On July 29, the Judicial Council will vote to “retire” the name of the Administrative Office of the Court and henceforth refer to the AOC as “the Judicial Council staff.” The reasons for the change, and for the haste with which it’s being made, remain muddled. Our branch leaders claim that the change is necessary to eliminate “confusion”—although they never specify who is being confused, why the confusion couldn’t be cleared with a simple explanation rather than by suddenly changing the name of a 50-year-old institution, or why the confusion needs to be dispelled now, as opposed to sometime earlier in the budget process when it might have made a difference.
On one point, however, branch leaders have remained clear. They have all repeatedly claimed that the AOC has never existed as a separate entity.
In a letter to AOC staff dated June 27, the Chief Justice wrote: “Many now view the ‘AOC’ as a separate entity from the council, which it is not—it is, and always has been, the council’s staff arm, and as such implements council policy and provides professional services to the courts on the council’s behalf.” Justice Miller, chair of the powerful Executive & Planning Committee, declared at the last Judicial Council meeting, “We are not and we have not been separate and distinct entities.” A recent press release quotes AOC Administrative Director Jahr has having said, “There’s only one entity, and that’s the Judicial Council of California. Neither in the Constitution, in statute, in rules, or in other formal methods, was a separate entity ever created.” And in their report to the Judicial Council for consideration at this week’s Council meeting, the chairs of the five internal Judicial Council committees wrote: “It is a common misperception that the ‘AOC’ is an entity that is separate from, and in some way independent of, the council, with its own policymaking authority. In reality, the ‘AOC’ is not a separate entity.”
But this is not the position that the AOC and the Council have taken in court.
When AOC employee Paula Negley sued the AOC and the Judicial Council for gender discrimination and wrongful termination, attorneys for the Council argued back in 2010: “Plaintiff was employed by the AOC, not the Judicial Council. (Fuentes, Decl. p. 9.) As all of Plaintiff’s claims are predicated on the existence of an employee/employer relationship, the Judicial Council is entitled to summary judgment.” (Emphasis in original.) And Ernesto Fuentes, Director of the AOC’s Human Resources Division, stated in a declaration under penalty of perjury: “Plaintiff was employed by the AOC, not the Judicial Council. The Judicial Council does not have any employees.”
We link the relevant documents here and here. We obtained them through PACER, the federal judiciary’s functioning case search and e-filing system.
In announcing the proposed name change, Administrative Director Jahr said, “This retirement [of the name] at once changes everything, and changes nothing.” It certainly changes one thing: the position that the AOC and the Council have taken in documents that they filed under oath in litigation with their own employees.
Very Truly Yours,
Directors, Alliance of California Judges
_______________________________________________________
From JCW:
Odd this: These are the representations that the AOC, the Judicial Council and their lawyers made to a federal court. In essence, the AOC, the Judicial Council, their lawyers and AOC employees all lied to a federal judge to win a summary judgement AGAINST their employee and favoring themselves. Subsequent litigation from other entities against the Judicial Council and the AOC would omit the name Judicial Council from the litigation because they clearly and unambiguously established to a federal court that they were in fact two separate entities.
We talked to Paula Negley about these matters yesterday. She pretty much confirmed that they all lied to win their case and to secure approximately $34,000.00 in fees and costs against Paula. If we are to believe what Queen Feckless and the inept leadership are telling us today, Paula Negley is writing a monthly check to an entity that does not, nor has ever existed.
We’re also confident that the sudden name change is being made for the sake of other litigation – to get the AOC off the hook from another legal matter by saying they did not exist and oh, by the way, the statute of limitations has run out so you can’t sue the judicial council.
It’s just another day down the rabbit hole.
sharonkramer
July 29, 2014
The continued greasy sleaziness never ceases to amaze me. As I understand it, another possibility for the sudden change in definition of the AOC is that the BSA only has leagl authority to audit state agencies — not the judicial branch “policy writing body” and its “staff”.
Is it perjury now that the JC has always been responsible for AOC actions; or was it perjury before, that they aren’t? They don’t get it both ways.
Not sure the statutes have run for Paula. I hope she goes back and nails them for what they did while trying to destroy her for telling the truth of their wicked ways and the harm from it.
The statutes certainly have not run out for those who came after Paula and relied upon the now JC self-admittede falicy in federal court that JC officers have never had liability for acts of AOC employees/JC staff.
Wendy Darling
July 30, 2014
Speaking of statutes of limitations . . .
The statute of limitations for making a false statement under oath (perjury) to a federal court or in a federal court proceeding is five years. So there’s still a good year and a half for members of the Judicial Council, the AOC, and Fuentes to be charged with perjury for lying to a federal court.
And under California law, there is no statute of limitations for the embezzlement of public funds.
Again, not that anyone is going to actually do anything about any of that.
Still serving themselves to the detriment of all Californians.
Long live the ACJ.
sharonkramer
July 30, 2014
One could argue that Paula Negley just became aware that they knew they were committing perjury in a legal proceeding with their new admittance that they have always been responsible for acts of AOC — contrary to what they submitted earlier to skirt liability in federal lawsuit. Perjury is a funny thing. Its not the proof that you know they lied that counts. Its when one becomes aware of the proof that they know they did which matters.
Wonder what other lawsuits are out there in which the JC is now proven to know that they falsely claimed they had no liability for acts of the AOC? Sure sounds like a pattern to me — particularly against Whistleblowers!
R. Campomadera
July 29, 2014
The Judicial Council should be careful what it wishes for. Judges have full immunity for their judicial decisions only, not administrative decisions, for which they have only qualified immunity, just like any other bureaucrat.
Seems to me that the members of the Judicial Council had better line up their Errors and Omissions coverage. If the vote goes as expected (doesn’t it always?) they are going to be on the hook for the decisions of “their staff”. Given the staff’s track record (e.g. $500 million totally, absolutely wasted on CCMS, Long Beach, etc.), I sure wouldn’t want to be in that position.
I don’t think they’ve really thought this whole “it changes everything, it changes nothing” change through. There are going to be all kinds of unintended consequences, none of them inuring to the benefit of the members of the Judicial Council. They are being led down the primrose path by CJ Clueless, aka, CJ Feckless, aka “The Red Queen”.
sharonkramer
July 29, 2014
That’s EXACTLY right!
sharonkramer
July 29, 2014
Its pretty stupid to have a long history of BSA audits of the AOC doing acts which are nothing short of unconscienable — and then publicly state that JC officers have always been responsible for AOC acts, when you wrote in FEDERAL COURT under penalty of perjuiry, that they were not. Can you say “lying in federal legal proceedings, with no judicial immunity”?
MaxRebo5
July 29, 2014
That is a great shame JCW. I feel for Paula.
I noticed three things at the meeting this morning:
1. They almost laugh that there is no public comment. Could that lack of interest be a sign that this body is so removed that the public has no idea who they are or what public business they are conducting? If the public has no interest in the committee do you think they want that committee to have a staff of 800 employees?
2. For Judge Jahr’s retirement the presentation was by Noreen Evens and the chief didn’t say a word. Not a very heartfelt thanks for service to the man. No conference center in his honor? He did OK and didn’t waste $500 million on a failed computer system. Seems Jahr should be the new standard for excellence in judicial administration relative to the director he replaced.
3. For the retirement of the AOC name. No debate at all! Too funny. Jahr was telling the council how the signs, stationary, and cards will be replaced before the council even discussed the idea as a concept. The whole thing is a complete rubber stamp committee for the Chief. A two headed monster they said is the image they want to be free of by retiring the AOC name. Replaced now with a one headed snake. An almost a bibilical image of deception comes to mind.
Wendy Darling
July 29, 2014
So members of the Judicial Council and the AOC lied to a court. So Fuentes et al committed perjury. So they are all liars. So money is being paid every month to an entity that doesn’t legally exist. So there’s no public comment. So branch administration laughs at this. So 455 Golden Gate Avenue rubber stamps things assembly line style. So it’s all just an endless source of amusement for Queen Feckless and branch “leadership”. So what? Ho-hum. Yawn.
It’s not like anyone is going to do anything about any of it.
You just can’t make this stuff up really.
Long live the ACJ.
JusticeCalifornia
July 29, 2014
Concerted efforts to obstruct justice by (or at the direction/with the approval of) “top leadership” have gone on for years.
What the JUDICIAL COUNCIL did to Paula Negley is unforgivable. Feckless should propose to the JUDICIAL COUNCIL that the JUDICIAL COUNCIL give Paula Negley her money back, with interest. And the JUDICIAL COUNCIL should SWOV, but quick, to approve it.
sharonkramer
July 29, 2014
I second that, Justice California. In addition to all other damages, those pompous asses shattered her faith in the Constitution and completely shook her confidence of being able to determine who are true friends. That is a terrible thing to steal from someone. It adversely impacts the rest of their lives — just because they did the right thing.
If they think some little name change erases the damage and absolves them for past wrongs, they need to think again.
unionman575
July 29, 2014
http://www.latimes.com/opinion/readersreact/la-le-0729-tuesday-california-courts-funding-20140729-story.html
Wendy Darling
July 29, 2014
Terry Friedman should shut his piehole.
Long live the ACJ.
JusticeCalifornia
July 30, 2014
Friedman:
“California Supreme Court Chief Justice Tani Cantil-Sakauye has issued her “Three-Year Blueprint for a Fully Functioning Judicial Branch.” Justice demands that we reinvest in our justice system by funding our courts, as the blueprint proposes.”
LOL, LOL.
Feckless has done nothing to improve the courts. She has to be overseen and forced to do the right thing (like dumping Vickrey and CCMS, and bouncing Halpin); she has created awards named after the worst of the worst (Vickrey) and handed them out to those she personally knows are the worst of the worst (Turner); she has alienated and belittled over 25% of the CA judiciary; she likes to be chauffeured around on the public dime; she expects that her wish is everyone else’s command and makes appointments accordingly; she is reliant on tired, compromised Team George members and policies to guide her and do her bidding; she is arrogant, self-absorbed, very ambitious, but honestly, just not too bright.
That is a very poor collection of qualities for the “leader” of the biggest judiciary in the free world to have. (Maybe somewhere else, but definitely not in a “free” world).
It CANNOT be said by those who pay attention that her priority is serving the public. The public HATES how it is being treated in the courts.
So Sakauye and Team George can whine about funding, but given Sakauye’s track record this past three years, how can this administration be trusted to do the right thing for the public with public funds? History has shown it cannot.
Yes, we are watching history in the making. The decline and fall of the biggest judiciary in the world, courtesy of Ron George and Tani Cantil Sakauye.
And all those who are sitting around getting paid by the public to protect the public– who have been told about corruption and crimes taking place at the highest levels, but have done nothing to stop it– will be a part of the story.
Just my opinion.
Wendy Darling
July 30, 2014
Note to Terry Friedman and Queen Feckless: “More money” is not going to fix what is really wrong in and with the California Judicial Branch. And everyone that matters knows this at this point.
