As a nation watched the incidents in the kids for cash scandal unfold in Pennsylvania with great interest, a recent op-ed over at CalBar written by Janice M. Brickley, a consulting legal adviser to Commissioners over at the California Commission of Judicial Performance opines in a recent article that such a thing could never happen here in California.
She cites the CJP’s diligence in resolving nearly a thousand complaints a year in secret deliberations to which we say, bring your waders.
Those who avail themselves of the CJP complaint system claim it is ineffectual and acts on a precious few complaints. Those on the bench claim the CJP complaint system can be petty. From a position of analysis outside of the system we agree with both parties. It is both ineffectual and petty. Cases that should result in severe discipline, such as removing someone from the bench just don’t happen. The public views the CJP as an exoneration committee. Judges view it as a petty political animal that seemingly focuses on the small stuff while oftentimes missing the big stuff. Janice Brickley gets paid a good amount of money as a consultant to maintain the appearance that the commission is effectual as a legal advisor.
We strongly disagree and point to the several hundred million dollar software program that does not work being foisted upon us, the $2,500.00 lightbulbs and the Saldivar matter as proof positive that the systems set up by the judiciary to protect the public are broken and ineffectual.
All of these public protection systems must be reworked to be able to regain the public trust. They should probably all be placed under the same umbrella. Who is responsible for the unlicensed contractor debacle? A judge, a justice or an AOC employee? Where does one file a complaint? Who conducts the investigation to determine where the source of the problem came from and then prosecutes it?
How does one address this in the build-a-grievance thread?
Judicial Council Watcher 
Larry Hohol
April 24, 2011
I am a native of the county in Pennsylvania (Luzerne) where the “Kids for Cash” scandal occurred.The Judicial Conduct Board was made aware of serious Judicial misconduct by the two Judges at the center of this scandal 3 full years before the FBI came to town and arrested these crooks. A fellow Luzerne County Judge (Lokuta) was the one that caused an anonymous DETAILED complaint to be filed with the JCB by one of the Judge’s staff members. The JCB is required by their own rules to investigate all complaints including anonymous ones. They tabled the complaint and started an investigation of the suspected whistle blower. The whistle Blowing Judge was removed from the bench for life and stripped of her pension. She is the first Judge in the history of PA to be removed from the bench but never accused or convicted of committing a crime. The two highest profile witnesses against the Whistle Blower were none other than the two “Kids for Cash” Judges. There is a ton of additional information on this scandal that will be exposed in my upcoming book on the subject. My first book, which is listed below provides detailed information on the corruption of the Luzerne County Court system and the Pennsylvania Judicial Conduct Board for a 20 year period leading up to the “Kids for Cash” scandal.
To answer your question…………..yes, it can happen there and probably is.
Larry Hohol-Author, The Luzerne County Railroad
http://www.TheLuzerneCountyRailroad.com
wendy darling
April 24, 2011
Agreed. Anyone who doesn’t think that it is aready “happening here” is deluding themselves, or keeping a seat warm on the California Judicial Council and/or the CJP.
Which, again, is why all roads lead to Sacramento.
Note to Larry Hohol: if you have the time and the interest to write another book on judicial branch misconduct and corruption, please come to California. The California Judicial Branch is in dire need of having some clear light shone upon what has and is going on beneath the bench.
Long live the ACJ.
Mrs. Kramer
April 24, 2011
Yes. I am living proof that it is happening here. McConnell denied my anti-SLAPP motion in November of 2006, while ignoring the irrefutable evidence that a newly retired Deputy Director of CDC/NIOSH & author of a medico-legal paper for the US Chamber, Bryan Hardin, was improperly not disclosed to be a plaintiff to the strategic litigation on the Certificate of Interested Parties. Only five owners of GlobalTox were stated. Hardin is the sixth.
At the same time, GlobalTox was testifying as expert witnesses for the US Dept of Justice under Atty Gen. Alberto Gonzales. They were hired to defeat claims of illness in a sick military family living in moldy military housing at Ft. Sills. (between 2004 & 2008 they were paid over $800K by the DOJ for expert witness services.)
If, McConnell had acknowledged the evidence that non disclosed plaintiff Hardin’s business partner, Kelman, was using criminal perjury to establish false yet needed reason for malice while strategically litigating; the US DOJ’s case would have collapsed. This would have been caused by it becoming public knowledge that one of the DOJ’s experts was using perjury in a stragetic litigation while trying to shut up the first person to write of the science fraud of the US Chamber et. al. and how it markets to the courts, (that the DOJ was using to deny liability for causation of illness in a sick military family).
