Democrat Kelly Hanley, NC Superior Court 6B, Seat 1
Career: Hanley began her career as a prosecutor at the Harris County District Attorney’s Office in Houston, Texas. She’s spent over three decades serving the legal system.
Education: Hanley earned her law degree from Tulane University School of Law and her bachelor’s degree in Broadcast Journalism and International Relations from Syracuse University.
Interview responses have been edited for brevity.
For those who have never met you and don't know what you do, please introduce yourself, tell us what you’re running for, and why you think you deserve the people’s vote.
Thank you. My name is Kelly Colquette Hanley, and I am running for Superior Court Judge in District 6B.
For the people who don't know me, and a lot of people do know me, but for the people that don't, they would know very quickly that I am very passionate about issues, that I care deeply about people, and that I've always tried to do the right thing, no matter how tough the decision.
And I am running for superior court judge to be able to treat people fairly with respect, to give people access to the courts, and to make sure that you're applying the law with the facts, and that you're not being influenced by any sort of political agenda, favoritism, or any sort of bias.
What do you think qualifies you to take this role beyond your law degree?
Well, so I've been a lawyer for 35 years now.
When I graduated from law school in 1991 from Tulane in New Orleans, I moved to Houston and I was a Harris County Assistant District Attorney there for five and a half years, and I tried hundreds, if not handled 1000s, of felonies, including child molestation, rape, gang-related offenses, armed robbery.
You always felt very good about bringing justice to those families who lost loved ones, or who suffered some sort of crime.
After we moved here to Wilmington 30 years ago, I started doing some criminal defense, family law, representing domestic violence victims.
And then I became the family court administrator. The judges asked if I would do that here in New Hanover in Pender County.
I served as co-president with the YWCA, helped with the founders gala for THE Children's Hospital, just so many different things.
I was president of the Pine Valley PTA, being involved with my kids because I had four kids, so you know it was nice to be able to be the court administrator and yet at the same time take care of your kids and be involved in their school.
After working for the judges as the trial court administrator and the family court administrator, I then went into civil practice.
So I've been doing that now for 20 years. So all kinds of complex litigation. So that makes me not just a lawyer who graduated from law school, but I've had the different realms from criminal to family practice to administration to civil, as well as serving our community.
And so I would bring sensibility and common sense and integrity to the bench, along with a lot of experience.
When was the last time you had to make a difficult decision on a certain legal or moral issue? How did you handle it?
Every day we deal with difficult decisions. I am not one of these types of lawyers where you only tell your client what they want to hear. I think people forget that you're a counselor at law as well, and not just zealously representing someone's clients.
So you need to tell them the good, the bad, the ugly. Sometimes they don't like to hear the bad or the ugly, but it's essential that they understand that they're going into something with their eyes wide open.
Civil litigation costs so much, and I don't think people realize that it can be 10s of 1000s, if not hundreds of 1000s of dollars, to litigate a case from beginning to end. That's just from the trial level.
When I was a prosecutor, for instance, you may not have had enough evidence to convince a jury beyond a reasonable doubt, and so then you'd have to tell the victim's family or the victim themselves, you know, “hey, we're going to have some issues here. We're not going to be able to get X amount in prison.”
So can we try to tailor some other sort of plea bargain, so that we can bring closure and resolution. But at times, you do need to dismiss cases as a prosecutor, when you just don't have the evidence beyond a reasonable doubt.
What is your philosophy on sentencing, within the constraints set by structured sentencing?
What's essential is to take your tools that you do have available for you to try to construct sentencing in the way that is reflective of the actual crime.
You know, we are limited on certain resources. Like right now, for instance, I'm sure you're familiar with DART Cherry, that serves as you know a drug substance abuse system for men, and that's located in Goldsboro.
There's 300 beds for men, but then women, for instance, and the Black Mountain Center, there's only I think it's like 60 or 90 beds, but it's a lot less than what's available for men.
So your resources that you have available are few and far between, and it's really taking what New Hanover County has to offer, along with whatever we can possibly get from the state, i.e. Dark Cherry or Black Mountain, and just try to construct what you can to reflect the actual crime.
Sometimes, some people may think prison is appropriate, but then other times there may be some sort of a mix where you can do community punishment, i.e. probation, along with some sort of incarceration.
But it's essential to be very tough on crime when need be, and also be able to look at the big picture and try to be flexible and original, sometimes within the confines of the sentencing guidelines.
Judges determine how the law is applied, and not what the law should be. How will you balance between being an independent judge who rules on what the law is, and an elected official who has a responsibility to your voters?
You are sworn to take an oath that you will follow the law, no matter how difficult it may be to follow that particular law. That is what you are elected and mandated to do, and that's the whole point.
Elected officials, whether you're a county commissioner or a president of the states, whoever you are, you do have certain constituents that you need to appease.
There are certain agendas that you're trying to promote, but the whole point of the judiciary is to be independent and not to fall prey to any of the political noise that's out there.
Look at the facts, apply the law, no matter how difficult, challenging, nuanced, and then you can sleep at night.
What is a bias/prejudice that you currently struggle with? How do you work to overcome that prejudice?