Long live the ACJ.
sharonkramer
July 30, 2014
You are so right, Wendy. This SWOV while claiming to be holier than thou needs to stop from top to bottom in the Cal courts. Politics under the color of law is the main problem in the branch. Giving them more money w/o ridding the compromised is like throwning gasoline on a raging toxic dump fire.
Just heard of another one where the Fourth District Division One Appellate Court is about to issue a fraudulent remittitur concealing that they failed to address a judgment known to be void on its face, in their opinion.
Yep, you guessed it. The victim is a whistleblower of cronyism in the courts, who they want destroyed and silenced.
MaxRebo5
July 30, 2014
Nice article by Courthouse News this morning:
Council Backs Off Deficit Budget, Name Change Brings Controversy
By MARIA DINZEO
Tweet ShareThis
SAN FRANCISCO (CN) – Senator Noreen Evans on Tuesday urged the Judicial Council not to waste good will between the courts, the Legislature and the governor’s office by assuming legislators will make up for a projected shortfall of $22.7 million in court fee revenue. On a second matter, a motion to abandon the name of the judiciary’s administrative agency passed, but not without controversy.
“The Judicial Council cannot pick a fight with the Department of Finance. It is not winnable. They hold all the cards, obviously, and we need to work cooperatively with them,” Evans told the council.
Evans was referring to a recommendation from the council’s Trial Court Budget Advisory Committee that the council avoid addressing the shortfall now and instead send a request for the additional funds to the governor’s Department of Finance.
“The consensus of the committee was that by doing that we would solve a problem that’s not ours and should be solved by the DOF and they should not be let off the hook for that,” said Judge Laurie Earl of Sacramento, who chairs the budget committee.
The projected 2014-2015 revenue for court fees such as civil case filing fees and criminal fines was lowered by the judiciary staff and the governor’s financial staff by about $70 million earlier this year.
In April, the council asked the governor’s finance department to backfill that amount in the 2014-2015 budget for the courts. In his May revise, the governor gave $30.9 million.
The judicial council’s budget committee then said another $22.7 million was needed for the trial court trust fund which funds trial court operations in the 58 counties of California.
Earl told the council, “Over the past several years, the state significantly reduced support for trial court operations and relied in part on revenue from court user fees, and the risk is if that user fees decline, so do the revenue they generate.”
“This was the advisory committee’s opinion that the stability of state trial court funding should be protected despite changes in user fee revenues,” Earl added, “This shortfall, we believe, is rightfully a problem the state needs to take responsibility for. ”
Earl noted that the Department of Finance had said it would be willing to backfill fee revenue shortages. “It’s not clear why they couldn’t commit to back fill this year,” Earl said.
Evans, a Democrat from Santa Rosa and the chair of the Senate Judiciary Committee, urged caution in approaching the shortfall.
She warned that it was not fiscally prudent to operate at a deficit and that the goodwill the judiciary had built in Sacramento could be jeopardized by allocating funds that the courts are not assured of getting.
“Don’t upset the apple cart at this point. There has been a lot of goodwill built up at this point and we need to keep that moving forward,” said Evans. “I would suggest that conversations be held with legislative leaders.”
The judges around the council meeting table seemed to agree.
“The sentiments from the DOF is they want us to act prudently. Fiscally responsible. They consider deficit spending to be contrary to that,” Judge Brian McCabe from Merced said. “I’m slow but I’m not that slow. This is going to create political fallout and will undo what we’ve worked very hard to do over the last several years which is build a relationship with our sister branches.”
Justice Marvin Baxter said, “Sometimes a recommendation with the best of intentions can have unintended consequences. I suspect that in this case it would be true. We will be telegraphing to the trial courts that this money is available. Then what do we do? I do think that we proceed carefully. I don’t think we should provoke our sister branches of government.”
The council rejected the budget committee’s recommendation on a voice vote.
Judge Mary Ann O’Malley of Contra Costa County was the only judge who stood in opposition, voting against the majority.
“I feel for those presiding judges and court executive officers they’ve been cut, and cut and cut. I don’t think anybody wants to pick a fight with anybody I just think they don’t want to be hit again. And so it is just a matter of hoping that a wrong can be righted for the right reasons,” O’Malley said.
Also during its Tuesday meeting, the council approved an amendment to the California Rules of Court to retire the name “Administrative Office of the Courts,” and rename the agency “Judicial Council staff.”
A month earlier, Chief Justice Tani Cantil-Sakauye said she had decided to the change the agency’s name and directed the heads of the council’s five internal committees to draft the rule change.
At Tuesday’s meeting, the head of one of those committees made his pitch for the change, reflecting a line of argument adopted by the agency’s former director Steven Jahr who said, “It at once changes everything and changes nothing.”
“For years there has been widespread confusion among those who aren’t familiar with the judicial branch that the staff of the council was a separate entity from the council and in some way independent of the council,” said Justice Harry Hull, who chairs the internal committee on policy and legislation. “This confusion in my view at least was sometimes exploited by those who didn’t have the best interests of the judicial branch or the public in mind.”
That argument was contradicted a day earlier.
“This is not the position the AOC and the council have taken in court,” said a statement from the Alliance of California judges, a reform group that counts 500 California judges as members.
Referring to the AOC’s opposition to a sex discrimination suit by a former employee, the Alliance noted, “An attorney for the council argued back in 2010 that plaintiff was employed by the AOC and not the council.”
In that litigation, an affidavit filed by the AOC’s human resources director said, “Plaintiff was employed by the AOC, not the Judicial Council. The Judicial Council does not have any employees.”
Referring to the argument that the name change “changes nothing at all,” the Alliance statement said, “It certainly changes one thing, it changes the position that the AOC and the Council have taken in documents that they filed under oath.”
On Tuesday, the motion to adopt a court rule abandoning the name Administrative Office of the Courts passed on a unanimous vote.
MaxRebo5
July 30, 2014
I did want to comment on this article. The author says the name change was not without controversy. She is correct the ACJ’s raised great points in their letter but they do not have any respresentation to on the Judicial Council (as they should). The unanimous vote shows there was actually no controversy at all by the members of the Judicial Council. They rubber stamped this name change without any debate.
As for the shortfall of the fees, it is interesting the Judicial Council accepted the $30.9 million Governor Brown provided (not the 70 million they wanted). My view is this is tactical choice by the JC too. They will eat the $22,7 million and make the trial courts take that hit (more layoffs for the 58 trial courts).
I believe the Judicial Council is making this tactical choice to preserve their politcal capitol so they can push for the $400 million needed to fund the Sacramento Courthouse construction. They know this approach will mean layoffs for trial court staff around the state to afford a new courthouse in Sacramento. It is the exact same tactic Ron George/Vickrey took when Arnold was Governor. George/Vickrey pushed for and got 5 billion in bonds for CA Courthouses but there was no political capitol left to preserve/maintain funding for trial court staff. As a result, 2,500 trial court employees around the state, myself included, got laid off.
The same tactics are repeating again today because it is the same folks from Team George in charge with the current Chief Justice. If there is a shortfall in funding it should be the Judicial Council’s staff that is cut first to address the 22.7 million dollar shortfall in fines/fees and not trial court staff. I hope Governor Brown sees through this very wicked tactic by the Chief Justice’s Judicial Council where trial court employees are again being thrown under the bus by their so called “leaders”.
Wendy Darling
July 30, 2014
Published today, Wednesday, July 30, from the Metropolitan News Enterprise:
State Judicial Council Approves Retirement of AOC’s Name
From Staff and Wire Service Reports
As expected, the Judicial Council yesterday voted to retire the name of the Administrative Office of the Courts.
Under the rule change, approved at a meeting in San Francisco, the agency will henceforth be identified as the Judicial Council staff.
Third District Court of Appeal Justice Harry Hull, chair of the council’s Rules and Project’s Committee, called the change “[a] move that makes a great deal of sense,” in a statement released by the agency.
“For years, there has been confusion over the relationship between the administrative office and the council; that the staff of the council was a separate entity and in some way independent of the council. It’s time to end that confusion,” Hull said. Hull noted that the rule changes “merely retire the name without changing the functions, duties, responsibilities or obligations of the council or its staff.”
Earlier this week, the expected action was questioned in a statement issued by the directors of the Alliance of California Judges, a persistent critic of the AOC.
“The reasons for the change, and for the haste with which it’s being made, remain muddled,” the alliance directors said. “Our branch leaders claim that the change is necessary to eliminate ‘confusion’—although they never specify who is being confused, why the confusion couldn’t be cleared with a simple explanation rather than by suddenly changing the name of a 50-year-old institution, or why the confusion needs to be dispelled now, as opposed to sometime earlier in the budget process when it might have made a difference.”
The alliance also said the council and the AOC had claimed to be separate entities when they were sued by an AOC employee for gender discrimination and wrongful termination. It cited a 2010 declaration under penalty of perjury in which the director of the AOC’s Human Resources Division said the plaintiff was employed solely by the AOC and that “[t]he Judicial Council does not have any employees.”
In other action, the council voted to approve the allocation of $65 million appropriated for trial court facility modifications and planning.
The council also voted to seek $27 million for the design of a new criminal courthouse for the Sacramento Superior Court.
“I’m the eternal optimist. I believed it would ultimately get built,” Presiding Judge Robert Hight told Courthouse News Service Monday.
A statewide budget crisis in 2008 gutted the courthouse construction budget, with the Legislature taking funds set aside for construction projects and redirecting the money to keep standing courthouses open. Dozens of courthouse construction projects ended up on the indefinitely-delayed list.
“When the budget crisis hit, we were ready to proceed with design, construction plans. Then the council delayed this, because there wasn’t any money left in the account,” Hight said.
For the Sacramento courthouse, the process started with a recommendation by the Court Facilities Advisory Committee which then moved to the Policy Coordination and Liaison Committee. Based on a presentation from the chair of the facilities committee, the liaison committee voted unanimously last Thursday to recommend that the full council approve $27 million for blueprints at the next council meeting which is scheduled for Tuesday.
Based on past practice, the council is almost certain to approve what is recommended to it.
Within the council, the Court Facilities Advisory Committee determines the fate of every proposed courthouse project, deciding which one is shelved and which one goes forward.
“We were very sorry to have to put it on the back burner when we did,” said Justice Brad Hill who chairs the facilities committee. “This is certainly a critically needed project and we’re looking forward to getting it on track. Of those that were deferred, it was at the top of the list.”
The liaison committee to which he spoke was open to the press and public as a result of a new Judicial Council rule that opened almost all the council committees to the press and public.
One reason the Sacramento courthouse was first in line for funding was the need for improved security, said the court’s presiding judge.
“We only have one in-custody elevator and it only goes to the 4th floor,” said Hight. “If you have an in-custody matter on the 5th or 6th floor, you have to walk the defendant upstairs and across public halls and it’s just not good for security,” he said.
