Celebration – ACJ passes the three year mark

Posted on September 12, 2012


September 12, 2012

Dear Members:

This week marks the three year anniversary of the Alliance of California Judges.  We thank all of our members for standing with us and helping us continue to grow. We have added members every month since our inception and we look forward to working with you in the coming years to continue the reforms we have helped to institute. To those of you who were present at our formative meeting in San Diego in 2009, we offer you our special thanks for your help in getting this ball rolling.

Meanwhile, we note the confusion engendered by the Council and AOC of late.  On the one hand, the Council publicly preaches openness, transparency, cooperation and civility, and Council members laud one another at every meeting for their new improved approach. On the other hand, while the AOC granted an interview with a reporter to discuss the reimbursement to be paid to certain CJA conference-goers, a judge’s request for that same information was shunted to Justice Harry Hull, who requires that all correspondence be by U.S. mail. And, of course, this procedure is in place only for requests originating with the ACJ and its affiliated judges.

What if the presiding judges of the state, fed up with daily AOC demands/requests for information from the trial courts–including, for example, AOC surveys relating to the private sex lives of judges–decided to treat each inquiry as an information request under Rule 10.500? Does simple communication really have to be that difficult?

Our questions over the years have unveiled some very disturbing facts about the operations of the AOC and the failure of the Judicial Council to restrain its growth. Rest assured that, whatever roadblocks may be set up to deter us, we will continue to ask the tough questions to get important information for our members and the public.

Thank you for your continued support.

Directors, Alliance of California Judges


From JCW and our sponsors:

A congratulatory note from those of us at or involved with Judicial Council Watcher – plus a heartfelt thank you goes out to all 450+ members of the Alliance of California Judges.  You saw the issues and your professional association encouraged hundreds of other judges to attempt to right a badly listing ship. While the underlying foundation of this slow motion train wreck has yet to be addressed, you have asked tough questions and come up with disturbing facts that has served as the genesis for change.

And on that note we have Mr. Hulls purported reply posted in MetNews. Frankly, it is a chickenshit reply tantamount to answering a different question than the one asked in an effort to avoid the two points the ACJ sought clarification on.

MetNews “No inappropriate conduct by AOC lobbyist” 

Okay, so you can’t have it both ways Mr. Hull. Either Mr. Child was lobbying all on his own which would be inappropriate conduct or our esteemed chief justice is lying her ass off and you just threw her under the bus.

Oh. Wait. There is the ever useful “there is no one truth, only versions of it”.  I almost forgot….