Welcome. We are so pleased that you are joining us this evening for the 2020 Honolulu Prosecutor Candidate Debate proudly presented by Hawaii women lawyers. HWL is a non-profit organization committed to improving the lives and careers of women lawyers, influencing the future of our legal profession, enhancing the status of women, and promoting equal opportunities for all. My name is Louise Ng. I am a partner in Honolulu with the law firm of Dentons and a longtime member of HWL. I am honored to serve as the moderator tonight. Over the next hour, we will hear from all seven of the Honolulu prosecutor candidates on their plans and policies to address important issues that directly and substantially impact women and children in our community. The primary election takes place on August 8th with ballots being mailed to registered voters on July 21st. In an order determined by random drawing, the candidates are Anosh Yaku. He is a practicing lawyer. He previously ran for Honolulu prosecutor in the 2016 election and was incumbent Keith Kanishiro's only opponent. Our second candidate, Jackie Esser. She is a career public defender. According to Jackie, she has spent more than a decade working to reform the criminal justice system, giving crime victims a voice in every case, and investing in our communities to make them safer and just, safer and more just. The third candidate, Steve Aum. Steve and Aum is a former Hawaii state judge, Honolulu prosecutor and United States attorney. According to Steve, he has the experience and integrity we need to clean up the prosecutor's office and make Honolulu safer. The fourth candidate I'm introducing is Megan Cow, a former deputy prosecutor and current practicing attorney. According to Megan, as prosecutor, she will use her skill, experience and knowledge to restore integrity to the office and earn the respect of the community by fighting for justice for those who cannot fight for themselves. Our fifth candidate is Dwight NadaMoto, the acting prosecuting attorney for the city and county of Honolulu. According to Dwight, he is a law and order prosecutor who will be tough on crime and his priority as prosecutor will be locking up violent criminals. Our sixth candidate, RJ Brown. He is a former deputy prosecutor and current practicing attorney. According to RJ, he is running because the criminal justice system must be reformed. He pledges that his administration will champion smart, efficient and responsible prosecution. Finally, our seventh candidate is Tai Kim. He is a practicing promulgated defense attorney. According to Tai, his mission is to change the culture of complacency and close door meetings so that elected officials serve the best interest of all people. We are excited to present this opportunity to hear from the candidates on these critical issues. Before our broadcast began, we went over some basic ground rules, including common courtesy and taking turns to answer one at a time and to ensure our viewers can easily hear everyone's responses and get the most out of today's event. Each candidate will be given approximately one minute to respond to each of the questions presented. At the end of the question rounds, each candidate will have a chance to give a short, concise closing statement. So without further ado, let's get to the questions. The first answerer of the question is going to be Anosh, and the first topic is domestic violence. A recent city audit showed that nearly 40% of murders in Hawaii are related to domestic violence, and domestic violence makes up a significant portion of violent crime in Hawaii. At the same time, recent administrations have imposed controversial no drop policies, which prohibit these cases from being dropped, even if a victim later withdraws his or her complaint, or no longer wants to testify. Reportedly, this policy leads to more case dismissals and acquittals while utilizing valuable state and city resources. So the questions are, as prosecutor, would you maintain the no drop policy for domestic violence cases? And what would you do to achieve better outcomes in domestic violence cases, both in terms of protecting victims and providing treatment or punishment to offenders? Anosh? Oh, I wanted to say hello to everyone. And thank you to Hawaii women lawyers for hosting this forum. I appreciate it. And I appreciate you inviting me. I'd like to start out by saying thank you to everyone. I'm sorry. So this is about no drop policy about domestic violence cases. Right. In situations where the victim has decided not to want to pursue the prosecution. Yes, as I explained before, the policy is that no drop policy includes that consists of prohibiting cases from being dropped, even if the victim later withdraws his or her complaint, or no longer wants to testify. I find that to be very problematic. I would not pursue that. I mean, I'm not in favor of that. I believe that you do need to have victims to meet the burden of proof. And domestic violence situations are fluid. You know, oftentimes these are dysfunctional situations and you can't you can't things change. You can't just lock yourself in and say, no, we're definitely pursuing this. And going forward, if you have a victim who has decided that they didn't want to continue with it, that's my view of it. Thank you, Anosh. Our next the next person who will answer is Jackie Esser. Thank you. Domestic violence will be one of my top priorities. I will realign the office resources to focus on the very serious violent crimes, the crimes that matter most to our families and communities. And this includes crimes of domestic violence. We have to empower victims of violence to have control over their futures and the case while providing them access to the services they need. Victims have to be centered. Too often victims are patronized by conviction hungry prosecutors told to play their role in seeking a conviction. Under my administration on day one, within 24 hours of a police conferring the case with the prosecutor's office, we will reach out to the victim help coordinate services in the community to provide emergency housing, shelter food, job resources, whatever the case may be, to not have to wait to get a conviction. As you said that most of these cases are not resulting in convictions and we have to change that and the focus has to be on providing meaningful support and restorative justice. Thank you, Jackie. Steven, all miss next. Thank you. This is an extremely difficult area and I have focused on domestic violence for much of my career. I did those cases as a deputy prosecutor and then supervised that section. I did domestic violence homicides and as a judge, that's where I spent my first two years on the bench. What you're