Res Ipsa Loquitor

Posted on June 7, 2012


No Res Ipsa Loquitor this isn’t about you. This is about our friend Phil Carrizosa who works for The Ministry of Truth at the AOC. Mr. Carrizosa probably doesn’t know that about a quarter of the whole judicial branch is reading JCW on a regular basis. Judicial Branch employees everywhere know what JCW is but haven’t heard of AOC e-news so that should tell you something but I digress…

Mr. Carrizosa recently visited us here at JCW and suggested that we casted an aspersion about him when we suggested he employs tweedle-dee and tweedle-dum from the movie “Good Morning Vietnam” to do his censoring with this post:

Regarding the article in the San Francisco Chronicle, the simple truth is that I was unaware of the article until Monday when a colleague brought it to my attention. Neither Google Alerts nor Google searches picked up this article. If I had seen it, I would have certainly selected it for use in E-News and circulated it among my colleagues for their opinion. E-News is reviewed by a half-dozen people before it is distributed. The decision about what to include in E-News is NOT mine alone. In the future, I would appreciate an opportunity to be heard before aspersions are cast about me.

Truth be told, we were incorrect. He doesn’t employ tweedle-dee/ tweedle-dum censors, he is a tweedle-dee / tweedle-dum censor and admits he drives the bus. Damn. People actually do read JCW. 

From: “Carrizosa, Philip” <>
Date: May 30, 2012 2:09:44 PM PDT
To: “Gilliard, Maryanne” <>
Subject: Courthouse News and E-News

Dear Judge Gilliard:

Our director, Jody Patel, has asked that I write you to tell you my thoughts about not including Courthouse News in our E-News clipping service.

First of all, I would like to apologize if I seemed dismissive of your email. I was sincere in thanking you for your email and your thoughts.

About E-News: I make decisions every day about the contents of E-News and I base those decisions on my 30  years of experience as a journalist. We do not include blogs in E-News because in my experience many blogs have shoddy  news standards. Not all of them, for sure—I think some of them are actually better than some news outlets. However, I do not want to be in the position of judging the quality of blogs and some time ago we made a decision to leave them out of E-News altogether unless it was breaking news (not opinion) that would inevitably be reported in the print edition of a news organization.

Courthouse News, in my opinion, is a blog or blog-like, especially in its reporting. I realize that it views itself as an online news organization. However, in my opinion, it is more like a blog than a news publication.

Again, thank you for your email and your thoughts.  I know that reasonable minds may disagree on this issue, but I hope that you appreciate that it is not an arbitrary decision on my part, rather a considered decision based on my evaluation of how best to disseminate to our readers the best of the news reports on the courts.

Philip R. Carrizosa
Executive Office – Communications
Judicial Council – Administrative Office of the Courts
San Francisco CA 94102-3688
415/865-xxxx; Cell 415/407-xxxx; After 4 p.m. and weekends: 415/550-xxxx
“Serving the courts for the benefit of all Californians”


From: Gilliard, Maryanne
Sent: Monday, June 04, 2012 10:47 AM
To: ‘Carrizosa, Philip’
Cc: ‘Cantil, Tani’; ‘Patel, Jody’
Subject: Courthouse News

Dear Mr. Carrizosa,

I am in receipt of your email dated May 30th wherein you state that “Courthouse News, in my opinion, is a blog or blog-like, especially in its reporting”.

I am at a loss to understand, other than you disagree with the content, why you conclude that the Courthouse News is a blog. This is a blog: .On the other hand, the Courthouse News is a fully staffed national news service. In fact, the Chief Justice has done several interviews with Courthouse News reporter Maria Dinzeo in the last year and on one occasion, I am told, she engaged in a one on one interview. I am also informed that the Chief Justice has indicated to Ms. Dinzeo, that she believes her reporting has been fair and that she appreciates the in depth coverage that the Courthouse News does on stories concerning our branch.

It is concerning to me that there appears to be content based discrimination in what is and is not included in the E-News. Your decision to black list the Courthouse News is but one example of this content discriminatory practice. I remind you that I penned an opinion piece for the Daily Journal entitled: “Who Really Runs the Judicial Branch”. It appeared in the Daily Journal on March 15, 2011. This piece was not included in the E-News, but a piece by Justice Richard Huffman extolling branch governance was. Mind you, both of these pieces were available for inclusion in the E-News as the Daily Journal still permitted their use by non-subscribers.

I am also concerned that an AOC staff member appears to be empowered to make this type of decision without proper oversight. I believe that many judges view the decision to censor what news will be provided via the E-News as just another example of a bureaucracy desperate to control the message. Perhaps I am wrong and your supervisors and the Judicial Council have also agreed with the Courthouse News blackout, but I take you at your word when you say: “I make decisions every day about the content of E-News”…..

In any event, I would ask that you reconsider your policy and allow the judges of this state the opportunity to read the Courthouse News. Judges are entrusted to make decisions every day….I believe they can be trusted  to make a decision to either read or not read the Courthouse News when included in the daily E-News email.


It’s obvious to JCW that Judge Gilliard does not have a copy of the “Delilah English Dictionary” for everything AOC. ” It’s a dictionary that’s currently only about a paragraph long.

Cutting staff equals hiring! Black equals white! Night equals day.! Up equals down! Less equals more! Wrong equals right! Illegal equals lawful! Wastefulness equals prudent financial planning! Mismanagement equals good stewardship! Obfuscation equals transparency!. Unaccountability equals responsibility. Change equals status quo! Feel free to add your own mind-benders.

Now of course our friends over at Courthouse News aren’t going to publish a newsworthy story like this about Courthouse News not because it isn’t newsworthy but because as a news organization rule number one is you never want to be the subject of the news.

No, those rules don’t apply to the AOC’s Faux News channel, AOC publications or AOC e-news as propaganda is permissible self-promotion. 

If there’s any doubt about that, re-read the last line of Mr. Carrizosa’s email to Judge Gilliard

I know that reasonable minds may disagree on this issue, but I hope that you appreciate that it is not an arbitrary decision on my part, rather a considered decision based on my evaluation of how best to disseminate to our readers the best of the news reports on the courts.


 Res Ipsa Loquitor