In another thread, Res Ipsa notes that what we’re witnessing is akin to the last vestiges of a failed ancient regime with those in power routinely ignoring calls for radical change. We don’t disagree. Res then asks this question which is the subject of this thread – What’s next and where do we go from here? To use exact language,
Where do we go from here? Is it time to move beyond the conventional rally and demonstration?
Is it time to name names, identify those who have been enriched through kickbacks and their own greed, and call them out at every opportunity?
I suppose that one could gather our opinion on these matters from reading the 425+ pages of this blog. We are not the leaders. You are the leaders. This project was launched because most of major media does not have the dedicated resources and much of the public – and judges themselves – did not have an interest to tear this can of worms apart with what they themselves could not say. Someone needed to manage the ministry of truth and hold them in check just long enough for others to smell the morning coffee and wake up on the right side of the bed. Before this project was launched – and let’s be clear that this is a project with a defined set of goals – there were many before us that had always known that the emperor had no clothes, yet they had not previously organized, knowing that as individual voices, they would be marginalized and retaliated against.
These fears and this reality still exists for many, yet we are a government of the people, by the people and for the people and these things must change.
So as we promised The OBT some time ago and as we were reminded by Res’s comment,
Where do we go from here?
Judicial Council Watcher 
Nathaniel Woodhull
August 10, 2012
Where do we go from here?
My concern is that it may be no where good. The current “management” of the Judicial Branch could not be screwing things up worse if they tried. In some respects, it’s like watching a Three Stooges short. The decision to flippantly keep the E&P meeting closed was about the last straw.
One of two things continues to occur: (1) The Chief and her minions are completely incompetent manager; or, (2) They are so sure of themselves that they feel they are not accountable to anyone. After a moment’s reflection, I believe the answer to the last posit is both (1) and (2) are correct.
Followers of the JCW, continue on with the civil path of expressing your discontent to all those who will listen; especially to members of the Legislature and their staff members. Come up with constructive solutions to the problems that we are facing. The first start would be to democratize the Judicial Council.
Keep fighting the fight!
Res Ipsa Loquitor
August 10, 2012
Well, JCW, since I asked the question, may I offer one small suggestion.
Go local!
The ACJ, JCW, and others are amazing in their efforts to shine the disinfectant light on the proceedings at 455 Golden Gate, but there is something individual judges can do, and that is to go local and personalize what is going on in the courts.
Please consider initiating opportunities to speak at your local bar associations about the current crisis, but do not neglect opportunities to speak to the paraprofessional associations in your area as well, such as the local Association of Legal Professionals or Legal Secretaries Association, paralegals. court reporters, and local court interpreter associations.
Personalize. Outline what has happened and then relate this the direct effects on local legal professionals and their clients such as closed branch courts, limited hours, furlough days, the lack of court reporters, layoffs of valued court workers, etc., etc. You know your local story better than any of us in San Francisco or Sacramento do.
Where am I going with this? To counter the Ministry of Truth, local judges have a unique power and the credibility to spread the word in their communities of what has happened, how local courts are paying the price for the mismanagement at the AOC, and encourage these locals to demand change however is best in each given situation. If 400 judges cannot move the AOC to change, then what is needed is a groundswell of informed, involved, committed voices up and down the state to demand reform, and to use the power of their voices and their votes to demand change.
I understand the inherent risk each judge faces. I understand why many members of the ACJ chose not to disclose their identity. Your efforts may likely be refuted by some local esteemed member of the JC. But you have a story to tell that cannot be refuted. Billions wasted, allegations of kickbacks, whistleblowers fired, $100,000 embezzled from the AOC HR and no complaint filed, Enron-like financial maneuvers, and a AOC transactional lawyer living in Geneva , and that is just the start.
There is much more that can be done, and this suggestion is but a small mosaic in the total effort to save the California Judicial Branch for the people of the State of California.
Wendy Darling
August 10, 2012
General Woodhull, Rep Ipsa Loquitor, and others: From personal, eyewitness, heard it straight from the horse’s mouth, experience, the one and only thing the Office of the Chief Justice, the Judicial Council, and the AOC is genuinely afraid of, and also the one thing they can’t control, is — public exposure. Especially at the local level.
Which is exactly why they hold a sword over the head of any trial court that dares to speak up. And so far, the retaliation tactic has worked really well for them. (Personally, I’ve lost count of the number of times I have heard Court Executive Officers and trial court judges state how they are afraid to speak up about what is wrong with branch administration because of what the AOC will turn around and do to their court, with the blessing of the Office of the Chief Justice and the Judicial Council.)
My mother always told me that people deserve what they accept. When the trial court judges stand up en masse and refuse to accept the behavior from 455 Golden Gate Avenue, only then will it change. Same thing for the State Legislature. Failing to do so means they have all accepted this behavior.