going to have to do is decide is the victim dropping wanting to drop the case because she has decided that's safer for her kids and her family leaving her husband or boyfriend who's abusing her is the most dangerous time or is she getting pressured by him to do that? Secondly, I would convene a working group of the most knowledgeable people to try to proceed and that includes people like Lynn McGiver and people like Nancy Creedman, Loretta Sheehan, Jan Tamora. It's trying to look around the country and see are there better ways to do this than what we're currently doing. This has been important. I fought as a prosecutor to make manslaughter a 20 year felony rather than a 10 year. We fought the public defender's tooth and nail and finally became law as a 20 year felony. That's what it should be if the defense is successful in getting a murder knocked down to manslaughter. So this has always been a priority. I will work with train the deputies to be more effective in court so we can be more effective in whatever way we choose to handle it. Thank you. Thank you, Steve. Megan Cal. Thank you. First of all, I am a domestic violence victim survivor. I know exactly what domestic violence victims go through before they're subpoenaed and that is very difficult to deal with. Secondly, a domestic violence victim can be male or female. Nowadays, it doesn't matter. There are male victims and there are female victims. Lastly, what I would do is I would use empathy to guide the victim through the system. Right now, that's not what happens. I will have the deputies sit down with the victim, whether it's a he or she, and we will explain the criminal justice system to him or her and guide him or her through the system so that they have a full understanding of what's going to happen next. I understand they might be recounting, but we will move through the system anyways, and that's because the suspect needs to face consequences. Thank you, Megan. Do it not a modal. Domestic violence has always been important to me. The problem is, the batteries control the courts. What we have done so far is that I have hired the preeminent domestic violence prosecutor in the United States from Queens, New York. He has been training my deputies since the beginning of the year. His methods of prosecuting domestic violence have been taken up by the federal government.  With his help, we have put in a bill to make domestic violence easier to prosecute. It would allow the case to go forward without the victim. What would happen is that a body can would take a statement from the victim. At the very beginning, you will be able to see the emotions on the victim. You're able to see her looks the way she's crying or whatnot. And that would come in as an excuse to rebut any recantations she might make later. This bill passed unanimously through the Senate and was one vote short of being unanimous in the House. Unfortunately, at the 11th hour, this bill got killed. But we are taking a proactive case in prosecuting domestic violence. It is very important to me, the batters should no longer be able to control the situations, frustrating the victims again and again. And that's why they recant. We must stop that. Thank you, Dwight. R.J. Brown. I would not retain the no drop policy only because I tend to think that any type of broad broad brush policy leads to bad results in certain situations. On a criminal justice system, you have to take cases on a case by case basis. You've got to understand the individual circumstances of each charge that you're dealing with. Now that said, far too often, when you've got a domestic violence situation, the victim in that case is terrified that she has to go back or he has to go back to the abuser, to the spouse. And it may be easier or there may be an incentive for him or her to just say, Listen, I don't want to do this. I just want to make things right and let's get back to peace and calm. But the problem is it doesn't lead to that. It oftentimes escalates to worse situations. And so, yes, you have to take the victim's desire to go to court into account. It's obviously incredibly important features. But at the same time, you have to keep in mind that your job is to protect this person, and you have to lead them through this process. And you have to make them understand that by taking this difficult road of getting on the stand, looking your accuser in the eye and identifying him or her and saying this person beat me and hurt me, that you're going to make yourself safer. And we need to deal with these abusers in a much more severe way than we have been. They do control the system, as Mr. Naramoto said. They have been playing the courts with defense attorneys and they know that victims are oftentimes not going to show up. And so you've got to improve training within the prosecutor's office. The prosecutors have to be able to learn how to go to trial without these victims on occasion or to use other types of evidence or to use hearsay exceptions or whatever we have to do. But I would not retain the policy that said my general inclination is to always go to trial on these matters and ensure that we get justice to the best of our ability. Thank you, RJ. And finally, Tai Kim. Thank you. domestic violence are unlike many other criminal offenses. It involves person that a defendant knows a friend or knows a partner spouse girlfriend boyfriend, what have you so it's very, very sensitive area. We need to be doubly sensitive in prosecuting these cases. But I am in support of no drop no drop policy because what happens when there's a, you know, oftentimes an offender gets arrested and they get a rain. And soon after they get they post a bail they get released. And so they're accessible to the victim. And especially if there's a children involved with the domestic violence cases. Lot of there's a lot of emotions, a lot of things, a lot of elements at play. And we cannot have offenders or victims dictate criminal justice system. We cannot have offender and especially the offender, but oftentimes with the victims to, to control whether or not it should be prosecuted or not because domestic violence, like any other crime is a societal infringement. You know, we are protecting the public at large. It's not just a victim that prosecutor's office is representing. We're representing all crimes that are happening on the island of Oahu protects everybody. So it's a societal breach. We cannot have offenders or or or the victims compromise that. So I am in support of it. In terms of a better outcome, there has to be a better counseling available for the victim and the defendant. In several cases, we have mediation. You know, for criminal cases, something like domestic violence when