It gets worse. In 2010, Huffman, Benke and Irion were provided evidence that the US Chamber paper cites false physician authorship. But the physician, Andrew Saxon of UCLA, has stated under oath he did not author the Chamber’s medico-legal mold statement. Only Hardin and Kelman, two phds were paid for the Chamber paper.
Huffman, Benke and Irion were evidenced that the Chamber paper was being used in a litigation in Az involving infant deaths, a moldy apartment building and a $25M insurance policy issued by Travelers. Kelman was serving as an expert defense witness and the paper he and Hardin authored for the Chamber (that cites false physician authorship), was submitted in the case by a PAC amicus, in validation of Kelman’s expert opinion.
The three San Diego justices were directly told and evidenced in briefs that IF they acknowledged Kelman’s use of perjury to establish malice while strategically litigating as a plaintiff trying to shut up the first person to expose the fraud of the Chamber et al, THEN the fraud of the US Chamber paper would be discredited in the $25M Traveler’s Insurance case (and so would their expert witness, Kelman).
NOPE. They rewarded the perjury with Kelman’s attorney being evidenced to them of suborning the perjury yet again in his brief he submitted to them in September of 2009. They willfully aided the fraud to continue, interstate, in a litigation involving a $25M insurance policy; by being willing participants in a malicious strategic litigation carried out by criminal means.
I can unequivocably state and evidence that you are right, Wendy Darling. It IS happening here.
About the Arizona Case and the Fourth Division One.
http://katysexposure.wordpress.com/2010/08/03/arizona-appellate-court-defines-outrageous-behavior-and-then-proceeds-to-practice-it-just-like-the-san-diego-courts-have-for-five-years-over-the-same-issues-fraud-in-health-marketing-by-the-us/
Mrs. Kramer
April 24, 2011
Excellent questions and key to restoring ethics and law to California’s “judicial wilderness”. The CJP is like a bad joke made in poor taste. I know this to be fact because I have personally been subjected to the antics of these court jesters.
They who have:
i.) abused their positions of authority; and
ii.) have delivered excessive punishment for minor infractions among “serf” judiciaries; and
iii.) have delivered no punishment for criminal infractions by monarch judiciaries (including
a member of the CJP and the JC – with the CJ turning a blind eye); further
iv.) corruption, cronyism and judicial & public fear of retribution/retaliation for exposing
frauds and cronies in the Ca legal system.
The CJP in its current form is the Poster Child of a threat to Democracy. And I can prove it via legal documents. I can prove Justice McConnell and Justice Huffman have been willing participants in a malicious, strategic litigation carried out by criminal means by authors of medico-legal policy for the US Chamber; and that they know their actions of rewarding criminal perjury and suborning of criminal perjury used to establish needed reason for malice in a strategic libel litigation aids with billions in interstate insurer fraud. That’s right. I said, “I can prove it.”
McConnell did it first in November of 2006 when affirming a erred denial of an anti-SLAPP motion over the first public writing of how the US Chamber got their fingers into the mold issue. Then, as the Presiding Justice of the Fourth District Division One Appellate Court, she assigned the case to Benke and Huffman in 2009 to review her work.
They even had the imperialistic audacity to ignore the evidence that a retired high level CDC/NIOSH employee & author of policy for the US Chamber is an undisclosed party tothe litigation, as they then proceeded to ignore the evidence that his business partner and co-US Chamber author, was committing criminal perjury to establish a made up reason for malice.
(Video of the US Chamber author, Kelman, and I discussing his perjury used to establish made up reason for malice. He lied about being a great expert defense witness in my own mold suit of long ago that purportedly caused me to “launch into an obsessive campaign to destroy the reputation of Dr. Kelman and GlobalTox’s” Since September of 2005, all courts were provided irrefutable evidence that the guy was a non-entity in my mold litigation of long ago, who did not give the testimony he claimed in his declarations submitted in the libel litigation. McConnell has a copy of this 3 min. video showing his depositions prove perjury in his declarations to make up a reason for malice; and Huffman has the transcripts of it. http://www.blip.tv/file/2063366/)
1. Certificate of Interested Parties missing the NIOSH employee/US Chamber author’s
name “Bryan Hardin”. http://freepdfhosting.com/57726d547a.pdf
2. McConnell being evidenced of the improperly missing NIOSH/US Chamber name “Bryan
Hardin” from the Cert of Interested Parties. http://freepdfhosting.com/dc748c7054.pdf
3. McConnell double speaking in her opinion while refusing to take notice of the improperly
missing name, Bryan Hardin” from the Cert of Interested Parties or that his business
partner, Bruce Kelman, was committing perjury to establish needed reason for malice
claiming reason because the Cert info wasn’t presented to the lower court.