Until and unless the judges of this State, and the State Legislature, stand up, speak up, and refuse to accept current Judicial Branch “leadership” and administration, then the judges of this State and the State Legislature have no reasonable right to complain about what they, themselves, have accepted. And they will deserve what they have accepted.
Long live the ACJ.
Res Ipsa Loquitor
August 10, 2012
Ah, yes.. I grew quite weary of hearing some very senior attorneys in the OGC contemptuously disparage the local bar and judges as “the local yokels.” Which, all things considered, was chutzpah at its finest.
Wendy Darling
August 10, 2012
Well, Res Ipsa Loquitor, on a sliding scale of offensive terms used by very senior attorneys in the OGC, and others in AOC administration, “the local yokels” is less offensive than the more frequently used expletive form of “poo poo head” in referring to judges and court administrators.
It’s a perverse work environment when you work for the California Judicial Branch, in the Administrative Office of the Courts, and you think you are there to serve the public good, and the so-called “leadership” regularly refers to the very people you are there to serve with various derogatory forms of profanity.
Chutzpah at its finest, indeed.
Long live the ACJ.
unionman575
August 12, 2012
Good idea Res!
😉
Curious
August 10, 2012
Spot on, General Woodhull. They are both. I am told by a unimpeachable source that Miller has yet to even respond to the request to open the meeting beyond “I’ll discuss it with the committee.” Even Ron George and J. Huffman used to promptly issue denials to requests along the same lines, rather than just ducking out on the issue, as J. Miller appears to have done.
If the Council exercised little power and occupied a mere ceremonial function, the current approach of appointing acolytes would be just fine. If they are to actually make decisions affecting the judiciary, as they do, democratization is the only answer. I believe the judges of this state would simply not elect the like of Judges Baker, Friedman, Yew and others similar aligned. Nor would we see Ms. Krinsky and other special-interest types. We would have judges with proven abilities who are respected across the state, answerable to those who elected them to their spots. What we have now is just a bad joke with little relationship to democracy. They continue, year after year, to giggle their way through meetings, cracking inside jokes and at the conclusion of 5 hour meeting where no one, including the Council members, know what they decided, proceed to pat themselves on the back for proving once again their wisdom and debating skills.
Watch the 8/30-31 Council meeting where this will be on full display, where with much knitting of brows and pretend debate, “friendly amendments”, parliamentary maneuvering, and just general hoohah they will do very little. There is not a chance in the world they will simply vote to implement, without exception, the recommendations of the SEC committee, though this is exactly what the state’s judges demand and the reasonable approach. This is too correct and too simple a course of action. It will have to be mucked up beyond all recognition. The meeting will be another exhibit (are we up to People’s #100 by now, madame clerk?) in the trial that ended for most of the branch years ago at which point proof beyond a reasonable doubt was reached that our leaders have no right to use that term. Yet they grinningly persist, armored by arrogance as well as an abysmal ignorance, of what is happening around them.
Dan Dydzak
August 10, 2012
DYDZAK V. DUNN, OCSC Case No. 30-2012-00558031
FYI, the Orange County Sup. Ct Clerk’s Office has failed to date to post on the Register of Actions my pleadings adding in as Doe Defendants GREGORY MUNOZ, FRANCES MUNOZ, DOUGLAS P. MILLER and THOMAS J. BORRIS. I have CONFORMED FILED COPIES of said pleadings. As stated earlier, a senior employee of said Clerk’s Office yesterday wilfully prevented me from filing an important prepared pleading and illegally gave me legal advice and would not perform her ministerial duties. Her name is LINA DE LA CRUZ. She sarcastically stated to me when she refused to let me file the pleading, “Are you going to sue me, too?” She thereby committed obstruction of justice. Mr. Carlson has not called me back to discuss her actions of obstruction of justice.
Judge BORRIS was a former law partner of GREGORY MUNOZ and friend of THOMAS V. GIRARDI. It is clear that there were improper EX PARTE COMMUNICATIONS to FIX my
case and steer it to MUNOZ. This is actionable, tortious conduct. The ONGOING FAILURE by the Clerk’s Office to not put the aforesaid pleadings on the docket for public view is tantamount to spoilation of evidence and pleadings and obstruction of justice/wilfull interference with processes of the court.
I am awaiting to see if the Orange County Sup. Clerk’s Office will put up the pleadings on the docket and if GREGORY MUNOZ, now a party who was SERVED with process, and whose sister, FRANCES MUNOZ, will finally disqualify himself. The applicable statute does not allow a judge who is a party or who has a close relative who is a party to sit on a case. Disqualification is mandatory.
The Alliance Judges all know that a judge who is a party to litigation cannot sit on a case. Judge GREGORY MUNOZ does not follow the ethical rules, and he previously unethically ruled on his own disqualification.