there's an offender that really knows or close to the victim, we need some sort of a counseling joint counseling to resolve it so that it doesn't happen again. There has to be understanding as far as a sentencing outcomes. You know, that too can be modified so that the offender gets a second chance. So it's not all about criminal convictions and incarceration, but we need to work on mediation, working in working it out together so that the future offenses does not occur. Thank you. Thank you, Ty. Okay, the next set of questions, Jackie will be the first one to answer. The next topic is sex trafficking. And again, I'll set the context and then ask the question over the past decade, it has been increasingly apparent that sex trafficking is a very serious and long overlooked problem on Oahu, which threatens the safety of our children and erodes the sanctity of our island communities. Historically, law enforcement has addressed the problem by cracking down on so-called prostitutes, usually women and children, either one, proceeding with prosecution, potentially treating many victims of sex trafficking as criminals, or two, requiring victims to assist in investigations and testify against their traffickers before they can be given immunity and actually be treated as a victim. So the questions are, if elected, would you give immunity to sex trafficking victims, even if they're unwilling or unable to testify? And if so, how would you hold pimps accountable for their actions? In addition, what steps would your administration take to address the ongoing demand for prostitution, which is what drives sex trafficking in the first place? Jackie, yes, sir.   And again, I will realign the office resources to focus on the very serious violent crimes.  In order to combat it, we must have this victim-centered approach that supports victims of sex trafficking to cooperate with police and law enforcement.  We want to support people in sex work who want to engage in sex work because certainly our economy does not work equally for everyone.  We absolutely need to prosecute the people who really profit from sex work.  That is the only way to combat sex trafficking and prosecute these people have to have an open door. So sex workers can come to law enforcement and work with the prosecutors and identify the people causing harm and trafficking our children and our women and our LGBTQ T plus communities. This is how we will be able to prosecute the real criminals, the sex traffickers. Thank you, Jackie. Steven Ohm. I absolutely will focus on sex trafficking. When I was the United States Attorney, we prosecuted seven pimps for sex trafficking. We worked with the victims in the sex trade. They're the ones who came and talked to us, said they wanted help. We were able to hold the defendants in custody until their trial. They went to prison for several years. Many of the seven were able to go back to their lives before that. In the last year, I have taken three training courses to educate myself further about this, particularly about child sex trafficking. And there's no such thing as a child prostitute. That is a great victim. And I've gotten to know the good folks at Ho'ol and La Pua, led by Jessica Munoz, they're building a 30 bed facility on the North Shore so people have a safe place to go.  Shah Talebih has been hired by the Attorney General's Office as a statewide coordinator for human trafficking. He has done these cases in Washington state and will be a great resource in training prosecutors and public and law enforcement officers in how to do these cases successfully. So it is going to take a full court approach to do this. But as a prosecutor, I'd be cooperating with the Attorney General's Office, with the liquor commission, with the United States Attorney's Office and be a full player wanting to work with everybody else to address this problem.  And it takes a tough prosecutor to do that. We will successfully do these cases, send those folks to prison. These are our daughters, our nieces who are getting brought into this world. I got a message from a woman at Farrington High School. She was the teacher. She worked on weed and seeded me. She said, we've got this problem in our school. Come help us get elected. Thank you. Thank you, Steve. Megan Cowell. Yes, I will provide immunity for the sex trafficking victim. In 2009, I was the first deputy prosecuting attorney in the state of Hawaii to try a promoting prostitution in the first degree, state versus Joseph Vimily. Lori Whalen was the victim. And when we arrested Joseph Vimily, she did not want to prosecute him. And I understood this because at certain times she was madly in love with him. And at other times she was deathly afraid of him. And she was on the mainland. And so I had to talk with her by phone. And it was very difficult to create a rapport with her. But we did it. And we were able to bring her back to Honolulu to testify against Joseph Vimily. And this girl had been through major abuse. Joseph Vimily had taken her down a crowded alley in Waikiki and beat her in front of a number of people. He had thrown her hundreds of times into a shower naked and wet and whipped her with a leather belt. He then took her to the North Shore and held her by gunpoint and threatened to kill her. And still, she did not want to testify against Joseph Vimily. But we got her to testify by guiding her through the system, having empathy for her and explaining to her what she should expect and how the criminal justice system works. And we got a guilty verdict and Joseph Vimily sits in prison where he belongs today. Thank you, Megan. Do I not a motel? I think sex trafficking cases which I have done, we always look at giving the victims immunity. We are only looking at prosecuting those who profit from sex trafficking. And normally when we talk about a victim, we do not mention their names. Let me, we currently right now have a sex trafficking task force that includes Homeland Security, HPD, Coast Guard, borders, FBI, Susanna Westley, whenever we go into a brothel or whatever, we always take service providers and we try to hook up any victims with them. One of the cases that I have prosecuted concerns was Weili.  