Fact checking the opponent:
ü FACT CHECK: Campaign mailer attacks Judge for using committee to raise campaign funds, and urges vote for opponent on that account. FACTS: The campaign mailer is false and deceptive by stating an ethics rule that does not exist and by omitting to admit that the opponent engages in the same fundraising. Use of a committee to raise funds is authorized by the campaign rules. Moreover, the opponent has raised funds by use of a committee, and in fact attended a fundraiser just last week
ü FACT CHECK: Opponent objects to questions about his community involvement over the last four years. FACTS: Opponent makes campaign references to Little League and Youth Football involvement. The voters will decide if his material simply refers to coaching his kids some years ago, or if it implies he is still involved in these organizations for the benefit of the next generation. Long time board members of both (including the Judge for baseball) confirm the opponent has not been involved in running these organizations since well before last election in 2012.
ü FACT CHECK: Opponent claims close friends of Judge called him first when they had an unexpected legal problem. FACTS: The claim that the opponent was called first is false and he knows it. This representation was over five years ago, and the first call was to the Judge despite the fact he was in Texas at a grandchild's graduation. After discussion with the family, it was agreed that the close personal relation could interfere with objective legal decision making and they would seek to retain another attorney, which they did through a third party they knew.
ü FACT CHECK: Opponent claims Judge misrepresents experience. FACTS: The opponent took part of one sentence from one handout to make his case, distorting the true content. Judge has forty years’ legal experience and 30 years combined experience hearing cases as an arbitrator assigned to local court overflow cases and now as Town Justice. The campaign literature so states.
ü FACT CHECK: Opponent objects on ethical grounds to pictures used in Judge's campaign material. FACTS: The pictures used were submitted to the judicial ethics committee to confirm there were no ethical issues with their use, they were approved and the objection is unfounded.
ü FACT CHECK: Opponent objects to references to the fact he works in another county. FACTS: Opponent does not challenge the fact he works in another county and apparently agrees this is not local. The five attorneys who have served as Town Justice over the last 40 years have all had offices in Cornwall or in neighboring towns minutes away. The voters will decide the relevance of this to their vote.