Judge MUNOZ is clearly guided by the RONALD M. GEORGE crowd rather than being a fair and impartial judge.
courtflea
August 10, 2012
I agree with Wendy and it has been mentioned here time and again is that the judges must stand up and throw off the cloak of AOC domination. I’ll say it once again, the judges need to take legal action against the CJ, the JC and the AOC. It could be easily done in the form of the AOC not following the rules of court regarding the release of information. If the judges chose to take such a course, I am sure we could raise some money here for the cause (or would OGC assist? They are after all the in house council for the branch. interesting thought). This move would not only generate tons of publicity for the cause of democratization, it is certian the judges would prevail and transparency would be forced upon the death star.
If the judges do not act together, the legislature will be doing things to the branch we ultimately be sorry for. The branch needs to bring positive change and sunshine upon itself, not have it shoved down its throat. As N Woodhull says “no where good”. The branch needs to remain a seperate and distinct branch of government, but not one that abuses that distinction to operate in the shadows. All government policy making at its highest levels must be in a public forum.
Secondly, I do believe the book idea is worth some merit to promote change. Or perhaps a series of phamphlets a la Thomas Paine to pass out at the local level This could be part of Res’ ideas. Hand out to unions, (teachers of government courses come to mind), and to the bar, the legislature, etc., to provide them with the knowledge of what is really occuring in the darkness at the death star. Even a compulation of what is discussed here could make fasinating reading. Not to mention shocking to those who still nievely believe that the judicial branch = access and fairness and should be held to a higher standard. So if as Wendy says the only thing the CJ/AOC and the JC fear is exposure. This could go a long way in gettin er done.
Robert Turner
August 10, 2012
I think everyone on this blog has done a great job of pointing out the problems with the JC and the AOC. The new Chief can still move away from the centralized path that Ron George wanted. She is a very bright and savy person and I can understand how she would likely prefer to keep the status quo where there is a near dictatorial voice from Chief/Director on policy for the branch through a pupet Judicial Council. However, that is not a very just process for a branch that mission is to provide justice. Membership of the JC has to be opened up to a democratic process where judges from the three levels select their members so policies and priorities debated vigorously. CCMS, the SEC report, and all of the layoffs at the trial courts prove that old style, even if you like centralized administration, was simply not effective for the branch. I think the Legislature and the Governor are the best hopes now for showing the new Chief how to get the branch back on a healthy path. The power of the purse is the only weapon that will check the Chief if she does not change and start respecting the disenting views within the CA bench, by CA court staff, and by outside groups.
As a judicial administration graduate from USC I am saddened to see that the field of court administration has lost so much respect that the new director is a former judge. Is there not one graduate from a school of public administration worthy of the job? The motto of USC is “fight on” and that has become my personal view for life as well as my advice to all of you here on this page. It is all the easier to do when you know you are fighting for a positive change.
Curious
August 10, 2012
If you are correct that the Chief is bright and savvy (and you may very well be right) then the only explanation for her behavior is that she has allowed her dislike for the ACJ to cloud her judgment. Much like an attorney becomes embroiled in a case due to dislike for opposing counsel, and allowing ego to take over while overlooking the best interests of a client. She has unfortunately taken some very bad advice, IMHO, and vowed to fight to the end. “Her hill”, remember? She has demonstrated little of the good humor, humility, wisdom, and straight-up honesty we need in a Chief Justice. Instead, she has allowed herself to side with an indefensible bureaucracy. I believe stubbornness is no substitute for clear thinking, pragmatism.
We see this type of behavior in court daily, for example where a defendant’s mother refuses to see the evidence for what it is and insists, in the face of overwhelming proof, that her darlin’ baby is blameless. You say the Chief Justice has a chance to redeem herself. I say that time may have already run. Whatever one’s position on that, It is clear that if she fails to throw her position firmly behind the SEC committee, hell or high water, she has zero chance to succeed in her position. Zero. She must get out of the shadow of Ron George, Beth Jay, and the AOC and stand up. That’s what leaders do. They don’t make excuses.
Dan Dydzak
August 10, 2012
Re my last post here today in Dydzak v. Dunn et al., the OCSC Clerk’s Office put up my Doe Amendments re: Munoz, Frances Munoz, Presiding Judge Borris and Cof A Judge Miller ONLY AFTER I contacted Clerk Carlson’s Office directly and said I was bringing the matter to attention of Judicial Council Watcher and making a post thereto. This means people do read these comments. Thanks.