Judges also currently share an elevator with members of the public. “You’re in there with the defendant’s family and the victim’s family,” said Hight. “Though nothing has happened thus far, sometimes it’s tense.”
http://www.metnews.com/
Long live the ACJ.
MaxRebo5
July 30, 2014
http://www.sacbee.com/2014/07/30/6591468/steinberg-discusses-ambitions.html
Wendy Darling
July 30, 2014
It’s no secret Steinberg wants an appointment to the California bench He is also not a political idiot. The political reality is Steinberg will not get an appointment to the bench in advance of the November election. After the November election may be a different story. And if it’s not an appointment to the California Supreme Court, well, ok. Any other appointment to the California bench will do.
Still serving themselves to the detriment of all Californians.
Long live the ACJ.
JusticeCalifornia
July 30, 2014
Absolutely amazing that Steinberg thinks it would be appropriate for Brown to appoint him to the Supreme Court. Steinberg is a politician. He will always be a politician, on or off the bench. How does being a politician qualify one to cut the line for an appointment to the Supreme Court? Geez.
Oh wait, right, now I understand. Feckless couldn’t get a job out of law school and was a gambler and cocktail waitress by trade and she is now chief justice, so why wouldn’t Steinberg think it is perfectly OK to be her termed-out politician buddy sitting on the Supreme Court with her? Brilliant.
Hey, maybe Steinberg was the one who insisted on the AOC name change? He wouldn’t take a job there unless it had more faked dignity? I still think Feckless has her buddy in the running to be . . . .what….Lord Steinberg, Judicial Council Chief of Staff? She needs him to protect her, he wants power, the pay and perks are nice, and he could have a damn fine gold embossed business card . . .
Steinberg is a successful, savvy politician, but that does not qualify him to be appointed to the bench, or hired as top administrator of the judicial branch.
Wendy Darling
July 30, 2014
“How does being a politician qualify one to cut the line for an appointment” to the California judicial bench?”
Here’s one possible answer: “The judge credited Senate President Pro Tem Darrell Steinberg (D-Sacramento) for putting $40 million into the budget for courthouse construction. “Sen. Steinberg went to bat for us and made sure it happened. But for him, and then the governor authorizing the funds, we wouldn’t be here,” he said.
http://www.courthousenews.com/2014/07/28/69909.htm
Long live the ACJ.
JusticeCalifornia
July 30, 2014
LOL. So Steinberg has arranged to have the taxpayers of CA buy him a Supreme Court or Judicial Council position? Really?
Let’s just put Steinberg in some tight pants, and a red light and sign saying “Justice for Sale” outside 350 McCallister.
Wendy Darling
July 30, 2014
I’m pretty sure he is already there, Justice California.
Long live the ACJ.
Frenchie
August 7, 2014
Finding this post has anesrwed my prayers
unionman575
July 30, 2014
Why yes indeed Long Beach was a great “deal”.
😉
Judicial Council Watcher
July 30, 2014
Figures lie and liars figure. Just ignore the 100 million more pre-adjusted that long beach cost…….
courtflea
July 31, 2014
Pleeezzee another frickin tome designed to put even the most eager legislative staffer to sleep. Man, they sure can crank out the BS. 😛
Delilah
August 7, 2014
http://www.sfgate.com/default/article/Santa-Clara-County-shutting-courthouses-5673071.php
Wendy Darling
July 30, 2014
Lando, Courtflea, Ant, Delilah, OBT . . . where are you?
Long live the ACJ.
wearyant
July 31, 2014
I’m here, totally gagged out by the latest events in As Injustice Turns and Churns, the continuous, long-running soap opera of the CA courts, Wendy D! For example, J Hull talking of “confusion” about the AOC and Judicial Council !! Excellent way to silence critics, by gagging them to death by spewing this crap or making them choke the life out of themselves with laughter by these ridiculous statements they continuously make from on high …
Wendy Darling
July 31, 2014
In the upside-down double-speak world of 455 Golden Gate Avenue, where everything is really the opposite of what is said, there was no “confusion.” In fact, it was precisely because so very, very, very many people were no longer “confused” about the incestuous link between the Judicial Council and the AOC, that the name was “changed”, which at the same time changed “everything” and simultaneously changed absolutely “nothing” at all. Well, except for that whole lying under oath and committing perjury thing. But nobody really cares about that, or will do anything about it. So it still changes absolutely nothing at all.
And yes, you just can’t make any of this stuff up. Really.
Long live the ACJ.
courtflea
July 31, 2014
yo Wendy! I’m here. I have been trying to shut my mouth after reading all of this stuff with the agency that was formerly the AOC. I guess I am just dazzled by all of this B.S. No matter how jaded I am or how much JCW reports on it, it never ceases to amaze me….the antics (to put it nicely) of the JC and the AOC. If anything the JC is an arm/rubber stamp of the agency formerly known as the AOC. You know letting the judges feel important and in charge all the while they just approve whatever the the agency formerly known as the AOC feeds them just like it was their own ideas! The rational part of me wants to think that such learned individuals that comprise the JC must have some brilliant strategic grand design in making these decisions for the benefit of all Californians, but i must remind myself that rational thinking plays no part (unless you count a thirst for power)obviously in this farce that is the JC and the agency formerly known as the AOC. You can’t make this stuff up, really, you can’t make it up. Truth is stranger than fiction. And the kool aide drinking goose steppers march on in lock step, until the next JC meeting.
Wendy Darling
July 31, 2014
Good to hear from you, Flea!
Long live the ACJ.
wearyant
July 31, 2014
Couldn’t have said it better, Flea! Funny how the jerks on the JC/AOC have shocked us both temporarily speechless with their antics. You just CANNOT make this stuff up. We should write books.
Still serving themselves to the detriment of all Californians.
Long live the ACJ.
courtflea
July 31, 2014
🙂
Delilah
July 31, 2014
I am here too, Wendy Every day. At this point I have nothing new to contribute other than to echo everything you say, and now the comments of Ant and Flea. I had written an epic rant, but I am letting it sit in my outbox until morning so I can reflect on the wisdom of posting it.
Suffice it to say that the fact that the Judicial Council could declare by unanimous vote that the AOC never existed as a separate entity, and that only a couple of reporters from Courthouse News even raised an eyebrow about something so preposterous, says it all. That should have been laughed or shot down the minute it was proposed! Are you kidding me?
No, you can’t make it up. But that’s what our “reality” is anymore. Made-up shit. And, as George Carlin says: “And nobody seems to mind, nobody seems to care…”
Wendy Darling
July 31, 2014
It be funnier if it wasn’t state judges and state attorneys doing all of this. It be funnier if those state judges and state attorneys hadn’t taken an oath, which is apparently meaningless. It be funnier if it wasn’t state judges and state attorneys lying under oath and committing perjury.
But it is state judges and state attorneys doing all of this. And so much more.
Your quote from George Carlin really does succinctly sum it all up . . . Nobody seems to mind, nobody seems to care.
Still good to hear from you, Delilah. And many here would probably like to see your post.
Long live the ACJ.
The OBT
August 1, 2014
Thanks Wendy for asking for me. I was off in my secure and remote location for a bit and have come back to read about the latest antics at 455 Golden Gate. I really have a hard time understanding Justice Hull. Who is he fooling ? No one that works in our branch could be confused about the roles of the Judicial Council or the now former AOC. What went wrong in all this was Ronald George who essentially took power over everything . His quest for more and more power and control over the Judicial Council,the trial courts and the AOC blurred the roles of all of the above. CCMS and other major fiscal mismanagement like Long Beach an economic recession and the appointment of the blundering Queen HRH-2 all led to the collapse of George’s empire. Now to try and salvage something the insiders shoved J Jahr out and came up with this plan to rename the AOC. Nice try. No one is buying what the 455 Golden Gate insiders are selling because nothing is changing and nothing ever will until the Judicial Council is democratized and HRH-2 resigns or retires.
Lando
August 1, 2014
Wendy you are great friend to all of us and for our honorable and just cause to see our branch reformed. I will always remember Senator Steinberg for his lack of courage in blocking AB 1208 from ever getting a fair hearing in the State Senate. His actions proved to me that despite his high minded so called concerns for the courts, he put his own ambitions ahead of the public. He doesn’t deserve to be appointed a Small Claims Commissioner let alone a Supreme Court Justice. In this instance we are lucky to have term limits so the good Senator can be thanked and excused.
sharonkramer
August 1, 2014
I’m reading comments like some think things will never change and that the compromised will continue to get away with the shenanigans forever because no one is paying attention. I don’t believe that it is true or that it takes massive amounts of people to cause change.
Each and every regular contributor to JCW have added valuable pieces to increase the understanding of the tangled web of deception. These pieces collectively make it easier to grasp how and why the big picture, perversion of justice on many levels, is occurring. Sooner or later the pieces will fall into place where criminal charges are going to have to filed somewhere — or those who fail to do so will be also proven criminal by their negligence.
I guess what I am trying to say is “never doubt the power of one”. Never doubt that what YOU are doing will, in the end, cause change for the better. I know that it will. That’s the way things work when even just a few won’t stay silent about corruption.
Wendy Darling
August 1, 2014
“Never doubt that what you are doing will, in the end, cause change for the better.”
Used to believe this. Don’t believe it anymore. Not likely to ever believe it ever again. I’ve joined the “believe it when you see it” crowd.
And what I expect to see is what I currently see. No one will ever be held accountable, in even the smallest way, for any of it, not the punishing people for telling the truth, not the abandonment of ethics, not the lying, not the perjury, not the embezzlements of public funds, not the waste of millions and millions of dollars, not the “a phone call from the Chief Justice can fix anything”, not any of it. The FBI isn’t looking into it. Neither is the Attorney General. Or the State Legislature. Or the U.S. Department of Justice. Or any enforcement or administrative agency either. Going to court is pointless. Everyone that could do something – anything – about any of this will continue to turn a blind eye or run away as fast as they can in the opposite direction.
What I also expect to see is the audit report will come out, and no matter what it says, it too will change nothing. Then the November election will happen, and Governor Brown will be re-elected. Then some time will pass, and Steinberg will likely get an appointment, somewhere, to the California bench.
And it will all just continue, ad nauseam.
Still serving themselves to the detriment of all Californians. Regardless of whatever name they’re doing it under. Or whatever black robe they’re hiding behind.
Long live the ACJ.
unionman575
August 1, 2014
I’ve joined the “believe it when you see it” crowd.
😉
R. Campomadera
August 1, 2014
But WD, the question is whether we’re better off with your voice than without it. I know the answer: we’re better off with it.
Our best weapon against the continuous stream of corruption and incompetence that we see coming from the “leadership” is our continued voice and persistence. If we give up, there truly is no hope. If that happens, they win. They must not be allowed to win.