He would charge maybe $10,000 which none of them could afford. Because they couldn't afford it, he would later place them in brothels. We were able to prosecute him because we gave immunity to some of those individuals who he had placed in those brothels. Weili at that time had moved to Los Angeles. We charged him with RICO. We charged him with protein prostitutes in the first degree. He was extradited to Honolulu. He pled and he was deported. So we are always looking to prosecute sex trafficking. Thank you, Dwight. Archie Brown. And you know, again, I will not say in every situation that I'm going to provide immunity in these situations, but the law currently prohibits both the practitioners and the providers of sex trafficking trade. And so I think you've got to uphold the law the way it's written. Now that's, I'm obviously not in the business of trying to re-victimize a victim. And so if we have a sex trafficking victim and we can give him or her immunity to testify against a PIMP that's involved in the case, that's certainly something that we're going to do.  And that would be a priority of mine.  And so you do work with the federal government. The prior administration has been extremely adverse to working with the federal government. And so I would like to work with the U.S. attorney out here and make sure that we can target these PIMPs and we can, you know, prosecute them to the fullest extent of the law. Because ultimately, that's what we've got to do. That's the job. And that's how you're going to disincentivize the trade. We also have to be looking at the jobs.  I mean, this is a supply and demand issue. So you've got to go after the demand, but you got to go after the supply as well. So it's a multi-tasked, multi-faceted thing. Thank you, RJ. Tai Kim. Thank you. As far as victims concerned, of course, definitely whether victims are too afraid to cooperate or not, immunity. We cannot re-victimize the victims. Number one. Number two, immunity for victim, of course. Number two, pimps. Full extent of the law. State law, federal law, full extent of the law. They have to be accountable. They have to be, there have to be serious accountability and consequences. You know, we cannot, whether it's a first offense or second offense, whether it's the first time they got caught or not. Full extent of the law. As far as reducing sex trafficking, it takes education.  We have to educate the public the impact of it, of sex trafficking. People need to be aware and we need to reduce the demand for it. So long as there's a demand for it, pimps will supply it, whether there'd be illegal, illegal immigrants or not, or some girl down the road, some runaways, some juvenile delinquents. Pimps will target so that they can't have the supply. We got to cut off the demand. And that's through education, that's through community involvement. And that's through we all working together to, to let the people know what's happening. Let the people be aware and be conscious about it. Thank you. Thank you, Ty. And finally, Anosh. I would, I'm going to keep this brief. I agree with much of what many people have said. Emphasis should be on prosecuting the traffickers, not prosecuting the victims, not prosecuting people who have been trafficked, who are caught in this cycle. I agree generally with the idea that don't want to re victimize the victim. As far as immunity goes, I am in favor of providing them with immunity. And I am generally reluctant to use it as a kind of coercive tool. You know, if we're only giving immunity, if they decide to testify against the trafficker, I'm not sure, I'm not sure that that's something I would be eager to do. I'll be very reluctant with that. Thank you. Thank you, Anosh. The next topic we're going to cover is victims rights. And again, I'll set the scene and then we'll ask the question. And the first person to answer is going to be Stephen Alm this time. Many believe our current criminal justice system often re victimizes victims of crimes through long drawn out criminal proceedings, lack of communication, lack of ability to provide meaningful input and having to recount over and over the sometimes humiliating or traumatizing circumstances of their victimization. Meanwhile, defendants may strategically drag things out, which not only makes things increasingly difficult for victims, but actually extends the dynamic of power and control that offenders may have over their victims. In recent years, there has been some movement to recognize the critical role that victims play and implement more trauma informed processes. Yet we continue to hear about cases in which victims feel ignored, confused or taken for granted, sometimes even by the agency's task with assisting them. So the questions are, what types of victims rights and services do you think are essential? And how would you implement them? What would you do to minimize the trauma on victims throughout the investigation and prosecution of a case? And Steven Ohn. Well, the process needs to be more victim driven. There's no question about it. I've worked with victims the entire 16 years. I was a prosecutor. When I was the United States attorney, I hired Mae Chun, then May Wine to really improve our the victim services at the United States Attorney's Office. She's well known in the victims rights community. She was number two at the prosecutor's office. And part of it is is making them a central part of it. So they're communicated with their listen to their supported. I think what has been happening in this in the sex assault arena, where a victim is taken for a one stop shop to get interviewed once. And then there's a deputy prosecutor should be working with them once. The same thing should be happening in the domestic violence arena. I think that was the whole purpose of that center that got started before it went off track by the prosecutor's office and became essentially a jail for victims. But that the original idea was very good as far as making it a one stop shop for those victims. I have always tried to place victims concerns right at the forefront. And part of that is treating everybody with courtesy and respect as a judge. I was known for that, whether it was defendants and trauma and forecare. Most of the women on probation and in in prison have been traumatized. Many of the men have as well. I've learned a lot about that from Lauren Walker from going to her classes going to the women's prison participating in those activities, learning about it. So we can we can do better for victims. We will. We'll get the deputies to understand how important that is and the depth and the victims can help them win cases as well. So I look forward to doing that if I get in as the Honolulu prosecutor. Thank you. Thank you, Steve, Megan Cowell. The first thing I would like to note is that it is very old school and discriminatory to continue to refer to victims as she. If you are a relevant lawyer and you are active in the criminal justice system now, we know that victims can be males or females. And nowadays there are many males that are victims of many different crimes, male on male, female on male. And so if you're out of touch with society and what's going on, you should not be running for prosecuting