Kim Gardner grew up in North City and watched as crime consumed her neighborhood. Her family owned the local funeral home, through which many victims of crime passed. Before entering public service, first as an assistant prosecutor then as the 77th District’s state representative, she was a registered nurse. Last August, she won the primary and then became circuit attorney earlier this year. Now, she’s bringing a fresh perspective to how the job should be done. “Crime is a public health issue,” she says.
How did your prior experience in this office shape your approach to running it?
Get a fresh take on the day’s top news
Subscribe to the St. Louis Daily newsletter for a smart, succinct guide to local news from award-winning journalists Sarah Fenske and Ryan Krull.
When I was here, I was handling 300 cases by myself, going to trial all the time. You see the most serious people—the violent people, the murderers and rapists. We have to deal with those individuals in the traditional way, incarceration. But we also see people who are non-violent, who are addicted to drugs, who have mental health issues, who have made bad choices because of a lack of foundation and economic opportunities. You see all the systemic issues. I think it’s our job as prosecutors to do more than just prosecute people. In terms of the non-violent, addicted, those with mental health issues…we fail those people. We have to do a better job of expanding our tool box and say to ourselves, “Listen, I can be a serious and effective prosecutor, but I can also look at non-violent individuals that we’re going to make even more violent when we put them in the system.”
Our duty is to look at crime as a continuum. You have people at different phases of the continuum, and you have to deal with them accordingly. You have people at different phases of the continuum, and you have to deal with them accordingly. We do that by making a determination of where to place that person. For some people, going to jail is not the answer. We’ve been incarcerating more people than ever, and that hasn’t worked. Crime should be going down; [instead] violent crime is rising. Prosecutor’s offices around the country are part of the problem of mass incarceration. If we can save people, we should give those people a chance, and I don’t think that’s taking away from the traditional role of a prosecutor to pursue justice.
How are you pursuing those alternative outcomes?
From day one, we started evaluating cases appropriately and giving recommendations. We looked at how we can identify the most serious individuals, and if they’re going to trial, they can focus on the trial. But the nonviolent individuals who are up in the air, maybe we can move the cases.
The second thing is, we’re looking at expanding diversion programs. I think we have a good start, but I want to create a domestic violence diversion program. A lot of our domestic violence cases right now are being dismissed because victims fail to cooperate. To me, the best option is to get the perpetrator help, as well as the victim, so we can prevent the next call. I want to look at opening up my diversion programs to address 18-to 25-year-olds, where some of the craziest decisions are made and take a little bit more risk where they may have some criminal records, a lot of them non-violent, but they are on this trend and it can escalate. So is there a way that we can prevent that next escalation with monitoring, employment or education, job skills or trauma-informed counseling? I’m big on providing services that we lack in the community.
We’re looking at how we can be part of a mental health diversion program. And with gun laws that are very lax, we’re looking at how we can capture this gun culture and find ways to educate young people earlier. Ask them: Why are you carrying guns? What is going on in your environment, your community, your household? So they don’t have to pick up that gun and be a victim or victimize someone else. Let’s get out into the community to talk to a teacher or a parent who says, ‘My kid has a gun. What do I do?’ So we can get services to that young individual before they make that really bad mistake.
What are some of the biggest obstacles you’ve faced in implementing change?
Changing the mindset of the organization. Typically, the mindset has been prosecute, prosecute, prosecute, no matter what type of case. We have to find creative ways to work together. It’s easy to do it the same way we had done for decades. Now, it’s trying to expand minds in the office. I’ve done that by hiring executive staff members with a variety of backgrounds: former public defenders, prosecutors with experience in community prosecution working with community police. I’m setting the change at the top of the organization.
What about political blowback?
I think everybody has their skepticism on whether this will work, but right now, we’re in a critical time when even Republicans and Democrats can agree that mass incarceration is no longer effective, and I think we need to try something different. There’s been more talk of diversion in the prosecutor’s world and the law enforcement world. Right now is the right time to talk about it. I’m not going to say everybody’s on board, but there is more support for alternatives than some people think.
And from the conservative state legislature?
I was a legislator, so I know it’s easy to follow the status quo. I’ve been to Jeff City on a victims and witness protection issue that is so crucial—we have retaliation issues in this city that are unheard of. I went back to some of my old colleagues and their new colleagues and stressed the importance of protecting witnesses and victims, and I was pleasantly surprised that alternatives to incarceration was an important agenda for the Governor’s Office.
What are your other goals as you move forward?
We have to build community trust. Without that trust, the whole criminal justice system will not work. We have to do something about murder… We have to get to the root cause and talk about gang culture. We have to be inventive—not just in putting a case together and holding that person accountable but also so we know what’s going on before the next case or arrest… What I tell my prosecutors is “It’s no longer ‘This is the defendant. These are the charges. This is the recommendation.’ It’s ‘What’s going on in this person’s life? Did they finish school? Are there any mental health issues? Are there any mitigating circumstances?’… Prosecutors have to protect the accused, the witnesses and victims, and the public safety. It’s a wonderful job. We have to do it differently than we have done.