Wendy Darling
August 1, 2014
With all respect R. Campomadera, as stated above, I have joined the “believe it when you see it” crowd. And what I see is they have won, they have been allowed to win, and they will continue to be allowed to win.
And as for “hope”, whatever tiny little smidgen or scintilla of hope I had, it died quite some time ago. There are very few things I am absolutely certain of in life, but one of them is that you can’t bring things back from the dead.
At this point, hope is for idiots.
Long live the ACJ.
R Campomadera
August 1, 2014
Oh dear. I still have hope.
Michael Paul
August 2, 2014
I’m a member of the believe it when I see it crowd but I still have hope.
Wendy Darling
August 1, 2014
Ho-hum. Yawn. Business as usual for Queen Feckless’ good friend Senator Steinberg. He’ll fit right in on the California bench when he gets there, having developed plenty of expertise while in the California Senate in covering up the truth, and fraud and corruption by those holding public office. Published today, Friday, August 1, from Courthouse News Service, by Maria Dinzeo:
Newspapers Sue California Senate for Records on Indicted Lawmakers
By MARIA DINZEO
SACRAMENTO (CN) – Major California newspapers, including the San Jose Mercury News and Oakland Tribune, claim the California Senate unconstitutionally withheld public records on when and where indicted and suspended state Senators Leland Yee and Ronald Calderon met with undercover FBI agents.
San Jose Mercury News managing editor Bert Robinson said in an interview Friday that for years, the Legislature has denied records requests regarding legislators’ calendars, citing the 1991 California Supreme Court case Times Mirror v. Superior Court.
“No one has challenged it,” Robinson said. Until now.
In the Times Mirror case, a Los Angeles Times reporter’s request for five years of Gov. George Deukmejian’s calendars and appointment schedules was blocked by the court, which ruled that those documents did not fall under the plain use of the term correspondence.
Robinson told Courthouse News on Friday: “We’ve been for some time looking for an opportunity to challenge their stance on that, because we have long believed that their interpretation of Times was way broader than was justified by the language of the Supreme Court decision. Three years ago we were close to suing and we were not sure we had quite the right case.”
Robinson said that the state Senate’s refusal conflicts with voter-passed Proposition 59, which amended the state constitution to allow public access to the writings of public officials for all three branches of state government.
“When public agencies are considering whether or not to release information, they should consider interest in disclosure in the broadest possible sense and the interest in secrecy in the narrowest sense,” Robinson said. “The bias is always in favor of making the information public. That is why we feel their stance is at odds with the California Constitution.”
The Mercury News, Bay Area News Group and Los Angeles News Group say in the lawsuit that they requested specific calendar entries and appointment schedules, reflecting when and where Yee and Calderon met with undercover agents. But “the SRC [Senate Rules Committee] chose to treat the calendars of its constituents as inviolate and above the public’s presumptive right to know of the conduct of the Legislature’s – and thus the public’s – business.”
Robinson said: “The public interest in understanding what was happing there is enormous. We knew when we submitted that they were going to say no, and the reason they were going to use was the public interest in keeping this information confidential outweighs the public interest in making it public.”
But that argument, he said, “is just ridiculous on its face.”
Calderon, a Democrat from Los Angeles, is charged in a 24-count indictment with public corruption, accepting bribes from an undercover FBI agent, wire fraud and money laundering. He has pleaded not guilty.
Los Angeles News Group reporter Rebecca Kimitch sent an email to Deputy Secretary of the Senate Sheron Violini on June 19, requesting appointment books and calendar dates “reflecting with whom California State Senator Ronald Calderon met, or was scheduled to meet, or otherwise communicated with” on dates between February 2012 and March 2013.
The requests, made under the Legislative Open Records Act, were summarily rejected by the Senate Rules Committee, headed by Senate President Pro Tem Darrell Steinberg.
Through a response from Secretary of the Senate Gregory Schmidt, the committee said the requested records fell under provisions of the Legislative Open Records Act that exempt records where “on the facts of the particular case the public interest served by not making the record public clearly outweighs the public interest served by disclosure of the record,” as well as correspondence between legislators and their staff, records exempted by legislative privilege and communications between legislators and private citizens.
Yee, a Democrat from San Francisco, is charged with racketeering, wire fraud, public corruption and conspiracy to deal in firearms. He pleaded not guilty to all charges at a hearing this week.
A 137-page FBI affidavit claims Yee offered to help undercover FBI agents buy assault weapons from suspected terrorist group Moro Islamic Liberation Front in the Philippines, and to do political favors and vote on certain legislative bills in exchange for campaign donations.
Investigators said Yee told undercover agents that he needed to retire a $32,000 debt from his failed 2011 mayoral bid before he could announce his intent to run for Secretary of State. At a meeting with an undercover agent in February this year, Yee allegedly said of the gun deal: “People want to get whatever they want to get. Do I care? No, I don’t care. People need certain things.”
Yee also allegedly agreed to vote for several bills, including medical marijuana legislation, and allegedly helped a phony software company called Well Tech to obtain state government grants and contracts.
The solicitations for donations were allegedly made by his political consultant Keith Jackson, a former San Francisco school board president who also was indicted for narcotics conspiracy, wire fraud, murder for hire and conspiracy to import firearms.
Yee was arrested in March, and his offices in San Francisco and Sacramento were raided by the FBI.
In April, The Bay Area News Group asked for records for 26 dates between October 2011 and March 2014 where Yee was noted in the affidavit to have met with undercover agents, and for travel records and expense reports for Yee’s trips to the Philippines from January 2010 to April 2014.
Schmidt sent a response citing the same exemptions it used in rejecting the Calderon requests, and added that the Senate had no expense records related to travel to the Philippines.
Matthias Gafni, the San Jose Mercury News reporter who made requests, tried to narrow his request through an email on July 10, by asking for appointment books, schedules or calendars reflecting meetings on 29 specific dates that Yee was supposed to have had meetings related to the crimes mentioned in the indictment.
Schmidt again denied the request on behalf of the Senate Rules Committee, for the same reasons, adding, “These exemptions apply based on the substantive nature of the requested records, irrespective of how narrow in scope the request is crafted.”
Robinson didn’t buy the Senate’s argument.
“The guy has been suspended and he’s termed out. It’s not going to compromise his ability to be an effective legislator; no one is going to meet with this guy as a state senator again,” he said.
While both legislators are suspended, the complaint notes that they continue to draw taxpayer-funded salaries of more than $90,000 a year.
The news groups seek a writ of mandate ordering the Senate to disclose the records.
They are represented by Duffy Carolan with Jassy Vick Carolan in San Francisco.
http://www.courthousenews.com/2014/08/01/70047.htm
Long live the ACJ.
sharonkramer
August 2, 2014
I have more than hope that some leaders of the branch are going to get nailed for at least one of their criminal acts.
Here’s why I think that.
There are a lot of individuals currently knocking on doors to stop the criminal enterprise that the Cal judicial branch has become — while manifesting its criminality in various ways.
In sales, one can expect a 2% response rate when cold calling — meaning for every 100 doors knocked on, 2 will open. So, for every door that doesn’t open, statistical rules of thumb establish that a diligent knocker is one step closer to the door that will. That rule applies to everyone who is diligently knocking on doors to stop the fraudsters.
We don’t each need the doors we knock on to open. Collectively, we just need one person to get one open — which increases the odds for all of us, of someone getting nailed. To me, its just a numbers game and a matter of time before someone gets charged and prosecuted — as long as people keep knocking on those doors. Take out a couple of their key players for whatever reason, and their whole game collapses.
Wonder what kind of odds I could get in Vegas if I wanted to bet on it? lol
JusticeCalifornia
August 2, 2014
Love this song! The harder they come, the harder they fall. . . .
Saw the man sing it himself last night. Jimmy rocks! And at 66 years of age, he had everybody rocking with him. Wish I had taken a video on my phone, but I like this rendition:
JusticeCalifornia
August 2, 2014
I like Willie Nelson’s version too. . . .
It is nice to take a break and recharge. Feeling downright “irie” today. Back into the fray tomorrow or Monday. LOL.
The harder they come, the harder they fall, da da da. . . . .
Lando
August 2, 2014
What a devastating piece Courthouse News broke about the California State Senate and their leader D. Steinberg. Thanks Wendy for posting it. After reading that , I think Steinberg has no chance for any judicial office including Traffic Commissioner or the Mayor’s spot in Sacto. He would also appear to be too toxic even to the overlords at 455 Golden Gate. That leaves J Miller, Nash , or Roddy as the winner of the latest nationwide search lol , to replace all that have failed our Queen, Vickrey, Overholt Patel, and Jahr. My money is on Miller who loves all the power and perks the Crystal Palace brings and it sure beats hanging out in downtown Indio .
Guest
August 4, 2014
Miller and Nash probably are the two in the running but Roddy is out. His influence and knowledge passed a long time ago. No one listens to him and the cj doesn’t have time for his “good ole days” jive. Roddy’ career is done. He is just hanging on to his self aggrandizing legacy by kissing the judges a$$es in San Diego.
unionman575
August 4, 2014
I’ll put my money on Steve Nash.
The OBT
August 3, 2014
Doug Miller the new head of the AOC? You can’t make that up. He is a complete and total lackey to HRH-2 just as he was to HRH-1. He is exhibit 103 in why we need the Judicial Council and now the ” Judicial Council staff” to be democratized. My friend Lando is usually quite insightful but Indio isn’t bad. It might be the ultimate secure and remote location to get away from all this mess Ronald George created.
sharonkramer
August 3, 2014
How about some of those justices from the 4th/1st? I happen to know they are proficient at ordering the falsification of court documents and pretending they’ve followed the law. Seems that talent would qualify several from Symphoney Towers to be the new chief of staff for the org that has changed, but hasn’t changed at all.
The OBT
August 3, 2014
Hmm One of the possible secure and remote locations would be the City Center Motel in Indio. I wonder if they have a conference room named after Justice Douglas Miller lol.
unionman575
August 3, 2014
Sigh..the memories of City Center Motel in Indio…that was once in a lifetime…
Called ahead from the road for an overnight stay on the way to Arizona…. Arrived at 9:45 pm, the proprietor was wearing athletic shorts and no shoes/socks (not very professional). Quickly checked in, went to the room. It was a smoking room, and stunk of cigarette smoke. Went back and asked for a non-smoking room, and we’re quickly accommodated.
😉
Lando
August 3, 2014
City Center Motel. ” It’s Funky In A good Way”. Maybe when Queen Feckless and J Miller run our branch totally in the ground we can finally exit 455 Golden Gate and run the branch from here haha.
the OBT
August 3, 2014
The City Center Motel home of J Miller. It is the perfect place to run all branch operations out of. ” Rooms to let for 50 cents. No phone , no pool . no pets” Sounds about right as this has what HRH-2 and her chief supporters like Harry Hull and Doug Miller have reduced us too.