attorney. Also, I believe that communication is key. It doesn't mean just sending out a subpoena in the mail or sending an email out. It means having the deputy prosecuting attorneys sit down with the victim, talk with him or her, explain the justice system to him or her. It is very difficult to maneuver through the criminal justice system if you've never been there before. And lawyers have a specialized knowledge that we can share with everybody. And that includes and is especially true for the victims. They get subpoenas and they show up for court and they're wondering, do I have to stay here? What's going on? Who's going to talk to me? They are giving no information. We need to do a better job of calling them in, meeting with them, answering their questions, being accessible to them. And that means answering the phone every single time they call. Thank you, Megan. Do it, not a modal. Oh, my office has always been about victims. Whenever there's a potential plea whatever's going on the case, we always contact the victim. It could be a victim of a sex assault. That can be a victim of an A-ha. When we did our sex trafficking task force, one of the things we did is we contacted the sex abuse treatment center and they were able to give our members training. What that training causes, trauma informed training. So when they are talking to a potential sex trafficking victim, they know that sometimes their reaction to them is not based upon hostility to them, but upon the pain of which they have an experience throughout their life. We are always looking at victims, victims of what we focus on. And one of the things we try to do is like about what, three months ago, we had that COVID-19 thing. Victims were not being informed. We tried to inform them as much as we could. But unfortunately courts would just let them out, no hearings. And at least half of those people who were released, I mean hundreds were released. About more than 25% of them have been re-arrested. So we are always about victims keeping them informed, letting them know what's going on. Thank you, Dwight. RJ Brown.  They've either been defense attorneys for all or the vast majority of their careers. And that's fine. They've dedicated themselves to representing defendants. They are a necessary and important part of the criminal justice system. But I'm a prosecutor. I got into this business to represent victims. That's what motivates me. That's what I want to do. And you know, the reality is we have fallen short, we have fallen short every single day of making sure that we are doing our job and keeping the victims up to date with cases. And so if elected, you know, what I would do first and foremost is make sure that prosecutors after every single court setting, whether it's to set a trial or talk about a continuous or talk about motions, they need to maintain constant contact with the victims of crimes. They I found, I believe I'm probably the only candidate here that's actually represented the state in a criminal trial in the last four or five years. And what I found is that victims get most frustrated when they're out of the loop when they don't understand what's going on because, you know, people get it. The criminal process is complicated and difficult. And, you know, they're willing to work with you, but you've got to have that dialogue. You've got to keep them informed as to what's going on. And so all deputies will be instructed to work with the victims every single time. Pick up the phone and call people. Let them know what's happening. Beyond that, within the prosecutor's office itself, we have victim advocates. I would double the size of that division. We've got to make sure that we have trained professionals who understand the complexities and nuances and how to deal with victims. And we would significantly increase the funding and make that happen. Thank you, Archie. Tai Kim. This delayed is definitely justice denied. You know, you don't want to be victimized as you have asked to prolong the prosecution in favor of the defense. Defendants have right to speedy trial under our Constitution. Victims should have right to speedy trial as well. What happens is defense councils would delay it, whether it's intentional or not, they would delay it. What happens? Victims would just wait around for trial. Judges have to be mindful of not continuing it, not delaying it and consider not just the defendant's rights to be prepared for trial, but victims' right to be heard. Victim is waiting to be heard. We must do more to take care of the victims who have been victimized. And if you delay it, we are in fact re-victimizing them. This has to be told and informed to the court. There has to be a policy, not just for the defendant to have a right to speedy trial, but for victims to have a right to speedy hearing, speedy trial for the victims as well. Although it's not in the Constitution that victims should have a right to speedy trial, we should have a policy. We should have a discussion with the public. People need to be aware of what's happening. Every one of us have duty and obligation to inform the public of what's happening and what's not, why we are delaying these cases. And oftentimes what happens with delays, victims would just move on without having their voices heard. Thank you. Thank you, Ty. Anosh, Yaku? Yes, I would echo most nearly everything everyone has said. We need better communication, better witness victim advocacy. I believe that expanding that division would be helpful and would be good. I can't say that I disagree with any of this. And I would agree with Taikim, justice delayed is justice denied. I agree mostly nearly with everything everyone has said. Thank you, Anosh. And finally, Jackie Esser. We shouldn't have to wait for a conviction to provide support to a crime victim. The reason why we must invest in our communities and families is in crime prevention and not jails and prisons is that stronger families and communities means less poverty, means less mental illness and substance use disorder and allows prosecutor resources to focus on prosecuting the most serious violent crimes, as well as providing meaningful support on day one of an incident for crime victims. We absolutely have to change the culture of the prosecutor's office. It cannot be about conviction rates. Instead, we have to focus on how well we are healing the harm that crime causes and the rates of recidivism. And we can do that in a number of way. But as far as crime victims are concerned, the policy and the culture needs to not revictimize victims and wait until a conviction to provide support. And that takes collaboration. So prosecutors on day one when a case is brought for conferral for charging must