The Huffman bitch slap

Posted on June 2, 2011


Same as it ever was, same as it ever was,same as it ever was,same as it ever was,same as it ever was,same as it ever was,same as it ever was,same as it ever was,same as it ever was,same as it ever was,same as it ever was……

For years there have been fervent objections to the leadership of the judicial council’s executive & planning committee being the same crusty old geezer that has been there for years, denying both the public and judges a voice in the judicial council’s business. Many believed that in order for any changes to be credible, the crusty old geezer who had been a fixture for the last 14 years had to go.

And so he did. Sadly, he didn’t go far enough. Many believed that with Huffman chairing executive & planning, that not a single idea promoted by any of the individual committees that were chartered to look at AOC’s operations or accountability or reform minded groups concerned about council governance, direction or management would ever see the light of day. So it was a promising move to see “tricky dick” step down from the Judicial Council.

In the ultimate of bitch slaps to the entire judicial branch, the pinnacle of arrogance and betrayal, guess who was put in charge of all of those reform minded committees?

Yep, you guessed it, yesterday Chief Justice Mini-mimi appointed Dick Cheney uh, Dick Huffman to chair the Accountability committee.

So much for that dash of hope you had….

JCW will be working with others towards building momentum to recall chief justice mini-mimi from office in 2012. Please join RTOC for more information.


Added: Further down in this thread Justice California references a letter to Chief Justice Cantil-Sakauye that all but undermines what little credibility she had. This letter in PDF form can be found in this link.10 28 10 Letter to Justice Cantil-Sakauye

Here is the significance of the letter, and the e-mail below. At the October 29, 2010 JC meeting, Cantil-Sakauye announced that she received the referenced documents and distibuted them. She then asked the JC to accept the Judnick/AOC “report” on the document destruction. One JC member asked if the new information raised any new issues not addressed in the original Judnick report. Judnick said no. That was patently untrue. The Judnick report dealt only with two specific provisions– Govt. Code section 6200, and Family Code section 1819. The October 28, 2010 letter (and referenced 9.15.10 criminal complaint, which contains case references and will not be posted here) raised many more detailed concerns and questions.