Wendy Darling
August 3, 2014
Not to mention the hookers and drug dealers hanging around outside. Branch “leadership” could set up a table selling their specialty version of Kool-Aid.
Long live the ACJ.
JusticeCalifornia
August 4, 2014
In 2006 Steinberg advised the top assembled members of the branch to deal with court critics and challengers by “building as big a wall as possible and playing defense”. At that time Ron George was considered by many nationwide to be at the top of his game, and in the running for a US Supreme Court seat. Four short years later, after playing defense, and insulting at least 25% of the judiciary, George was forced to resign, and the branch was in shambles.
The branch is still in shambles.
George’s replacement, Feckless, and her Team George sidekicks, cannot, to use Rodney Dangerfield’s words, get no respect. For good reason. They are still in the ivory tower, playing defense. Playing hide the ball. Playing favorites. Fiddling while Rome burns. Rearranging deck chairs. Riding around in police limos on the public dime.
But I disagree that Steinberg does not have what Feckless wants, or that he is too compromised for Feckless (lol, lol, lol — can you tell me one person who is too compromised for her?). He cuts deals. He hides information. He does favors and keeps score and has a black book full of names. He has a big ego– so big he thinks he deserves a spot on the State Supreme Court.
Steinberg is a talented politician. But when it gets right down to it, he has a track record of giving TERRIBLE advice to the judicial branch. The interesting thing is he knows the branch is out of control and the public has suffered under George and Feckless, but notwithstanding his powerful position in the state senate has done nothing about it.
sharonkramer
August 5, 2014
An oldie but a goodie. Whose yo daddy?
http://articles.latimes.com/1991-12-21/local/me-380_1_patrick-henry-high-school-students
Dante
August 6, 2014
Judges are people, people sometimes have children. Children, including the children of judges, sometimes do stupid things, including cheating at school. This 23-year old scandal really doesn’t say much about anything, does it? This really is starting to sound more like stalking of judges and their families than legitimate discussion of the problems with the California judicial branch.
Judicial Council Watcher
August 6, 2014
Agreed, and we have asked Sharon not to come on here and assail judges and government employees. A vast majority are honest, hardworking public servants. JCW is NOT the place to post this kind of material Sharon.
the OBT
August 5, 2014
Governor Brown has a bigger picture vision for the Supreme Court and my guess and hope is that doesn’t include political hacks like Mr Steinberg. I am hoping he appoints another outstanding and thoughtful woman to Justice Kennard’s seat to follow her legacy, like UCLA Dean Moran and Justice Humes to Justice Chin’s seat as Chin is rumored to be retiring soon. The Governor’s appointments to all levels of the judiciary have been outstanding and it gives me hope that some of these thoughtful and independent judicial officers will see the long term wisdom of bringing democracy back to our branch unlike Steinberg who has done everything to defeat and derail fairness , democracy and change, while he caters to the insiders at 455 Golden Gate.
JusticeCalifornia
August 6, 2014
I have to disagree about one of Brown’s appointments.
Governor Brown appointed Beverly Wood to the Marin bench, notwithstanding the fact that the JNE commission was told about her past– and at the JNE Commission’s suggestion, Governor Brown was also told about her past. Schwarzenegger was smart enough to pass on Wood (for Superior Court judge) and her buddy Marin Judge Lynn Duryee (for appellate justice). But Brown went for it.
Wood, Duryee, and their respective husbands are all involved in the very politically connected law firm Freitas McCarthy that gives a lot of money to a lot of people. Wood’s selection as a Commissioner in 2005 under her good friend Marin Presiding Judge Lynn Duryee from a field of 50 or 60 applicants served immediately to increase Wood’s net worth and her community property interest in the Freitas McCarthy firm, and set her up to be in line for appointment as a judge when Duryee retired.
In my opinion, Brown completely dropped the ball and sold out regarding Wood’s appointment. Now everyone is now forced to deal with the spectacular mess her appointment and foreseeable bad behavior on the bench have caused– just in her last one year as a judge.
I personally think that is BS. Brown was warned, appointed her anyway, and now others have to play clean up.
The fallout from Brown’s appointment of Wood is just getting started. She is a textbook exam test question regarding “how many laws and rules of court, and judicial canons did this judge violate”, and an Exhibit “A” example of a California judge gone wrong. The law means nothing to Wood– it is bothersome “procedural minutia”, to use her own words. Her legal misadventures continue, and continue to be documented– she just cannot seem to help herself.
Let’s see what the CJP does with this really problematic judge. It should be swift and it should be harsh. Given what Wood has done and continues to do to so many Marin litigants, Wood deserves nothing less.
Shame on Governor Brown for KNOWINGLY subjecting Marin County to this debacle.
sharonkramer
August 6, 2014
In Feb 2014, Brown appointed the daughter of a convicted felon who was also a San Diego judge.
See http://articles.latimes.com/1997-02-07/news/mn-26420_1_san-diego
and http://www.metnews.com/articles/mcco100401.htm
He recently appointed a young man who was involved in a highly publicized high school cheating scandal whose father was also a San Diego judge.
And let’s not forget Brown appointee Rosenstein who recently violated canons of judicial ethics and voters’ rights while back-door politicking for superior court judges appointments to be for life.
I was recently told that approximately 25% of the judges in San Diego county are either married to judges are were borne from judges.
So much for autonomy in the courts!
Dante
August 6, 2014
Are you saying that because Justice McConnell’s father had been convicted of a felony, she should not be eligible for appointment?
What canon do you believe Judge Rosenstein violated?
You were recently told of that 25% statistic by whom? Do you have any citation for that assertion? I’m often told that all judges are corrupt and all government employees are lazy and incompetent, but that does not make either statement true.
I enjoy reading judicialcouncilwatcher, even when I disagree with what is said, but this kind of a comment debases the discussion.
sharonkramer
August 6, 2014
Dante,
I could see why you may think that based on what’s posted. The problem is, that’s not the whole story. Out of respect for JCW, I haven’t posted it — nor will I.
katy
August 7, 2014
Dante,
In further response to the questions you posed.
Your post:
1. Are you saying that because Justice McConnell’s father had been convicted of a felony, she should not be eligible for appointment?
Reply:
I am not aware that Justice McConnell’s father was convicted of a felony. Was he? I am aware that McConnell reportedly worked closely with the father of February 2014 Brown appointed judge, Keri Katz. Its Katz’ father, San Diego Superior Court Presiding Judge Bruce Greer, who was convicted of the felony of bribery and racketeering. Two links I provided of news reports on the subject substantiate this.
A. http://articles.latimes.com/1997-02-07/news/mn-26420_1_san-diego
B. http://www.metnews.com/articles/mcco100401.htm
As you can see from the second article, McConnell was accused of cronyism with the convicted judge while practicing politics from the bench under the color of law. Ron George and Richard Huffman came to her defense when she was being considered for appointment as an appellate justice. McConnell then went on to become the presiding justice of the 4th/1st and Chair of the “independent state agency”, the CJP.
To quote from the second article:
DiMare claimed McConnell has been investigated by the FBI and was a target of the investigation which resulted in Judges G. Dennis Adams and James Malkus being convicted of fraud and racketeering, and Judge Bruce Greer resigning and entering a guilty plea….The judges were found to have accepted improper gifts from Patrick Frega, a prominent trial lawyer who was convicted along with Adams and Malkus…. George accused DiMare of seeking to impose on McConnell a “guilt by association” standard. The chief justice noted that he was on the high court and voted to remove Adams from office, and said McConnell—who was assistant presiding judge under Greer—had never been implicated in the scandal….Support for McConnell also came from Div. One Justice Richard Huffman, who said he had followed McConnell’s career closely. He recalled her early days on the San Diego Municipal Court, when she “didn’t know a criminal case from a pickup truck” but went on to succeed through “enormous energy, talent, and keen intellect.”….Huffman called the corruption allegations “outrageous” and “scurrilous.”
2. Your post:
What canon do you believe Judge Rosenstein violated?
Reply:
Its “canons”, plural. 2(b)2 and 5. There were many media reports on the subject during the recent elections. I filed a complaint with the current San Diego Presiding Judge (who is also the son of a judge). In violation of Rules of the Court, I never even received a written notification of receipt of the complaint. However, Brown appointed Rosenstein stopped (publicly) abusing her judicial position to intimidate potential endorsers of a challenger to an incumbent judge. In essence, she was advocating for herself and all other CA superior court judges that their appointments be for life by trying to make it more difficult for anyone to challenge them in an election. As I understand it, newly Brown appointed Katz was doing the same.
My March 14, 2014 complaint for canon violations with links to some of the media reports and evidence to substantiate the allegations: http://freepdfhosting.com/6eb90290dc.pdf
3. Your post:
You were recently told of that 25% statistic by whom? Do you have any citation for that assertion? I’m often told that all judges are corrupt and all government employees are lazy and incompetent, but that does not make either statement true.
Reply:
I was told by someone who has done research on the subject. If I knew it to be 100% certain fact, I would not have added the disclaimer “I was told”. It should be easy enough to corroborate or disprove that this is a correct percentage estimate by anyone who has been around the courts for years.
Here’s the list of San Diego judges. http://www.sdcourt.ca.gov/portal/page?_pageid=55,1057194&_dad=portal&_schema=PORTAL
How many are married to judges or are children of judges?
4. Your post:
I enjoy reading judicialcouncilwatcher, even when I disagree with what is said, but this kind of a comment debases the discussion.
Reply:
The point is, we all know that there are severe ethics problems in the branch and that the CJP has been ineffectual, at best, at stopping them to the detriment of good, honest judges and to the public as a whole.
Justice California posted of a Brown appointee with ethics breaches under her belt. I’ve posted of the same occurring in San Diego.
Perhaps long-term nepotism is fueling the continuing problems from top to bottom. Those who are now at the top, once started at the bottom. Maybe its time to take a closer look at how one gets to the bottom to begin with. Do people become judges based on proven skill and willingness to uphold the law — or do they become judges based on the whims of political favor?
(am logged into WP as Katy. Don’t want to log out. Sharon Kramer)
Lando
August 7, 2014
I agree with Dante. It is really wrong to dredge up unfounded and ancient allegations about judges and their family members. There was some corruption in the San Diego Superior Court many years ago. It was limited to very few judges, was dealt with and is now over. It has no relevance to any issue today and it is totally unfair to even hint that any current sitting judge or Justice has anything to do with that in any way. Raising stuff like this undermines all of JCW’s great work to reform our branch and as Dante says debases the forum.
The OBT
August 7, 2014
I am in total accord with JCW, Lando and Dante. If I see any more of these unwarranted attacks on San Diego judicial officers I am out of here. Sadly my secure and remote location far from California is looking better and better all the time as a full time venue to exit too.
katy
August 7, 2014
OBT,
I would hate it if my concerns of continuing ethics problems in the courts themselves aided to drive you away from helping JCW to stop the corruption at the helm. I’m someone who needs to understand the roots of problems before I can grasp what may need to be done to solve them. I think one has to understand the history of HOW the JC grabbed control in order to wrestle it back and restore autonomy and justice to the courts today.