be working and collaborating with appropriate community based organizations to again give the crime victim support. Is it money? Is it housing? Is it food? What is it? And work with these agencies and the victim on day one to provide these things. Policies, the current policies of the prosecutors like asking for bench warrants when victims don't decide decide after they've been dragged through this corrupt system that they no longer want to be a part of it only revictimizes. We have to help and support victims, peace their lives back together. And there has to be meaningful support. We have to change the culture. We have to and under my administration, every crime victim will be offered the opportunity to participate in restorative justice. Every victim has a voice and it must focus on on that voice and ask victims what do they truly need to start healing from the harm that the crime has caused them. Thank you, Jackie. And so the next person who will go first is Megan Cowan. We're going to have the next topic be on racial disparity. I should note too that I was informed that our bell stopped working. And so everybody's been great about keeping within time. So we'll have to just have honor system on keeping within our minute. Racial disparity, the context is at recent national events as everyone knows. Have starkly demonstrated the racism and inequalities that permeate our nation's justice and society. Justice system and society while Hawaii's ethnic makeup and history are unique. Studies have clearly shown a disproportionate representation of native Hawaiians and other minorities in our criminal justice system. So the questions are, do you believe this is due to systemic institutionalized racism or due to more subtle implicit bias or due to other reasons? And how would your administration address these issues, including the public's perception of police violence, misconduct and systemic racism? And the first person to answer will be Megan Cowan. I believe that the disproportionate numbers are due to other reasons. They are not due to police misconduct, such as racism. I do not believe that police officers intentionally go and target Hawaiians versus non-Hawaiians. I was born and raised here. We were raised with not knowing color. We were so diverse that most people that were born and raised here do not discriminate in that manner. And most of the police officers are local and from here. In order to address the disparity, however, a prosecutor needs to be a community leader. The only thing a prosecutor can do is objectively apply the criminal laws to everyone. It is not just to say I as the prosecutor, I'm only going to prosecute non-Hawaiians or because I'm local, I'm only going to prosecute non-locals. That's not just and it is not fair. And anyone that promises that leads to corruption because once a prosecutor decides to start choosing who to prosecute and who not to prosecute and what charges to prosecute and what charges not to prosecute that leads to corruption. The next prosecutor will say, well, that prosecutor chose not to charge Hawaiians. So I'm going to decide not to charge Chinese people or I'm going to decide not to charge Japanese people. You cannot do that. But what a prosecutor can do is be a community leader. Go out and be a good example. Bring these issues to light. Talk to people. Educate the legislature so that the legislators know where to spend the money because legislators are not familiar with the criminal justice system. Thank you, Megan. Thank you, Megan. I mean, it goes by really fast. So do I not have a motto? You know, we support cultural awareness. We support giving Native Hawaiians every opportunity, education, whatever you need. We want them not even to get in to the criminal justice center. But once somebody guns into the criminal justice center, we evaluate case culturally blind. We base our decisions on the evidence. Now, I know some people may disagree or disagree with me, but, you know, I have I have prosecuted police officers. I prosecuted a Honolulu police officer who was the leader of a Berglay rig in Hawaii. I prosecuted him. I did the PRD before the Supreme Court and won. And something that's happened quite recently. I know many people may disagree. But my office has decided to prosecute. A federal law enforcement officer. We prosecute people depending on the evidence. That individual, the federal law enforcement officer, had a gun, did he had a gun shot and on our local resident. People may disagree with us, but we looked at the evidence and we are we it doesn't matter who it is, we will prosecute. Thank you, Dwight. Next, R.J. Brown. So the number certainly prove that there is a disproportionate number of native Hawaiians that are incarcerated in the state of Hawaii. It's just a fact. Now, what I would suggest and what I think is probably true is that there are a number of factors. That that have led to that. And if there's going to be a candidate that's going to sit here and tell you in the face, hey, I've got the answer and I can tell you exactly why and its racism. I think that that's they're probably trying to say something. And could that be a component? Absolutely. Are there implicit biases that we all maintain as as people growing up in Hawaii? Absolutely. Can we do better as a prosecutor's office to ensure more objectivity, higher ethical standards? Of course we can. But when you're when you're asking about this question and when we're thinking about it, you know, you've got to understand that we're trying to be the prosecutor and the role of the prosecutor is limited and distinct. And what we do is we look at evidence and we charge cases and we prosecute those cases. And so the best thing that you can do if you want to reduce disproportionate incarceration rates, if you want to make the prison system better, if you want to make the criminal justice system more fair, is you've got to elect somebody that has ethics that is a person of integrity that's going to do the right thing and they're going to require their deputies to the right thing, which means that you take race out of the analysis, you take any any category, anything that is not relevant to whether or not a crime has been committed with the requisite state of mind that it should all be set aside. We're about doing the right thing every single day in every single case. Thank you, RJ. Thank you. Thank you for the question. Do I think there's a systematic systemic racism? Do I do? I believe there's a sort of biases. Definitely. Most people take it for granted that we live in Hawaii. Hawaii is a melting pot of the world, not just most not just mostly isolated or the most isolated part of the world, but Hawaii has every ethnicity of the