Click to access 8d363919f8.pdf
4. Certificates of Interested Parties are not presented in lower courts. They are to assure that
Appellate Justices have no conflicts of interest involving the parties to a litigation.
Click to access 9acb031687.pdf
This is just PART of the corruption of what McConnell, Aaron and McDonald did in the 2006 anti-SLAPP opinion that looks like it was written by the US Chamber itself. The trial judge, who was facing an embarassing public admonishment from the CJP at the time (for something that occurred at a time in her life that would rattle anyone), stated she liked to read their opinions because she “won’t upset them if I follow their guidance” as she framed the scope of the trial on McConnell’s opinion of rewarded perjury. The trial judge then refused to even hear oral argument on a Motion for New Trial (on her last day before moving to Family Court) and refused to be “drawn into that kind of petty behavior” of asking the plaintiff attorney to explain himself for suborning the US Chamber author’s perjury after being presented 23 pieces of evidence that it was perjury.
Below is Huffman, Benke and Irion in 2010 CYA’ing for McConnell, Aaron and McDonald and the trial court “following their guidance”. If you read between the lines of what they wrote, it says that it is more important the San Diego Appellate Court remain consistant in rewarding criminal perjury in a strategic litigation on behalf of the US Chamber than it is to practice justice and law for the public good:
[¶]We do not propose to catalogue or to attempt to conjure up all possible circumstances under which the ‘unjust decision’ exception might validly operate, but judicial order demands there must at least be demonstrated a manifest misapplication of existing principles resulting in substantial injustice before an appellate court is free to disregard the legal determination made in a prior appellate proceeding.” (People v. Shuey (1975) 13 Cal.3d 835, 846; see also Yu v. Signet Bank/Virginia, supra, 103 Cal.App.4th at p. 309.) The record here will not support an exception to application of the law of the case doctrine. There has been no intervening change in the law of defamation in general or with respect to the fair reporting privilege in particular. Our review of our prior opinion does not show our analysis of the evidence of falsity and malice or our application of the fair reporting privilege were in any sense manifestly incorrect or radically deviated from any well-established principle of law. Thus any disagreement we might entertain with respect to our prior disposition would be no more than that: a disagreement. Given that circumstance and the fact that only nomimal damages were awarded against Kramer, the value of promoting stability in decision making far outweighs the value of any reevaluation of the merits of our prior disposition. (See People v. Shuey, supra 13 Cal.3d at p. 846.) Accordingly, on appeal Kramer is bound by our prior determinations of law.
[$500K in legal fees and about $2.5M in costs of stock sales, lost wages, etc. I was only sued for five words “altered his under oath statements” in the first public writing of how the US Chamber got their fingers in the mold issue with the help of a think-tank and a US congressman from CA…and the plaintiffs in the case. In six years time, there was zero evidence presented that I did not believe the truth of my words, or that my writing was incorrect. ]
SO WHAT if I can directly evidence that McConnell and Huffman have been willing participants in a malicious, strategic litigation over a matter involving billions of dollars and public health? Who stops them when the court jesters at the CJP will not?
Now, they are trying to use a lower court to gag me from writing of what they have done.
I publicly spoke at a conference in San Francisco of what they have done, starting at about minute 21. http://www.blip.tv/file/5057608
And I am going to keep publicly speaking about it until SOMEONE does SOMETHING to restore ethics and democracy to our courts and to the CA agencies that oversee our courts.
It is my humble opinion that the majority of justices in the Fourth District Division One Appellate Court being removed from the bench for eggregious ethics violations of willfully rewarding criminal perjury and suborning of criminal perjury adversely to the public’s best interest and to the benefit of the US Chamber of Commerce. Given the make up of that court as it relates to control of CA judicial policies and practices, I think this would go a looooooong way to restoring integrity to the Ca legal system as a whole.
Mrs. Kramer
April 25, 2011
More on the Court Jesters at the Commission on Judicial Performance & the Judicial Branch of the US Chamber of Commerce that is located at 750 B Street in San Diego.