Lando,
I respect your opinion, but differ with you on this matter. The ethics problems in San Diego are provably not ancient history. SWOV continues to the detriment of the public — even if it means falsifying court docs while attempting to cover up SWOV becoming criminal.
I bring up the nepotism in the courts because I think it would make it harder to speak against one’s family or childhood friends. So maybe nepotism is part of the problem?
.
In recent history, I’m not the one who publicly called you all “clowns” for verbalizing your concerns of how good judges and the public are getting screwed by too much cronyism going on. To only want to address the cronyism when it occurs at the helm, is not going to save the branch.
I think the history of the players who are still active and appear to be teaching the game to new players, helps to illuminate how and why the problems continue at the helm of the courts
It seems to me that it is a comprehensive problem and it needs a comprehensive solution.
JCW, thank you for allowing me to voice my concerns, even when unpopular with the judges who also work to right the courts.
Michael Paul
August 7, 2014
It won’t be sustained. We’ve discussed this many times Sharon. Please stop less you be aggressively moderated. Yes, there are issues in the courts but that is not the focus of the efforts here. Occasionally we permit those issues to surface when they are egregious but we don’t harp on them without end. That’s not the purpose or intent of this forum. The purpose of this forum is to deal with the head of the snake in the hope that everything else will self-correct when that effort is accomplished. And it will be accomplished even if it takes another ten years.
MaxRebo5
August 7, 2014
I agree with Katy that nepotism is a huge issue in CA Courts. I say this as a fromer pro cyclist would talk about the problem of drug abuse in the sport. You see, my father in law for 14 years was Bill Vickrey. He was a force in my carreer and education for 18 years. The jobs I had in CA Courts were due not to my masters degree in Judicial Administration but due almost entirely to my “family by marriage” connection wth CA’s State Court Administrator. For my last job as a “reengineering analyst” in Sacramento Superior Court I was hired by Jody Patel. I told no one of my family connection as I wanted it a secret for my own ego’s sake. I really just wanted people to like or dislike me for me as a person. To be my own success or failure in my own career. For me I thought being free meant keeping that fact a secret. In past jobs, like San Mateo Superior Court, I spoke of my family connection openly and that was really stupid and arrogant of me to do. In Utah it was known too as he was their former State Court Administrator and it was filled with friends of Bill. With Sacramento my naive intent was to be silent and succeed or fail on my own.
In reality, my coworkers all knew before I arrived! It was the gossip of the office on the very first day I started. I know I didn’t tell my coworkers so it had to be Jody Patel or Curt Soderlund who were the court executive and deputy court executive of Sacramento Superior Court at the time. The folks who hired me told my secret. It got out when I never wanted that known. I just wanted to get along based upon my own education and work experiences to that point which was an internship in grad school for Orange County Superior Court, a year and a half a jury clerk for San Mateo Superior Court, a year as a court clerk in Salt Lake City, and four years as an analyst and supervising analyst for Utah’s AOC. I thought my education and work experience was legitimate and was proud of myself. That’s not how it worked though.
I believe I was hired in Sacramento primarily as a favor by Jody for Bill. When I went out of Bill’s favor my job in Sacramento also ended. You see Bill’s daughter left me in the fall of 2010 because she was in love with my best friend who was married to my wife’s close friend of 20 years. Two marriages ended in divorce with 4 kids impacted. I honestly believe the budget was used as an excuse to get rid of me (now an ex husband) in 2012 who was no longer part of the family and from their point of view I detracted from their daughter’s quality of life with her kids.
Without my family by marriage connection the nine years 9 years of experience and service to Sacramento Superior Court was abrublty ended in 2012. Dennis Jones, who was on the AOC payroll as CEO of Sacramento Superior Court, so he could double dip pensions, made the cut to my job. Dennis said it was because of the budget, and there was clearly a budget problem, but I think that was used as cover to make more direct cuts they wanted for was fired for personal reasons. Sacramento was sitting on 17 million in reserves when they let me go.
I believe Bill Vickrey wanted me out of my ex wife’s life and she wanted 100% custody of our two kids. Bill was forced to retire by then over CCMS but Overholt was there at the AOC as acting director so Bill stll had influence in CA Courts. As my job at Sacramento was ending a reengineering job was created in Alameda Superior Court perfectly suited for my experience as a reengineering analyst. Does anyone besides me find it Interesting that Overholt was the former CEO of Alameda Courts where a job was offered to me?
The managers at Sacramento wispered to me that I should apply for the reengineering job in Oakland. I did apply, interviewed, and I got the job offer! I realized on the commute to Oakland that if I took it I would have have to move to the bay area which would mean giving up custody of my daughters. I had just lost them 50% of the time because we had joint custody so if I left for the job I would lose them almost 100% of the time. I had to decide, do I stay in my field and move away to make good money or do I stay in Sacramento and be present as a dad for my girls?
Keep in mind it was the depths of the recession, I really wanted to provide for my kids as a man, and I had no other job offers pending if I stayed. Nevertheless, I chose unemployment, left court administration, and stayed in Sacramento to raise my daughters. I found a job in a few months in another field for far less and now work in the Executive Branch where hiring is done much more fairly. It was the scariest time of my life and it didn’t have to be that way. I believe the layoffs of the analyst staff in Sacramento was done not based on senority or merit but on pure politics and Dennis promised the process would be fair. He had his assistants lay me off and didn’t even have the honor to do it in person. After all, it wasn’t personal right?
Yes there was a budget problem but who was selected to be cut was done not on merit but on politics. Even the other analysts let go I believe were cut to cover their methods. For example they fired another analyst with 20+ years experience I believe so they could say it was not just me who was a senior analyst that was let go. Dennis Jones soon retired and the HR Director for the court was soon fired. All loose ends for Team George tied up. Good luck with any wrongful termination suit as an unrepresented white male employee anyways.
Returning to San Diego (my hometown) where Kathy is concerned about nepotism. I interviewed for a job in San Diego Superior Court at one point right before I took the job with Sacramento Superior Court. David Yamakasaki was the hiriing manager under Mike Roddy at the time for San Diego who I interviewed with. Mike Roddy had been the Regional Director of the Northern Central AOC but Steve Love (who was a close friend of Bill Vickrey) was removed as the Court Executive of San Diego because of his alcohol problem. Mike Roddy got the job in San Diego and David was his right hand man.
Both Mike and David were USC Judicial Administration graduates so we all had the same degree and I thought that would be our common bond. That shared education background was minor to them. David knew Vickrey was my father in law and brought it up in the interview! He said, “I understand you have quite a family connection.” I admired David for being direct and not pretending he didn’t know (since he obviously did) but it also signaled it was not my education or experience he was most interested in and I was very sensative to that topic. David was on Team George, as we now can see so clearly, and that’s who the interview was with him even back then. The reality was if my father in law wanted me to live in San Diego it would of happened. If he wanted me (actually his daughter and grandkids) living closer to him in San Francisco then I would land a job closer and that’s how I believe my Sacramento came to be.
It was never an open market for me to work where I wanted to go. The entire market of CA Court Admin was corrupt like the sport of cycling when Lance Armstrong came of age. Lance chose to dope to get ahead and then became the ultimate professional cyclist. I wanted to stay clean and it pissed them off. Like cyclist Frankie Andreu who wanted to ride clean but Lance wasn’t going to change for him. Frankie was out of the family but his wife Besty Andreu who stood by her husband and loved him for being clean. In contrast my wife sided with her father and I believe was the one who pulled the trigger to end my carreer. She literally told me if there was one thing she could change about me it was my sense of justice. She wanted me to play the nepotism card outright, get ahead, make lots of money, and saw me as a fool for seeking to get promoted honestly when everyone was cheating to get ahead. She lost respect for me and there are three things a marriage needs love, trust, and respect. Sort of a three legged stool for any marriage to survive those things must be there.
It was actually Dennis Jones who was the court executive who laid me off from Sacramento Superior Court and he was the Deputy State Court Administrator for Bill for CA at one point. Dennis once offered me a job in Delaware where he was the State Court Administrator. I was working in Utah’s AOC as a supervising analyst. My wife was 8 months pregnant with our second daughter and I wanted a better paying job so my wife could afford to stay home. Dennis offered me the job but said I had to come immediately. That ended the job prospect for me. There was no way I was going to leave my wife when she was 8 months pregnant and move to the other side of the country. I declined the job and stayed in Utah for the birth of our daughter but then a job in Sacramento came open two months after our daughter was born. Funny how that job offer worked out don’t you think? That’s why the Alameda job offer felt so much like DEJA VU to me. I’d seen this game played several times. The jobs I was offered or not offered were controlled to get the pawn (me) to go where needed.
My opinion is Bill Vickrey didn’t want his son in law taking his daugher and grand kids to the other side of the USA back in 2002. Dennis Jones said to my mother in law at the time that I was the best analyst in the country and he really did want me to be there working in Delaware. Could of just been him BS’ing with her and saying something he didn’t mean but she repeated his words to me. It is ironic that Dennis then became Sacramento’s CEO when Jody Patel took Mike Roddy’s job at the AOC Northern Central Office. So Dennis Jones then had me as staff for like six years (on top of the three I put in for Jody). When layoffs came he selected me to be cut over newer analysts in the court with far less experience or education. My performance evaluations were excellent too. He had tried to promote me to management of civil operations without opening it to any other candiIdates and I wouldn’t do it that way. I rejected his offer of a back door appointment not an open recruitment where I won out. I wanted to get to the top but only if I didn’t have to cheat to do it. Interesting that the one analyst he wanted to promote was who he let go don’t you think?.
Clearly nepotism is a huge factor in CA Courts and it cuts both ways. Those in charge can have you hired and they can have you fired. Not based on your work but simply because your ex-wife wants the kids and you (despited all your education and experience) are now in the way.
Bill told me once, “The world is not black and white. It is grey.” He wainted me to be mentally tougher for the top jobs. I think that toughness (I’d call it corruptness now) is how Bill remains in silence and has never once called me to say sorry about you losing your job because of the CA budget. After all, if you believe their version it was just finances and nothing personal. Never once has he said sorry my daughter committed adultery and left you for your best friend. Sorry you lost your kids 50% of the time as I know you were a really involved father. So if the budget improves you’d think I’d be first in line to be rehired at Sacramento right? Right….I am blacklisted.
Vickrey loves the grey. He did not retire in CA to be close to his grandkids as he clained to the press (which is actually fine with me). That lie to the CA press was done to hide that he was leaving CA as he always planned to with a huge pension. He didn’t say the truth because he wanted to keep it all going with Overholt and Patel with Tani. He wasn’t going to give the ACJ more amunition to show he and George had built a political machine that was out of control in the wake of CCMS. Lies were as easy for him as they were for Lance Armstrong. Nobody was going to bring his image down. He was going out with awards just like Lance.