With regard to CJ Tani, she has a lot of explaining to do. My sources advice there is RICO activity afoot and her investments are going abroad. And if she should have distanced herself from the R. George crowd a long time ago. And for someone on a C of A salary, she sure was able to afford a new condo really quickly upon her descent to the CA Supreme Court. I wonder who financed the condo and who paid for the down payment. Does she put her restaurant meals, like Vickrey and Overholt, on the government nickle in the best SF restaurants?
unionman575
August 10, 2012
Let it all fly now!
Delilah
August 10, 2012
These people know exactly what they are doing. IMO they are not dumb and tone-deaf; they are extremely wily, tight-knit and focused in their ever-successful efforts to maintain the status quo, and even ballsy enough to double-down and raise the stakes because they know they act with impunity and there are no real consequences for their actions. Just like Wall Street. They are too powerful for anyone to take them on, being that they’re the “third branch” of govt and they are in the same club as the Gov and Legislators. All these fellow “club members” never fully turn on each other. They do a little lip service and window dressing here and there to look and sound good, but they will never prosecute or jail one of their own. There are too many skeletons in all of their closets, and members of the club know where all the other members’ bodies are buried. “You out me? I can out you.”
And so it all continues until somebody from the inner inner-circle has a fit of conscience and actually breaks ranks and spills the beans. And even then, that person can be marginalized and ruined and dismissed as an unreliable and incompetent malcontent, if they’re lucky that’s all that happens to them. Isn’t that what’s happened with every whistle-blower so far? I don’t mean the fit of conscience or that they were part of the inner circle. All fellow JCW’ers know what I mean.
Did you hear about recent AOC raises yet again? Maybe that’s already been addressed here. Due to life circumstances, I am very behind on keeping up with my daily fix of every single post here.
JCW, you have hushmail, even though it may be old news by now.
JusticeCalifornia
August 10, 2012
Love your post, Delilah.
“Top” leadership has been playing the oldest game in the mob rule book. You kiss our asses, and maybe we will cover yours. We will do what we want to do, when we want to do it, how we want to do it, and if you don’t like it, go tell anyone you want to, and by all means, go squeal – appeal. LOL, because just check out your burden of proof, appellate presumptions, our massive discretion, and who has authority over us (nobody!!!!). By the way, we are going to assign (or reassign as the case may be) your judicial/appellate panel, and on top of that we are going to sidestep the main issues and give you a bulletproof negative record and kick your ass on fees. ”
And then there came a revolution.
EVERYBODY OUT THERE, MAKE A RECORD OF ALL THAT IS GOING DOWN. The future of the branch may depend upon it. Do it carefully, though.
Many say we are dealing with the black-cloaked mob.
Say Tani, when you were working the casinos, girl, did you ever run across the mob? Just wondering. I hear that is where they hang.
JusticeCalifornia
August 10, 2012
ummmmm……RICO.
unionman575
August 10, 2012
Wendy Darling
August 10, 2012
Hey, Justice California, don’t forget that they also get to hand pick the judge.
Long live the ACJ.
JusticeCalifornia
August 11, 2012
http://www.sacbee.com/2012/08/11/4715790/ex-parks-official-had-criminal.html
Gosh, so much of the above story is so familiar. What has gone down in the branch makes the parks scandal look like a walk in the park.
Pun intended.
500 million on CCMS– the most expensive courthouses in the country–unlicensed contractors–grotesque coverups of corruption–the promotion of the patently unqualified–
if it looks like a duck and quacks like a duck. . . .really—-the FBI and DOJ should be declaring open season. The legislature and attorney general should be calling for an investigation.
Lando
August 11, 2012
Where do we go from here ? 1. The legislature needs to set up a joint committee to investigate the JC/AOC and CJP given their anti-democratic makeups. As for the JC/AOC the legislature should start with the SEC report and carefully look into why the SEC recommendations have not been enacted. Next they should ask as part of their investigation to have the State Auditor calculate JC/AOC financial abuse. 2. The voices of reform need to propose a constitutional amendment that would democratize the JC , set forth clearly that the AOC is an organization that exists to assist the trial courts and that the AOC’s size be limited . 3. As part of number 2 above , the proposed constitutional amendment should democratize the CJP and limit the terms of CJP members to 3 years. 4. As part of number 2 above, the new democratized JC would elect a chairperson so that role would not automatically fall to the Chief Justice. 5. The voices of reform need to put together a campaign to recall the Chief Justice. Her administration has failed and failed badly.The selection of an “insider ” for AOC Director and her failure to urge adoption of the SEC report are only the most recent examples of her failed leadership. As General Woodhull says we need to fight on and never give up a great chance to bring positive change to our branch. In so doing we can finally end the now discredited vision of Ronald George.
courtflea
August 11, 2012
As part of number one Lando, John Judnick’s head on a pike.
JusticeCalifornia
August 11, 2012
Yes, Judnick has done a lot of harm. No conscience. A true mob soldier.