I have had lots of communication with the CJP beginning in April of 2010. In October of 2010, I filed an official complaint with them against McConnell, Huffman, Benke and the other judges and justices who rewarded the use of criminal perjury by an author of medico-legal policy over the mold issue for the US Chamber, Bruce Kelman; that was used to establish false yet needed reason for malice in a strategic libel litigation. This was done for the purpose of keeping the fraud in the courts and public health policy going that it had been scientifically proven water damaged buildings do not harm people/workers.
Below is an excerpt of my writing in 2005 that is the subject of the six years worth of strategic litigation, that they have been desperately trying to keep from coming to greater public light. Its how the US Chamber and a think-tank got their fingers into US public health policy and in the courts to promote the scientific fraud for the purpose of staving off financial liability for illness and death caused by water damaged buildings.
“Dr. Bruce Kelman of GlobalTox,Inc, a Washington based environmental risk management company, testified as an expert witness for the defense, as he does in mold cases throughout the country…He admitted the Manhattan Institute, a national political think-tank, paid GlobalTox $40,000 to write a position paper regarding the potential health risks of toxic mold exposure. Although much medical research finds otherwise, the controversial piece claims that it is not plausible the types of illnesses experienced by the Haynes family and reported by thousands from across the US, could be caused by “toxic mold” exposure in homes, schools or office buildings.
In 2003, with the involvement of the US Chamber of Commerce and ex-developer, US Congressman Gary Miller (R-CA), the GlobalTox paper was disseminated to the real estate, mortgage and building industries’associations. A version of the Manhattan Institute commissioned piece may also be found as a position statement on the website of a United States medical policy-writing body, the American College of Occupational and Environmental Medicine.”
The next time the conflicted interest was publicly written of was January 2007. It was above the fold on the front page of the Wall Street Journal: http://www.drcraner.com/images/suits_over_mold_WSJ.pdf
I spent 6 months working with the WSJ reporter to get this story out. I was also able to get a federal audit of the issue. So, they failed at stopping me from getting the evidence of fraud from coming to greater public light. However, it was now necessary to shut me up of how McConnell wrote an anti-SLAPP opinion that aided it to continue far longer than it should have by rewarding criminal perjury in a strategic litigation to shut me up. All she had to do was acknowledge the evidence that the plaintiff/US Chamber author was using perjury to establish needed reason for my purported malice, and the whole US Chamber scheme would have immediately collapsed and immediately been gone from US public health policy, Ca workers comp policy and the courts.
So, after evidencing for the CJP, that McConnell rewarded Kelman’s perjury to establish needed reason for malice in the strategic libel litigation over the first public writing of how the Chamber mass marketed a fraud to the courts in 2006; and evidencing that Huffman covered it up for her in 2010; the CJP attorney sent me a reply in December of 2010, saying they would not investigate. See below. Notice the reply does not deny they were evidenced that McConnell, Huffman et. al. rewarded a US Chamber author’s criminal perjury while strategically litigating. It simply (and amazingly) says this is not a violation of the Code of Judicial Ethics. George was also evidenced of this twice, once in 2006 and once in 2010. Of course, the Cal Supreme Court refused to review the unpublised opinions of the judicial branch of the US Chamber, both times.
Submitted to the CJP on October 25, 2010: http://freepdfhosting.com/1d69ab0b1e.pdf
“Re: This complaint is against Justice Judith McConnell, Chair of the California
Commission on Judicial Performance and Presiding Justice (“PJ”) of the Fourth District
Division One Court of Appeal, along with nine of her subordinate San Diego judges and
justices. This complaint for aiding and abetting a multi-billion dollar interstate insurer
fraud scheme to defraud the public on behalf of the affiliates of the US Chamber of
Commerce. This has occurred by McConnell and nine of her subordinates willfully
refusing to acknowledge the undisputed evidence of a plaintiff’s criminal perjury while
strategically litigating and used to establish false extenuating circumstances for a
whistleblowing defendant’s purported malice. The plaintiff is an author of
‘environmental’ policy for the US Chamber of Commerce. The defendant is the first to
publicly expose how a scientific deception within the US Chamber’s policy has been
used to set US policy, adverse to public health and favorable to the insurance industry.
