An unfair and inaccurate picture has been painted of a Douglas County judge’s handling of more than a dozen cases, the judge’s supporters said Saturday.

“The information is very incomplete and misleading, and we want the public to have a complete accounting and picture of these cases and the judge,” attorney Dan Watkins said.

Watkins is one of the members of a committee working to retain Judge Paula Martin. Another group, the Justice for Children Committee, is trying to get voters to oust Martin from the bench when she comes up for retention in the Nov. 2 general election.

Justice For Children recently cited 15 cases in which it criticized Martin for being too lenient or too harsh, for setting low bonds or for a variety of other reasons.

Martin’s supporters, who have organized the Retain Judge Martin Committee, have now released their own information about 14 of the cases, saying they are presenting facts Justice for Children did not include in its information.

For example, Martin’s supporters say she acted appropriately in the case of Eric Harris, who in 1998 was given 36 months of probation after being convicted of child abuse. If he violates his probation he will serve 32 months in prison. Because of Harris’ lack of a prior record, Martin’s sentencing was not a departure from guidelines; Harris met the factors for a nonprison sentence.

In another example, Martin’s detractors argue that her sentencing of a man convicted of involuntary manslaughter was too lenient. In May 2001, Joshua Mattocks was given 36 months of probation instead of having to serve 32 months in prison. The nonprison sentence was ordered based on the prosecutor’s recommendation and the victim’s family’s sentiments.

A complete listing and breakdown of the cases can be found on the committee’s Web site, www.retainjudgemartin.com.

Justice for Children was formed a few weeks ago in response to Martin’s sentencing of three defendants in a statutory rape case involving the same victim. She was criticized for granting defendants probation instead of sending them to prison for 13 years. Sixteen of the 24 jurors on those cases, however, have come out in defense of Martin’s sentences.

“The jurors who heard evidence in the statutory rape cases support the judge, and we know the public will, too, when they have the facts on all of these cases,” Watkins said Saturday. Karin Drees, one of the leaders on the Justice for Children Committee, said she wanted to study the information presented by Martin’s supporters before commenting.

DocumentsWarning: Some material in these documents describes explicit sexual acts. State of Kansas vs. Brian K. Ussery sentencing motion State of Kansas vs. Brian K. Ussery sentencing transcript State of Kansas vs. William H Haney sentencing motion State of Kansas vs. William H Haney sentencing transcriptArticles Rape case details provide sentencing insights Supporters defend judge case by case Judge’s backers launch effort (10-10-04) Citation of case misrepresents reality, victim’s mother says Efforts stepped up to unseat judge (10-8-04) 6News video: Groups clash over campaign to oust judge (10-07-04) 6News video: New developments surface in rape cases (10-05-04) More about Judge Paula Martin