By BETTY ANN GUNTHER
Los Alamos

I sympathize with the Ragsdales anger at robbery of their home by John Craven, the son of a trusted neighbor as expressed in their various letters to editors, but I do not agree with their opinion that Judge Sheri Rafaelson should not be retained because she released him.

Rafaelson sentenced the young man not to incarceration, but to a drug treatment program and electronic monitoring. As the Los Alamos Monitor reports, on Oct. 11, 2014, Rafaelson ruled that “Craven will spend at least a year of his probation on electronic monitoring, or until authorities deem fit to release him, which will hinge on how well he does in the drug treatment program, which at minimum will take a year. He also must move out of his parents’ home and out of Los Alamos while he undergoes treatment.”

Judge Rafaelson sentenced Craven to treatment and electronic monitoring and saw to it that he would not live across the street from the Ragsdales. I consider that a reasonable sentence because it addresses the young man’s problem — drug addiction — and does not just send him to a prison where he is likely to become a more professional criminal. He was not simply released as the Ragsdales imply.  
   
I understand that Rafaelson’s critics think there should be some consideration for the victims and I could not agree more. On October 29, 2014 Judge Rafaelson, showing a high regard for the victim when she sentenced the teller who embezzeled $20,000 from the Zia Credit Union to five years on probation in which she must pay back  $32,914.95 to Zia Credit Union. It will be far better for the offender, the credit union and state budget if this teller stays out of jail and works to reimburse what she stole. If she doesn’t, she will be required to serve nine years in jail.     

Calling such sentences “catch and release programs” is clever but misleading. These people will be getting a sentence that will help them and the communities involved. Jails in New Mexico and California are so crowded that prisoners sometimes have to be released by federal court orders due to overcrowding. The more offenders who can be released for treatment or work programs, the less cost to the taxpayer and the better chance for the offender’s rehabilitation.

I urge you to think carefully about what Judge Rafaelson really has done. In her sentences she has tried to give the convicted person a sentence that fits the needs of both the state and the offender.  She is the kind of judge I like to vote for and I encourage all voters to think about important issues such as mental illness, drug addiction and jail crowding when they vote in the Nov. 4 election and in future elections.  

We need to quit using jails and prisons as dumping grounds for the mentally ill, the addicted, and people with mental disabilities. We need to rehabilitate more people and jail fewer. We need to do this for our pocketbooks and for the safety of our communities. Punishment doesn’t solve mental health problems and never did.

Please vote to retain Judge Sheri Rafaelson, District 1.