A candidate for the family court race has stuck to comments he won't accept contributions so he won't be beholden to anyone if elected.

The other three candidates in the four-person race agree they have to accept contributions so they can afford to get their messages to the public.

The family court race has current District Family Judge Catherine Holderfield having a total of $53,853.74 to move to the circuit court family judge position, which will hold the same responsibilities as her current seat. Holderfield loaned a significant portion of the money - $33,000 - to her campaign.

Two other candidates, Joy Denton and Dixie Satterfield, have raised $32,284 and $34,529.37 respectively.

Osi Onyekwuluje said at an Oct. 17 forum at Western Kentucky University that he would not take any campaign contributions because he didn't want to be obligated to anyone who might appear before him.

According to campaign finance records, Onyekwuluje has been the sole financier of his last three campaigns for area judge positions. During these races, he has contributed $16,074.20 to his own campaigns.

During the family court race, he didn't file any records because his total campaign contributions were less that $1,000, according to the Secretary of State's Office.

Holderfield, Denton and Satterfield all accepted money from attorneys.

“My donations are a good cross-section of the community,” Holderfield said.

Donations are not going to have any impact on how people are treated in court, she said.

“Campaigns are expensive,” Holderfield said. “But if you don't campaign, you're not going to win.”

With four candidates, issues can become clouded, and advertising is necessary to tout qualifications, Satterfield said. Advertising cannot be done on a shoestring budget, he said.

One of the issues is explaining the bar association survey results, he said. The results were so close that scores were mostly within hundredths of points and the survey's margin of error could have changed the results to two of the other three candidates.

Yet one candidate - Denton - is using those results to say she was favored, Satterfield said.

“I simply disagree with that,” he said.

Contributions would not impact his ability to make rulings, Satterfield said.

“In my 37 years of experience, no one has ever questioned my integrity,” he said.

All but possibly one of the attorneys who donated do not practice family law, Satterfield said. More than 80 percent of his contributions came from people outside the legal profession.

Candidates for judge positions are not supposed to directly solicit contributions, he said.

Lawyers have an obligation to inform the public about the quality of judicial candidates, Denton said. Campaign contributions are one of the ways they can indicate who they support.

Fifteen attorneys have made campaign contributions to Denton's account, according to her latest filing.

“Unfortunately, with four people running, the campaign becomes very expensive,” Denton said. “I don't think any of the four candidates can independently afford to advertise without taking contributions.”

If a candidate wants to get his or her message out to the public, money has to be spent, Denton said.

Denton comes from a large law firm, which has helped her to raise money from attorneys, Holderfield said.

Holderfield said she received less from attorneys because when she was practicing law she was a sole practitioner.

Of the three candidates who responded - Onyekwuluje did not - are pleased with how they've been able to get their message to the public thus far.

“It's going to get a lot more intense in the next couple of weeks,” he said.

In the race for court of appeals, Bowling Green lawyer Kelly Thompson has stuck to his pledge not to accept any campaign contributions from lawyers.

Thompson has received $900 from individuals for his campaign, while his opponent Dwight Lovan of Philpot, has received $38,625 for the race.

Lovan said he's thought about Thompson's stance about not taking donations from attorneys, decided to accept donations from attorneys because they wouldn't actually be a party in the case.

“Who the attorney is handling the case doesn't matter,” Lovan said. “His skill as an attorney does. Attorneys are rarely parties in a court case.”

At least 85 percent of the attorneys who have donated to his campaign were before him in his capacity as a workers' compensation judge, Lovan said. When trying cases in front of him, all have won and lost cases.

Lovan said he doesn't have the financial capability to run a campaign without donations. Individuals running for judicial positions have to raise money or be independently wealthy, he said.

Thompson, who was not available for comment, put $20,000 of his own money into his campaign (some of which was a carryover), according to finance reports.

If the state wants to eliminate the possibility of someone appearing before a judge they have given money to, they should create public financing of judge races, Lovan said.

“When I talk to people about that, they don't seem to be in favor of it because it might cost them something and I understand that,” he said. “Ultimately, you have to do the best you can personally and that's all you can do.”