The Vickrey’s taught their kids they were special which is actually true. All kids are special. The perversion of this message is subtle and not really ever stated but his daughter learned incorrectly that her happiness was more important than that of others. She then went one shade of grey further to the idea that it was OK if she gained her happiness at the expense of another (her 20 year friend who she outright betrayed). That’s basically a narciscistic viewpoint when you go there.
Bill’s daughter literally betrayed her own bridesmaid in open contempt for her and her 12 year marriage and has been silent about it ever since. She now spends time with her former bridesmaid’s kids as if she didn’t betray their mom in any way. My former best friend pretends he didn’t betray me to my kids too. It’s a toxic childhood for them to grow up in such deception but that is their reality. It is really immoral to me (not illegal so CA Courts allow it) but that’s my world. This is how the arrogance of the Vickrey style works in families and it is sorta how it worked in CA Courts. They never admit to any mistakes (ani is this way too) which is very unhealthy for any organization.
My view is CA Court is recovering from having had a relationship with a narcissist as the State Court Administrator running the courts for the past 15 years. It is very similar to my own process in recovering from being in a 18 year relationship to Vickrey’s daughter. Look at all the rebound State Court Administrator relationships (3 of them) since Vickrey left. The Chief is unstable and appears now to be eliminating the AOC all together in name. It is a long term fight this rift between the ACJ and the Chief. A very different vision and irreconcilable differences exist between those visions. That is why she will never open up the Judicial Council to other voices
Which brings me back to this forum and my beef today with some who seek to silence a viewpoint. Vote a post up or down a post, critique a post, but don’t threaten to leave it because you disagree with an opinion. That’s cowardly.
That’s sorta how Ron George acted with the JC. He ended all counter opinions on the JC. This page is better than that and should tolerate offensive speech (or in my case very long winded posts). I think Kathy raised a good point in saying nepotism is a factor in CA Courts and it prompted me to speak out. Her voice deserves to be heard as do all voices.
I have met Tani twice. Both times were on interviews. She was on the Third District Court of Appeals at the time. One was for a low level supervisor job. I find it interesting that she was there on the panel for both jobs I ever applied to with the Court of Appeals don’t you? She owes her job to Bill Vickrey and was his loyal helper when he was in charge. That is why she gives out that award in his honor as much as anything. I see that award in his name as her way of saying thanks for advancing my carreer and she does truly believe in that vision. If they have done any wrongs it is best to not speak of it openly. Hide behind silence sort of like my ex does about really painful actions and maybe the critics will just give up in time.
My point of this long post is there is indeed nepotism or favorites on nearly every interview at all levels in CA Courts not just in San Diego Superior Court. The CA Legislature is the same way with their staff too. They don’t want to have civil service rules where they can’t hire friends, favorites, and family. They don’t want civil service like is expected in the Executive Branch. I say this as someone who has experienced nepotism both ways. Kathy has a valid point. Happy to give her a thumbs up. This is not just a page for judges but for all. Even the lowly voice of a former court employee like me. Thanks for the forum JCW!
Michael Paul
August 7, 2014
Wow. Just wow…..
R. Campomadera
August 7, 2014
Dang, the image that comes to mind is the snake-filled Chamber of Secrets in Raiders of the Lost Ark.
wearyant
August 7, 2014
MaxRebo5, wowsers! I fear for your safety … but thanks for posting ALL your posts so unselfishly. Will we hear from you again or will you take to a bunker near the general Nat?
katy
August 7, 2014
Max,
Thank you for confirming that nepotism in the branch can indeed have an adverse impact on us all. I sincerely appreciate you explaining it from a case on point situation.
Sometimes when people are involved in trying to solve a problem, they don’t even reailize that what they are doing might be part of the problem. I think its good for them to hear differing views from others.
The main thing I would like to tell you, Max, is that in the big scheme of things I think your girls are very fortunate to have you for a daddy What you are teaching them in conjunction with what they are seeing first hand, will make them an ethical asset to society.
Michael,
As you know, its always been the deal. If you and JCW think I need to be heavily censored toward what you perceive as the way of advancing the establishment of ethics in the branch, then go for it. Its your board. Not mine. I only contribute where I think I can help. If you think differently, then as I’ve told you many times, I respect your decision.
OBT and Lando,
Please don’t feel under attack. You are right, too.
Sharon, (still logged into WP as Katy)
JusticeCalifornia
August 7, 2014
MaxRebo5, thank you for sharing your story.
Not to add fuel to the fire or anything, but how about Santa Clara’s Judge Vanessa Zecher? Her mother was a judge, and both her husbands (Cain and Fox) were judges. Cain’s wife was director of court services. . . .
okay I’m done. I have other nepotism stories but they are nothing compared to MaxRebo5’s story. . .
I would like to point out that we all look at what is happening from different angles and from different experiences, we are all clearly opinionated (LOL), but we are all posting here with the hope that things will change for the better.
courtflea
August 7, 2014
MaxRebo5 you have my sympathy for having been related to Bill Vickrey. But thanks for having the guts to share your story and expose your true identity. Like ant, I am concerned for you. I think the crooks like Bill V have a long reach and are still potentially dangerous to your career and family life.
What really pisses me off is that your identity was exposed and messed with your career aspirations. I know what it is like to want to be fair and square, be accepted for being yourself and your achievements, and not use your contacts to promote yourself. Those bastards.
All i can say is you rock dude for giving us the real story.
Wendy Darling
August 7, 2014
I must agree with Max Rebo 5.
Nepotism is a very real problem in the California Judicial Branch, especially at 455 Golden Gate Avenue and within the AOC. Among the many, many examples of the manipulation of the hiring process and the awarding of State jobs at the AOC, two in particular stand out. One was the hiring of the nephew of an AOC Assistant Director in a budget analyst position in the AOC’s Finance Department. The nephew had no finance experience or expertise; he was determined to be “qualified” for the position because he had been the treasurer of his college fraternity. After his initial hire, he was quickly promoted. He was also overheard talking on the phone, bragging that he did essentially no work, was often absent, picked up a paycheck every month for pretty much doing nothing, and was completely protected because of his relationship to an AOC Assistant Director. The AOC employee who reported this was disciplined for “gossiping.” The nephew was given a private office.
Not coincidently, the AOC Senior HR analyst who handled the hiring of the nephew was herself the girlfriend of the AOC’s Assistant HR Director. The girlfriend was hired into a position which required, as “minimum qualifications”, a college degree and a drivers license, neither of which the girlfriend had. Despite this, she was hired anyway, and then quickly promoted – twice. After she was hired, and promoted, the AOC’s HR Director allowed the girlfriend to go to school at San Francisco State University during state-paid work time to get her bachelor’s degree. The AOC HR Director also ordered various AOC line staff to drive the girlfriend around.
These are but two examples. There are many, many, many more. It goes on to this day. And god forbid anyone was to look too closely at some of the hires that have taken place in the AOC’s Office of General Counsel, or the “close personal relationships” of certain AOC attorneys with certain judges.
In the vernacular of the AOC line staff, it’s called “whoring your way up.”
But it’s not just nepotism in hiring and the awarding of State positions. I have witnessed discussions at 455 Golden Gate Avenue in which criminal activity was quietly “hushed up” depending on a person’s “close personal relationship” with Vickrey, Overholt, certain justices of the appellate courts, and others, including King George. From relatively lesser offenses, such as a DUI, or two, or more serious ones, such as possession of child pornography in such a quantity that it constituted multiple felonies and a mandatory prison sentence that would have been in the decades. All very nicely taken care of. “There isn’t anything a phone call from the Chief Justice can’t fix” isn’t just some catch phrase. It was, and remains, a well honed policy and practice at 455 Golden Gate Avenue.
I may not always agree with Sharon/Katy’s posts, but I will defend to the death her right to say them, especially here. One of the most powerful weapons judicial branch “leadership” previously had was the ability to silence and isolate those that would speak out. That was taken away from them, first with the AOC Watcher, and then with this forum, JCW. This is the only place on the entire planet that a person can come and speak honestly and openly about the very serious problems and issues in the California Judicial Branch and not be punished for telling the truth. If you come here, you take the bitter with the sweet, the good with the bad, that with which you agree along with that which you may not. If you don’t like a post, move on. It is the very essence of the First Amendment. To the extent that a post, or poster, needs to be modified, I leave that to the discretion of JCW, and JCW seems to be doing a really good job on that front so far.
And Max Rebo 5, I admire and respect your courage. I also wish to add my sympathies to you for in any way being related to Darth Vickrey. Working for Vickrey was a particular kind of hell. Being related to him, even by marriage, is a hell even I can’t begin to imagine.
Finally Max Rebo 5, pleased by assured it wasn’t all just some “magical coincidence”, all those things that happened. You have but to look at the Vickrey award for “excellence in judicial branch administration” to know the truth of this. Queen Feckless and branch leadership can change the name a thousand times over but it is, and will remain, the AOC: the Administrative Office of Corruption.
You just can’t make this stuff up. Really.
Long live the ACJ.
MaxRebo5
August 7, 2014
Thanks all. Mostly, sorry about all the typos for you as readers (sorry!). I was writing fast and emotionally not controlled and professional.
I am not worried about any fallout from my post though. What more can be done to me? My new job is in a union and I am past my probation period. I’m a research analyst II and will be eligible to be a research manager this fall. Besides, if I do get fired it just costs my ex more in child support so she has a financial incentive for me to be gainfully employed at the moment.
I am pleased with my choice as a dad. I think ethics is everything and am trying to be a moral example for them. They need it. They are teens so Darth Vickrey is mostly just Papa to them but I am teaching them to know right from wrong. It is all quite sad and not at all what I ever imagined for their childhoods or lives.
Thanks for this forum JCW! I’m very pleased it is going strong and voices outside of Team George are being heard. Looking forward to that audit report in two months and new appointments by Governor Brown to the CA Supreme Court (Not Steinberg). Governor Brown is my new boss and he seems wise to all of this crap. Gives me hope!
katy
August 8, 2014
Wendy, thank you.
I know you are going to find this kind of odd, but I wholeheartedly support JCW and MP anytime and everytime they may want to censor my posts.
Although our goals are compatible, MP and I have a differing phylosophy of how to cut off the head of the snake.
I hate censorship of differing thoughts that may not be popular with the crowd. Yet, I understand that this important board is unique and sometimes unique methods are necessary. Much has been accomplished via this board for the good of us all.
