for borough council, Jessica Kitzman, was running for office even though she works in the criminal justice system as a public defender. Her LinkedIn page and the state’s attorneys website all indicate this, as do numerous other public documents.
A press release, issued by the New Jersey Attorney General’s office on July 23, 2021, notes that Kitzman – an “Assistant Deputy Public Defender” – was the defense attorney on a case involving a man who attempted “to lure a 14-year-old girl he met on social media for a sexual encounter. The ‘girl’ in reality was an undercover detective participating in ‘Operation Home Alone,’ a multi-agency undercover operation… that targeted individuals who allegedly were using social media to lure underage girls and boys for sex.”
We wondered how any self-respecting system of justice could allow the politicization of prosecutors and public defenders. So, we Googled can public defenders run for office in new jersey, and came up with this:
(a) All State officers and employees within the Office of the Public Defender are prohibited from becoming candidates for election to any elective public office and from accepting appointment to same (e.g. to fulfill the unexpired term of an elected public official).
According to the New Jersey Election Law Enforcement Commission, Jessica Kitzman has been a candidate for borough council since March 18, 2021. So, we asked: “Is there anybody out there who can clear this up? Can a public defender run for public office? Please let us know.”
The local Democrat chairman answered our question and posted that Kitzman had received a “waiver” from the state and is allowed to run as an openly partisan Democrat for borough council. Another source produced a letter, dated July 1, 2021, from the Public Defender’s Office, giving Kitzman permission to run. The letter is signed by the Ethics Liaison Officer for the Public Defender’s Office and is copied to the chief Public Defender himself.
We found this strange, not only because Assistant Deputy Public Defender Jessica Kitzman had been a candidate (filed with the New Jersey Election Law Enforcement Commission) since March 18, 2021 – but also because Kitzman was a candidate on the ballot at the June 8th primary election. Kitzman won that primary and was certified the winner by the Secretary of State. Didn’t anyone pay attention to the fact that she was a Public Defender who had not yet received permission to run?
Kitzman was given permission to run months after she filed as a candidate and won the primary.
Based on this new information, will Jessica Kitzman be permitted to serve, if elected? Or will she face ethical charges for seeking permission after the fact?
Whatever the answer to those questions, there is a much larger question for the New Jersey legal establishment and the taxpayers who pay the bills to consider: Is it a good idea to turn the Public Defender’s office into an ideological redoubt for the Defund the Police movement? Or a patronage holding area for Democrat candidates? Is that what the Public Defender’s Office is for?
A partisan candidacy for local office is only the first notch in climbing the greasy poll of elected office. A successful candidate for local office will naturally consider or be considered by party insiders for higher office. Do we want those partisan political considerations to get in the way of finding the truth through the justice system?
Would a prosecutor be inclined to go harder on someone whose politics he or she disagrees with? Conversely, would he let someone else walk? Careerism has already produced prosecutors who think primarily in terms of win/loss records and not of justice. Finding out what really happened comes second to “making a case.” And the consequences of that can be terrible for both the reputation of the process, as well as for the poor souls involved.
So too, with a public defender, looking to embellish a political career. Will he or she hold back on zealously defending someone the voting public loathes? Will he or she favor the cases that elevate standing with targeted political constituencies at the expense of justice? Ever aware of changing fashions, public defenders now routinely paint the police with a broad brush – can a political public defender be expected to pay less attention to partisan opinion?
And what is the ethos of the Public Defender’s office? What are the policies that its leadership has pursued? Just what do you get when you elect someone from that institution? Well, let’s start at the top, with Jessica Kitzman’s boss. This is from his public biography on his office’s website…
“He has become an influential stakeholder in the NJ’s justice system on many issues, having spearheaded NJ’s pretrial release reform that eliminated monetary bail, advocated for sentencing reform on NJ.s Sentencing Commission, and directed the filing of three successful Orders to Show Cause in the Supreme Court for release of jail and prison inmates during the pandemic.
…handled numerous death penalty cases until the abolition of the death penalty in December 2007. He served on the Death Penalty Study Commission as a strong advocate for its abolition.”
Okay, that is a clear policy direction.
In September of last year, Kitzman’s boss wrote an opinion piece in the Star-Ledger (NJ.com) which was unambiguous as to the ideology it embraced and in the policy direction it advocated:
“Social awareness and protests are important but not enough. People in positions of power must adopt policies and enact laws that take concrete steps designed to eradicate systemic racism. It is time to act.”
“The main culprit is the so-called drug-free school zone law that requires mandatory minimum prison sentences for drug offenses committed within 1,000 feet of school property. We have long known that it is a discriminatory law.”
This kind of honesty is to be applauded. The voters know exactly what to expect from the novitiates of such an institution as they pursue political office.
There is a network of non-profits, funded by Democrat party interest groups, that actively recruit and train candidates for public office. Kitzman is a graduate of one such group. They openly talk about building a “bench” from which to groom future county and state leaders. That so many on this bench hold patronage positions on taxpayer-supported payrolls is a good indicator of where the Democrat Party is heading.
When you recruit public defenders, special interest lobbyists, government regulators, and corporate “government affairs” careerists – instead of average property taxpayers, blue collar workers, retirees, and small businesspeople – your party takes a different direction and you get a different kind of government.
The politicization of the Public Defender’s office should be addressed. Trying to balance the scales of justice with the demands of electioneering is a fool’s errand. It is an injustice to everyone involved and a taint on our legal system.
“Freedom and justice cannot be parceled out in pieces to suit political convenience. I don't believe you can stand for freedom for one group of people and deny it to others.”
Coretta Scott King