This complaint is for misusing the courts for political favor of US Chamber et al; and to
silence and retaliate against a whistleblower of the Chamber’s influence of a deception
US health policy; of which the University of California has played an intricate role; and
to retaliate for exposing Justice McConnell’s role in aiding and abetting with reckless
disregard for public health and safety.”
Response from the CJP on December 14, 2010:
Click to access dba7153f3b.pdf
“At its December meeting the Commission on Judicial Performance voted not to take further action with respect to your complaint dated October 25, 2010….Even a judicial decision or administrative act later determined to be incorrect is not by itself a violation of Code of Judicial Ethics and is not misconduct. Commission member Honorable Judith D. McConnell was recused from this matter….Yours very truly, Karen Clay, Staff Counsel”
So I reported and evidenced to the CJP that I have been the victim of crime of perjury used in strategic litigation that was rewarded by the committee’s chair, McConnell and covered up by the JC Chair, Huffman – and that George was also evidenced of this. I evidenced for the CJP how the judicial branch of the US Chamber rewarding a plaintiff’s criminal perjury while strategically litigating is aiding in the continuance of billions in insurer fraud.
They deemed this not to be judicial ethics violations. No questions asked of McConnell, Huffman et. al. of why they did it. No action taken by the Chair of the CJP or Chair of Exe Comm. of the JC to correct the devastation to the CA and US public caused by their actions of rewarding the use of criminal perjury in a strategic litigation adverse to the public’s best interest. No apologies received for their victimizing a Ca citizen by willfully aiding with criminal activity in a malicious litigation, financially ruining my family for daring to speak the truth in California.
Quite the contrary. Kelman is now the stealth agent of these justices and the CJP. He is seeking an injunctive relief that I be gagged from writing of the fraud of the US Chamber et. al., over the mold issue, what these justices did to aid it to continue, and how the CPJ deemed rewarding criminal perjury while strategically litigating is not a judicial ethics violation.
In summary, I strongly support AB 1208. For the sake of democracy, this little cabal of politicians disguised as justices need to have the control of our judicial system ripped from their hands. They need to be stripped of their robes for what they have done to use their positions of unbridled influence and power to abuse our courts while practicing politics, not law. “Could it happen here?” is the question of this thread. Yes. It could and it is.
JusticeCalifornia
April 26, 2011
In most of the really bad family law cases I know about throughout the state, OF COURSE complaints have been made to the CJP. But that loophole permitting the CJP to put a case on indefinite hold while a case is pending before the judge a litigant has complained about is gigantic. Excuse me, family and juvenile law cases can be actively pending for years before the same judge– particularly cases involving young children and abuse. I certainly never knew about that gaping loophole until McConnell told the Judicial Council at a Judicial Council meeting.
Or how about the loophole of not acting while a case is on appeal or folding up the CJP tent after an issue (say a 170.1) is denied via summary writ? The CJP effectively (or should I say ineffectively) waits to see what the appellate court is going to do first and will not second guess the appellate decision. So the CJP isn’t really the one investigating or deciding what to do about the complaint.
Or how about the GAPING loophole for assigned judges? To wit:
Shasta county has been run for years by Judicial Council/CJ darlings Melissa Fowler Bradley, and Judge Stephen White.
As it happens, Shasta County has an 80-something year old family law judge who is an assigned judge. Assigned judges are generally supposed to be assigned for a matter of days or months. This one has been assigned for years– and is the presiding judge!
Shasta county will NOT provide court reporters in family law cases, even if you ask for one in advance– except perhaps for trials.
So there is no record of the proceedings. . . . . .
And most litigants are pro pers who cannot afford lawyers or court reporters. . . . .
And this is a very busy courtroom.
To make matters worse, rumor has it certain of the recommending mediators don’t come anywhere near to meeting state-mandated standards. . .
And the family law self-help center reportedly is often not very helpful. . .or available. In fact, certain litigants have reportedly been turned away, or given incorrect advice.
Getting back to that 80-plus year old “assigned judge” who is far older than the retirement age range reported by the National Center for State Courts. One of the most active family court reform groups in CA has loudly reported improper /draconian actions of this assigned judge — who may be past his prime but is getting an estimated $400,000 a year with his retirement pay and benefits, and his FULL TIME LONG TERM employment as an assigned judge. On the taxpayer dime.