I have fought my entire life to do away with biases and prejudices, and so it's hard for me to say that is the case as far as me having something.
Of course, there are sometimes perhaps fleeting moments that come into play, but certainly nothing that I can concretely point to because, like I said, I have done so much.
Living in several different states, graduating from high school in Puerto Rico, living in Spain for a little bit, I was clerking for the Los Angeles District Attorney's office in LA, and you see so many different cultures, so many different people, and you just cannot make assumptions.
You just need to look at the person, see who they are, and then respect, welcome, and encounter, and not just prejudge people.
And I think judges, when they're on the bench, they have got to hold judgment. They have got to listen to people. And as a judge, I will not prejudge.
What is a quality you have seen in a judge that you would seek not to emulate on the bench?
Interruption.
There's a lot of paper, there's a lot of discovery, there's a lot of brief writing, there's a lot of behind the scenes that goes into complex civil cases.
When you've worked, you'll stay up all night writing a brief, or you will do so much to try to present your client in the most favorable light, and I've had so many judges say, "Oh, that's a lot of stuff. There's got to be a fact issue in there somewhere. So motion for summary judgment denied.”
It's like, wait a second, the client paid 10s of 1000s of dollars to get to this level. All I would like, Your Honor, is to have my day in court and then make a decision, and that's it.
It's giving people, whether you're pro se (representing yourself) or whether you're represented by an attorney, is to give your day in court. Listen to what people have to say. Don't interrupt.
Obviously, if someone's going on, or they're way off topic, or they're being completely disrespectful, contemptuous, if you will – different reason.
But for the most part, everyone deserves to have their day in court and to be listened to respectfully and fairly. And then, once you digest all the information, then make a decision.
What is the biggest mistake you have made in your career? How would you seek to avoid it on the bench?
So one of the biggest mistakes that I ever made, because it still haunts me, you know, more than 30 years later, but I did this one child molestation case, and it was a little four and a half year old, five-year-old girl, and her uncle had molested her.
And you know, before the trial, I met with her on several times, tried to get her comfortable with the courtroom, and it was one of those great big courtrooms with super high ceilings, the mahogany benches, the mahogany witness stand, the mahogany chairs that people were sitting in.
It was just a very intimidating forum, if you will, particularly for a child.
But you know, we walked around the courtroom, told her, "Okay, this is where you're going to be sitting. This is where the jury sits. This is where the judge sits. This is where your uncle's going to be sitting.”
But Texas had just passed a law to where you could do video testimony, so via camera, so the child victim could have been in another room so that they did not have to face their accuser.
It was so new that no one had really used it yet, and I did not use it.
So this little girl takes the stand. As soon as she saw her uncle sitting across from her, she ducked under the witness stand, and jurors started to cry, and the judge was like, "Okay, we need to take a break,” and that one really breaks my heart.
But that was very very hard because I wonder if things could have gone differently if I had learned how to do the technology.
So one thing throughout my career, and then obviously within the judiciary, is to be up on technology, use what's available to make it more efficient, and also to give a sense of security to victims that are coming in to testify, particularly unwillingly, or they're so young. So it was a great tool, and I've learned to embrace tools.
How will you handle conflicts of interest on the bench?
Recusal. Sorry. So I can't hear this case. So, and you don't necessarily have to go into detail why it's a conflict of interest per se, but that's one where attorneys approach the bench, so there is a conflict of interest here, and I do need to recuse myself.
How do you define injustice? How will you deal with injustice when you confront it in your courtroom?
Injustice can come in many shapes, sizes, and forms, and I think one of the biggest injustices is really if you rule a certain way, [knowing] the public is going to come down on you hard, and you cannot fall prey to that.
You have got to make these difficult decisions because if you don't, it's injustice if you don't do the right thing.
I think people sometimes are very swayed with, well, you know, "I went to high school with this person." You know, maybe they don't want to see them at the country club later if you don't rule in their favor.
I think it's really essential to avoid that, and I would really want to make sure that I don't care if I knew you from PTA or if I don't know you at all, I'm going to treat both of you the same.
I want you to ensure that you're being treated fairly and equally, because one of the best things is, even when you lose, to be able to come out and say, "at least I was treated fairly."
And then another injustice is, I think we have a lot of women that are not necessarily being promoted or recognized in our field.
You may know Judge Phyllis Gorham, but she was the only female Superior Court judge that we've had in New Hanover and Pender County, and she's African American, but she retired.
But you know, she was just awesome. But we need more female Superior Court judge portraits on that wall, and right now we just don't have any. And I'm sure they'll be doing one for Judge Gorham at some point, but it's not up there yet.
So I would like to see more diversity, a better reflection of who our community is.
It's very important to be able to look at the big picture. People come from different walks of life, and so we need to embrace that.
How do you ensure impartiality in your judicial decisions for people of all backgrounds in your courtroom?
Once again, you cannot assume. You cannot prejudge at all, and you've got to seriously listen.
I think that's what's so important about a judge is the ability to listen to what people have to say.
When you can look at that big picture, then that just gives you the ability to be able to make a sound, just, reasonable, commonsensical decision within the realm of the law.