world. It's a melting pot. We have every every culture. However, to say that there is no racism, there is no bias that's absolutely untrue. There is a systemic bias and prejudice in every level of our society. I'm talking about Honolulu, Hawaii. I grew up here in Kalihi, as well as in Kanoi. My I have friends who are of different, different, different ethnicity, and they're great people. But every one of us we're human being. We have our own biases and prejudices and our own opinions. To say there isn't, it's just simply false. We need education. We need to educate the people. We need to better train the police officers to recognize it. And of course, within the prosecutor's office, I will have the deputies always be cognizant of systemic biases so that there won't be any unfair prosecution. There won't be any playing with politics. It applies to everybody. Immigrants, rich, poor, new to the community, owed to the community. Thank you. Thanks. Okay. Anosh, Yaku. Hello, yes. Concerning this topic, I I'm more or less agree with the idea that I'm not sure we have systemic institutional racism at work. But I do believe we have more subtle implicit biases. And I would agree, tend to agree that although Hawaii is a melting pot, I do believe we have racism racism here as well. It takes several different shapes and forms and it's pervasive and pervades our society. It's no good. But I believe that people can trust that if they elect me, if they put their trust in me, that they can trust 100% that I would certainly not be targeting any particular group and that they would find that it's really just about applying the law even handedly and leading where the evidence will lead you, going where the evidence will lead you. I am off the belief in particular that there probably isn't much that can be done to change the public's perception on this except to elect somebody like myself, somebody who is from the outside, somebody who's not an insider or somebody who hasn't had a career in government. This is going to take time. I believe that recently, the events surrounding the Honolulu Police Department and surrounding the Honolulu Prosecutor's Office have shaken public confidence. They've shaken public confidence in law enforcement and our structural institutions to the core. It's going to take time. That's pretty much the only answer I can come up with. I don't think there's a band-aid. I don't think there's a quick fix. I don't think there's any rubbing alcohol or foreign for this. I believe this is going to take time. Thank you, Anosh. And Jackie Esser, I want to make sure to give you guys time for closing. Ask Micronesians if racism exists here. To say Hawaii is unique and colorblind is proof systemic, implicit, explicit racism exists in our criminal legal system. In Hawaii, with its history of colonization, the criminal legal system has operated to dislodge the claims of Native Hawaiians. The blind objectivity that is being discussed here tonight has been used as a weapon against our Native Hawaiians, our Pacific Islanders, our Black, Brown, and Indigenous since the beginning of the colonization here in Hawaii and slavery on the continent. Look who feels our jails and prisons. Native Hawaiians make up 18 percent of the adult population and over 40 percent of our prison populations. Studies show they're overrepresented at every single stage. The Office of Hawaiian Affairs have been documenting this for years. What is racism? The fact that our leaders have not done anything to end it. Under my... I'm sorry, can I finish? Just I want to give some examples. Okay. Examples of it is cash bail. Cash bail punishes the poor and it creates two systems of justice. Also the ACLU recently took the arrest records during the quarantine violations. Micronesians were arrested 30 percent more than not... than their white counterpart. Who were cited, who were just giving a citation. It absolutely exists. The prosecutor, you have to elect a prosecutor who understands this, not only understands it, who on day one will work to end it. Thank you, Jackie. And finally, Steve Ohm. Thank you. Our police department law enforcement made up with human beings. There will be racist there. Is it really widespread or a lot of police officers that way? I don't think so. At the same time, implicit bias certainly exists. I took that training when I was a judge. I think law enforcement should take it. I think the prosecutor's office, I'll have the deputies take it as well. But one of the practical things we can do, run an ethical office. So from charging to trials, to appeals, sentencing, it's done in a colorblind, non-discriminatory fashion. We should also support the efforts in the judiciary to help people of all races. And so between drug court, mental health court, hope probation, we now have strategies where research, Hawaii research has shown native Hawaiians get revoked and go to prison half as often. That means hundreds of native Hawaiians have not gone to prison. And for serious misconduct, when I was the United States Attorney, we charged investigated, investigated, charged and convicted Honolulu police officers for civil rights violations and for corruptions. And they went to federal prison. And as the U.S. Attorney, I brought in a new age of working closely with the Honolulu Police Department. They worked on task forces with the federal agencies. That was the best outcomes. So we prosecuted whoever needed to be prosecuted and I would do that as the Honolulu prosecuted. Thank you, Steve. Okay, we're going to give everybody a chance for closing. We've got about six minutes. So it's going to have to be less than a minute. We keep it to say five, two, three to five points. And we're going to start first with RJ Brown. Well, thank you guys for having this this event. We always appreciate it.  