Here is what Shasta County Judge Stephen Baker, as of December, 2010, was advising litigants who complain about this judge:
“An assigned judge is not a regular full time judge of our Court, but rather, a retired judge assigned to our Court by the Administrative Office of the Courts to assist in our heavy caseload. As such, insofar as complaints are concerned, California Rule of Court section 10:603(c)(4)(E) provides that the Presiding Judge shall:
“For each assigned retired judge:
(iii) Direct complaints against the assigned judge to the Chief Justice, by forwarding them to the attention of the Administrative Director of the Courts, and provide requested information in writing to the Administrative Director of the Courts in a timely manner; and
(iv) Assist the Administrative Director in the process of investigating, evaluating, and making recommendation to the Chief Justice regarding complaints against retired judges who serve on assignment”.
If the only investigation and oversight of assigned judges takes place by the AOC– well, as we all know, good luck with that.
Well guess what? I reviewed the file of a Shasta court reform advocate, who complained to both Baker and the AOC.
Let’s just say I saw some very serious(amazingly serious) irregularities.
Questions of the day:
Why is this judge on full-time, long term assignment?
How many complaints have been made against this judge?
Have these complaints been investigated, and if so, how, by whom, and with what result?
This 80-plus year old assigned judge is obviously the eye of the storm for the family court reform movement in Shasta County. For some interesting reading, check out today’s Blind Bulldog blog. Just google “Blind Bulldog”.
So why the hell is this judge still there, years later? It isn’t like he was either appointed by the Governor, or elected by the people he is reportedly brutalizing. And according to Baker, litigants cannot even take their concerns to the Commission on Judicial Performance.
Hey AOC!!!! You better figure out how to clean up this mess, but quick. The CJ and YOU are apparently responsible for making the ADMINISTRATIVE decision to keep this guy on the assigned judges list, and in Shasta County family court making decisions about children and parents, notwithstanding multiple complaints and red flags.
JusticeCalifornia
April 26, 2011
Correction: Re the above mentioned Shasta files I reviewed: I only had time to review files 10-13, and part of 9. But Karen Richardson, who was very helpful in facilitating the file review, knows precisely the concerns about what went down– especially the interesting practice of the lawyer for the represented parent apparently secretly (without a cover letter, or notice to the unrepresented parent) submitting orders to this 80-plus year old assigned judge, who apparently secretly (without notice to the pro per parent) signed them. The order in question was issued right after a public Shasta County family court reform event regarding the state’s family court crisis, and subsequent direct public criticism of the 80-plus year old permanently assigned judge. This judge apparently signed an AMENDED order extending for a year the pro per party’s probation related to 2006 family court contempt issues — WITH NO MOTION, NO NOTICE TO THE PRO PER, NO PROOF OF SERVICE BY THE LAWYER OR THE COURT LETTING THE PRO PER KNOW THIS “AMENDED” ORDER EXISTED. Had we not looked at her file, she would never have known– until it was too late. The effect of this order is that, WITHOUT NOTICE, THIS ASSIGNED JUDGE PUT IN PLACE A MECHANISM THAT COULD BE USED TO JAIL THE PRO PER COURT CRITIC WITHOUT ANY WARNING.
Talk about apparent down and dirty, very nasty whistleblower retaliation. . . . .I trust Karen Richardson has alerted Melissa Bradley and Shasta’s presiding judge about this.
Reminds me of that down and dirty Santa Clara case involving (former family court lawyer now Santa Clara Judge) Vanessa Zecher, Judge Patrick Tondreau, former Santa Clara CEO Kiri Torre, and Justice Donald King — where some would say similar highly irregular retaliatory actions against a whistleblower took place and are suddenly again in play. . . .good thing what went down in that case was documented from here to eternity. . . .
There really should be a state audit of how whistleblowers/court reform advocates (judges, court employees, litigants, lawyers, advocates, law enforcement, etc.) are treated in the “largest judiciary in the Western world”– at all levels.
JusticeCalifornia
April 26, 2011
oops, above I said “Karen Richardson”, when I meant “Linda Richardson”.
JusticeCalifornia
May 16, 2011
Someone just sent me this AMAZING video:
Watch part one, and then click on part two.
It is about how federal money is helping corrupt the courts by creating incentives to racketeer — taking children and elders from families to feed a thriving industry. Threats by court appointees. Tampering with evidence. Retaliation. Wow.
Judicial Council Watcher
May 16, 2011
Part two of this interesting piece ends with our site slogan:
“The germ of destruction of our nation is in the power of the judiciary, an irresponsible body — working like gravity by night and by day, gaining a little today and a little tomorrow, and advancing its noiseless step like a thief over the field of jurisdication, until all shall render powerless the checks of one branch over the other and will become as venal and oppressive as the government from which we separated.”