There are big issues that need to be dealt with. The criminal justice system needs reformation. We need to come up with alternatives for how we treat addicts for how we treat mental health issues. We need to minimize our use of incarceration as sort of our de facto go to tool in every scenario. Now that said, look, this is an application to become the prosecutor. There are a lot of defense attorneys in this in this race here. And I respect these people. They are smart. They are confident and they've got a job to do. But what we need is someone who believes in victim rights. We need somebody who believes in accountability. We need someone who's got a proven track record of going to trial, taking tough cases and representing actual victims, because what we've got is a defense oriented community and you need that tough advocate that's going to get there, make the case and get the job done the right way. If you give me this opportunity, I guess. Thank you. Thank you, RJ. Dwight Natomoto. Eight months ago, our city was in the midst of a crime wave. I sat there and watched and I didn't see anybody who had public safety as their main reason. I looked around and I saw Steve Vom, the founder of Hoppervation. Hoppervation is not about public safety. Hoppervation is about giving felons chance after chances of chance. Stephen Brown on Hoppervation when he is alleged to have killed Telma in the Pointville. Jackie Esser, she represents cops and murders. Nobody is focusing on public safety. Jackie Esser, she's the one who was for COVID-19 release. I was the only one who was against the premature release of inmates due to a alleged threat of COVID-19. Nobody I saw was interested in public safety and that is why I decided to run. Thank you, Dwight. And Nat is going to be Tai Kim. Mr. Tai Kim, I'm in my mid-50s, always my home. I grew up with KBT, Cuiopark Terrace in Kalihi, and in Kaniyoy. I attended for an elementary where I got my lichens. First load dance with Ms. Suzuki at Camp Erdman and my first kiss. Now with Ms. Suzuki, I grew up listening to Peter Moon Band, Kalapana and Kapena. I graduated from Castle High School in Kaniyoy, nominated to West Point by Native Hawaiian, attended college at UH with the help of Japanese-American. Both my brother and I went to law school and became lawyers. I got married here. Both my girls are born and raised here. This is my home, my only home.  Give me Aipoki and Lao Lao and I don't need anything else. I'm a product of all the generosity from every ethnicity in Hawaii. This is our home. We will make it stronger, safer, and more informed. Thank you. Thank you, Ty. We've got three minutes or less. OK, next. We've got Steve Ong. This election is all about restoring trust to the prosecutor's office. And I'm the person to do it. I have spent 31 years protecting the people of the state of Hawaii. And Dwight Nautomoto is either misinformed or he's trying to mislead you. The research shows hope probationers get arrested for new crimes. 55% less often than regular probation. They go to prison half as often. Elected a person who's been a prosecutor, who's been a judge, who can work with communities like we did in Cali, Paloma, and Chinatown to reduce crime there by over 70%. This is no time for on-the-job training. Apart from Dwight Nautomoto, nobody here has supervised anybody and has not supervised any prosecutors or led them in any way. I will do that. I will restore trust to that office. I'll train the deputies to be more effective in court and will protect the people of Honolulu. Thank you. Thank you, Steve. Anosh. Well, thank you for having this forum. I'm gonna try to go as quickly as I can. I would like to speak to, towards a number of issues, towards a couple of issues briefly. First, I wanna thank everyone who voted for me in 2016. This is a great time. I would urge you to feel good. I would urge you to enjoy this as much as I have been. This is an invigorating time. I'm gonna urge all the people who voted for me in 2016, let's run it back. Let's do it one more time. Let's show everyone in August, let's show everyone again.  Now, I do wanna mention, and I believe this to be true, that we are at an inflection point. This is a time to go forward, not a time to go backward. This is not a time to go back to the Conohiro tree or the Carlisle tree. This is a time for us to plant our own tree, to start a new relationship with someone, to start something brand new. I cannot think of a bigger disaster than to elect Keith Conohiro's hand-picked successor. I believe that would be disastrous for our city. I believe that it would be disastrous for the credibility of the prosecutor's office, and I humbly appreciate your vote. Remember, every passing minute is a chance for us to turn it all around. Thanks, Jackie, yes, sir. First and foremost, I'm a mother, and I want nothing more than a safe community to raise my daughter in. For the sake of our children and their children, we must do everything to end mass incarceration. It's time we start investing in our communities, in our families, in crime prevention, and stop investing in our jails and prisons. This will not happen if we keep electing prosecutors who think that the status quo is acceptable. Prosecutors who have been profiting from and entrenched in our current system and mentality that has led us to incarcerate thousands of our citizens and failed to make us safer. I'm glad people are joining me to the table now and talking about much-needed reform, but it's going to take fundamental transformational reform. I have been doing this my entire legal career. I will be ready on day one to lead the office into a more fair and just office and into the 21st century and beyond. Thank you, Hawaii women lawyers and Hawaii tech and think tech for having this important conversation and for your work in leading the way. All of the candidates here are very qualified and would do an excellent job, but we need to get away from Keith Kanashiro. Dwight Naramoto followed Keith Kanashiro to the prosecutor's office in the 1980s and then again in 2010. Keith Kanashiro handpicked Dwight Naramoto to run this office. Steve Olm also worked for Keith Kanashiro for six years and was promoted to be a supervisor under Keith. I believe that a prosecutor's duty is to objectively apply the criminal laws to anyone that violates the law. And if you violate the law I will prosecute you whether Hawaiian or not Hawaiian local or not holocal rich or poor. We need an objective prosecutor and we need a fresh new start. Thank you everybody just remember that this has been recorded. We are streaming online and so you can tell your friends and supporters to check online for at HWL and think Tecawaii.


The mellow thing, especially because that project's already been done and it worked. So why is it that it seems like he has to start over again from scratch? Just to have another shot in the league. Like I'm not the biggest Carmelo fan, but I'm with you guys. Like I don't understand why he's not on a roster already, Chandler. Yeah, this is a head scratcher because, you know, he's did the whole thing where like he's not coming off the bench and he wasn't accepting that role, but, but then he did and, and he thrived in it.  Meanwhile, this guy is just sitting on the shelf over there ready to play. So this one, I mean, listen, he's never been a great defender. He's he's he's always been the go-to guy, but he showed us that he's mature enough to accept that new role off the bench. And I think he's got a sign with the team here soon because he's better than a lot of guys that I've seen play this season on NBA teams.