–Thomas Jefferson (1821)
Judicial Council Watcher
June 12, 2011
JusticeCalifornia
June 12, 2011
Thank you JCW for posting this. Interesting that so many people were so willing to look the other way in the face of obvious injustice and harm TO CHILDREN, and that the State courts were perfectly willing to destroy records about this.
Kids for cash in various forms is already happening here in CA, coverups are taking place, and documents are being destroyed (with RG, Minimimi and AOC encouragement and approval).
RG, minimimi, the AOC, and so many others have blood on their hands. . . .and while many custody mistakes are just that– mistakes– the sick thing is that certain identifiable individuals — mediators, minor’s counsel, court appointees and judges– clearly get off on making recommendations/orders that are patently harmful to children. And the sicker thing is that top leadership is protecting these people.
Delilah
June 25, 2011
http://4closurefraud.org/2011/06/21/fraudclosure-sunny-sheu-murdered-judicial-corruption-activist-dead-weeks-after-posting-video-about-his-fears/
JusticeCalifornia
June 25, 2011
Thank you Delilah.
I hear interesting and threatening law enforcement procedures are taking place in Shasta County, too.
And that evidence about the questioning (involving Judge Halpin) that was involved disappeared,or “wasn’t audiotaped”. Really?
I also hear that in response to requests for Judge Halpin’s economic disclosure statements, Shasta County is saying assigned judges don’t have to keep their economic disclosure statements on file with the court. So people asking for the last 18 years of statements he may or may not have filed while he has been a double-dipping “assigned judge” are not getting them.
Molly Bigelow, Melissa Fowler-Bradley, what say you? Is what I have heard true? And is the court playing hide the ball about Halpin’s economic disclosures?
Perhaps Brad Campbell is on leave right now, trying to match up AOC payment records with Halpin’s disclosures, if they exist?
And the reason it will take SIX MONTHS to get assigned judge information is because that is how long it will take the AOC to DESTROY INFORMATION, or alter it, as has happened with the Marin Court?
Oh the tangled webs the third branch is weaving, for court employees and law enforcement who participate in, or look the other way regarding, Govt. Code 6200, Penal Code 96.5 and 182, RICO, and other interesting legal provisions.
I do believe that pretty soon those within the branch are going to understand that it is every man and woman for him or herself, because top leadership is going to be looking for “fall guys”.
SF Whistle
June 25, 2011
SF Superior Court is confronting the reality of having to lay-off over 200 employees–
Do you think this might be an opportunity to get rid of the staff that has been forced to lie for Judges? The staff that has been instructed to hold orders over holiday weekends—The staff that has been instructed to support judicial misconduct that they have witnessed in the Departments they work in each day—knowing full-well that the Judge they observe each day is pulling crap on litigants—? There are dozens of staff members (clerks, reporters, bailiffs that have been forced to look away as they have witnessed judicial retaliation and corruption in the very courts that they once went to work in expecting wrongs-to-be-made-right?
It will be interesting to observe as the court prepares termination notices—-Let’s see if those that “know where the bodies are buried”—get buried themselves—let’s see if people start talking about the horror stories they have been forced to participate in—
Interesting times ahead for corrupt courts—
I suggest that many Judges should grab that pension while the getting is good and beat a trail out of the State—You are NOT respected—you are quickly becoming known for your evil acts—known for refusing to follow the law–
JusticeCalifornia
June 25, 2011
And what are these recusals about and why?
Click to access Microsoft-Word-Fee-Fighter-LLC-Update-1-May-3-2011.pdf
JusticeCalifornia
June 25, 2011
No personal knowledge, no comment, just websurfing and assuming the branch can explain. . . .
Blind Bulldog
June 25, 2011
You know we have the paperwork to prove the lack of qualification in our Shasta County “Family Court Services,” the newest hire bosts a degree in, and only in “Nutrition”.
JusticeCalifornia
June 25, 2011
Well, Blind Bulldog, I sure do hope Stephen and Molly and Melissa and Shasta Family Court Services and the Shasta Family Law Facilitator and their top leadership protectors are paying attention to the attention they are getting, and clean up the Shasta courts. But quick.
And I still do want to know what that lit-up-like-a-Christmas tree room in the courthouse, that supposedly houses “more power than Redding will ever need” is all about.