If the owners/moderators feel there are times that my phylosophy needed to be moderated, they know that I wholeheartedly support their right to do so.
courtflea
August 7, 2014
you know I am a big beliver in karma. It may not happen in our life time but these villians will pay one day. yes they will. there is a special place in hell for them. yes you can make that up and it will happen….one day. Rest easy Max, their time will come
courtflea
August 7, 2014
ok I just have to bitchy Max…are the spawn of Bill V ugly or what? meow! 🙂
The OBT
August 7, 2014
Pretty sad what is happening to this blog. To call my comments cowardly after all I have done in my career to reform this branch and after all the hits I and many others like me have taken, who have advocated reform in the trenches since the beginning of King George’s administration is very troubling. My point was a simple one. We need to maintain focus on bringing democracy back to our branch. We need to work in a positive way to end the waste of taxpayer dollars on a bloated and poorly run bureaucracy at 455 Golden Gate. And we need to restore the value of ethics to a system that should stand for that. I have no problem pointing out problems that judges or anyone else create in blocking the movement to achieve that democracy and essential reform. What i do object to is personal attacks on judicial officers that are unfounded or unrelated to the administration of justice and/or attacks on their family members.That shouldn’t be what we are all about. It is not a First Amendment issue it is an issue of just being fair to people even those who haven’t been particularly fair to me or many others. It has been great contributing here and my hope is that my modest insights helped make a difference. Good luck everyone. I exit on the positive and when I formally retire I do want to meet you Wendy to thank you specifically for your courage, your honesty, and your commitment to restoring an ethical branch of government. You are an inspiration that I will never forget.
Wendy Darling
August 7, 2014
I do not think of you in any way as a coward OBT. Far, far from it. Sometimes choices of words can harm where harm is not intended. I agree with what you say above, especially about remaining focused, and not straying into personal attacks. At the same time, I have always maintained that it is all of us together, or none of us at all. All should be able to post here, as long as they do so responsibly. When it is not done responsibly, I personally leave that to JCW’s discretion to address and resolve. There have been many posts that I have disliked, even found offensive. I choose to move past them, and focus instead on the greater, common objective. For we must reach for that together, or we will not reach it at all.
Your contributions here, and to that greater common objective, are beyond measure. I, for one, have always looked forward to your posts. It will be a great loss for us all to loose your voice and perspective here, OBT. I hope you reconsider. If not, I will miss your contributions and presence here very, very much. As for the rest, I am deeply touched and honored. JCW knows how to reach me, in an indirect way.
Long live the ACJ.
MaxRebo5
August 8, 2014
I did not mean to personally attack you OBT As Wendy said, sometimes choices of words can harm where there is no harm intended. I just disagree with this one line:
“If I see any more of these unwarranted attacks on San Diego judicial officers I am out of here.”
My point is to support an open forum for information and I was not agreeing with all of Katy’s points but defending her right to make them. Her voice deserves to be heard. Vote up a post, vote down a post, or reply with a comment. That’s the marketplace of ideas and it’s beauty/flaw is the freedom of the writers to express themselves openly. Threatening to leave is walking away from the arena which is not the same as standing up and debating things point by point. If my reply offended you it was not my intent.
The true critics of this page are not the posters debating issues on it. The scary critics to me are the Judicial Council insiders who see posters on this page as cowards hiding behind false names. Or those like King George who arrogantly said critics are ants on a rail who’s views are not worth notice at all. Justice having blindness through arrogance (not objectivity) bothers me very much. According to Wikipidea, “Justice is depicted with a blindfold because it represents objectivity, in that justice is or should be meted out objectively, without fear or favour, regardless of identity, money, power, or weakness.”
Justice must be blind for all voices to be heard (like on this forum where we don’t see each other). If the process for making policy was open and democratic on the Judicial Council itself there would be real debates on issues and less need for this web page.
Since two Chiefs now have set out to control the JC in order to have it “speak with one voice” the JC has moved from being arrogantly blind of “lesser” voices to a further shade of grey in actively crushing voices of dissent.
Today there is very little debate at all on the Judicial Council (for example the name change of the AOC). Instead critics within the courts have have no seat at the table and have to speak in the public comment section at meetings. Given the Chief Justice can dominate and control all policy making it takes great courage for judges, AOC employees, trial court employees, and the press to speak out and have their voices heard. I like your voice OBT, meant no offense, and hope you keep bravely sharing it here where it is heard and valued.
Lando
August 8, 2014
So many things have changed over the years. I miss those old Muni Court days when we ran our own operation, tried to achieve a sense of personal justice and we spent taxpayer dollars prudently. Since we were a small operation we could have a connection to the public and counsel that appeared before us that was lost when HRH-1 appeared on the scene to “fix” everything. Like the General and OBT and many many others I fought the good fight for many years. Just like everyone here. Thanks JCW whoever you are for providing this awesome forum. It has made a huge difference. Thanks to all the great contributors here too for all they exposed particularly to the Governor and legislature about the excesses of HRH-1 HRH-2 and their branch cronies at the Crystal Palace. Like the great Jerry Garcia said what a long sad trip this has been.
unionman575
August 8, 2014
http://www.pacbiztimes.com/2014/08/08/courts-say-electronic-records-are-on-the-docket/
wearyant
August 8, 2014
Good link, UMan! Hope you picked up the central coast paper featuring it in person as the weather out here is delish! 😀
unionman575
August 8, 2014
LOL I get it online.
😉
katy
August 8, 2014
OBT, I don’t think of you as a coward either. It takes a lot of guts for a judge to post from the heart on this blog, even annonymously. We all know that you live in a culture of retaliation for speaking the truth. I don’t care if you always think like I do or not. I still respect your right to say what you think and this blog has provided a great forum for judges to bring serious branch problems to public/legislative light.
I think Lando just nailed the problem. We need to return to the days when judges could run their courts autonomously in the name of justice. George’s folly of trying to run it like a tax-payer funded, family owned and operated corporation, where the CJ controls everything via the BOD at the JC; and with judges and their staff being the little worker bees — has ruined the CA judicial branch.
It seems to me that at the end of the day, the solution always seems to be the same: Give back greater control to the trial judges over their funding and democratize the JC. Cut the AOC down to the bare bones of doing paperwork — not making executive decisions that impact justice all across the state.
There is currently too much control of money, power and policy is in the hands of too few perpetually conflicted souls.
And to the trial judges – not to diss but only to inform where you are aiding the problem you seek to stop: You need to stop dissing the helm for their SWOV while practicving it yourselves in your courtrooms — even when it is known to be unconstitutional, unlawful and sometimes criminal.
When you do that, all you are doing is discrediting your own words and the words of those who want you to have greater control of your courts. To me, this is where it seems that mass nepotism may be a root cause of some of the continued problems from top to bottom in the Cal judicial branch.. Break the George indoctrined SWOV from your mindset and we’ll all be alot better off in the end.
Wendy Darling
August 8, 2014
Katy/Sharon: with all respect, this sounds like you are scolding people, like they are children. Please stop.
katy
August 8, 2014
Not meaning to sound that way. My apologies if it comes across like that.
Like you say, we all bring different perspectives to this board of what its going to take to really solve the branch’s ethics problem.
I’m not a court employee. I am in a unique position from others on this board of communicating with those harmed by SWOV in the courts themselves. Just like I think some had no idea of the problems nepotism may cause until Max articulated it so well: I don’t think some understand how erred SWOV has trickled down in the courts. Just trying to communicate to solve a problem — not scold anyone.
Thank you for letting me know that it appears to you that I am scolding. Will try to do a better job of phrasing my points so they don’t come across that way.
courtflea
August 8, 2014
don’t go OBT, please don’t.
Wendy Darling
August 8, 2014
I know Flea, and I agree, one-thousand percent.
Long live the ACJ.
wearyant
August 8, 2014
I would also second Flea’s request and ask The OBT to continue interacting with this forum. I missed any “cowardly” reference; nonetheless, The OBT is an priceless viewpoint here. Each commenter provides a different, interesting “take” on this sad, sometimes poignantly hilarious soap opera we are all a part of in *our* judicial branch. Here’s sincerely hoping all will continue to comment, and at the very, very least, check in and see how everyone is faring.
I sure hope Lando’s recent post was not a farewell! I too remember days of old in muni where the cases piled on, and all who worked together felt a kinship and had the feeling of being a part of the laboring “crew,” getting through huge calendars and experiencing the chaos and angst of the public appearing before us, serving the citizens, feeling like good was accomplished at the end of a long working day. Little did we know that this positive workforce effort would end at the hands of a weird, elite narcissist resulting in courtrooms being closed and droves of trial court workers, whose endeavors were extremely valued, would be laid off as fat elitist bureaucrats continued on in their luxurious lifestyle! This blog may be terribly diminished without all voices, but definitely would without The OBT and Lando’s posts.
Have a great weekend, all.
And long live the ACJ. Remember, what is known formerly as the AOC is still serving themselves at the detriment of all Californians.
Wendy Darling
August 8, 2014
Again, I agree with Ant, one thousand percent.
Long live the ACJ.
Stuart Michael
August 8, 2014
I’m a retired executive-level trial court employee who also worked with many AOC employees and others in the court system statewide for many years. I found that almost of them were quite competent in their fields, professionally and personally honest, and committed to providing valuable services to the courts and the public. Sadly this sometimes meant that their AOC or court careers were stunted or destroyed by incompetent or corrupt managers. Many just left, or were hounded till they quit.
My court career spanned the Justice Courts, the Municipal Courts, and eventually the unified Superior Courts. I had the opportunity to work on numerous state-wide programs, projects, and training programs and am proud that I was able to add some small contributions and make many friends through the years. I too remember how good the Muni Court days really were for the the courts and the public they served. Although there were many initial benefits to unification and some important functions provided by the AOC, they’ve been wiped out by the cancer destroying us all.
I was one of only two people who accompanied Paula Negley the day her case was heard by the 9th Circuit panel. Justice California was the other. We knew it was a lost cause. As a long-time friend of Paula’s – dating back to our previous careers before we met again years later in the court system, I know what she went through, personally and professionally. It’s a truly tragic story, made even worse because there were many others similarly treated, and the perps got away with it – and still do.
I’ve followed JCW almost from the beginning and have gained a lot of insight and confirmation about the goings-on at Star Palace 455, and courts throughout the state. JCW is a vital part of whatever hope there is to rescue the courts. The range of contributors and their experiences is awesome.
We need to remember that JCW’s full name is “Judicial Council Watcher”, and that there are many watchers and observers. When the focus is on individual personality traits, disparaging personal attacks, even when true ( which most probably are) and use derogatory names and slurs, we weaken the message. When some feel they have to bail out, we all lose even if we don’t agree with their points of view
Those who have dropped out should return. The stakes for all Californians are too high for anyone of us to walk away, even when you’re unfairly attacked.
Please reconsider. California needs all of you.
katy
August 8, 2014
“When AOC employee Paula Negley sued the AOC and the Judicial Council for gender discrimination and wrongful termination, attorneys for the Council argued back in 2010: “Plaintiff was employed by the AOC, not the Judicial Council. (Fuentes, Decl. p. 9.) As all of Plaintiff’s claims are predicated on the existence of an employee/employer relationship, the Judicial Council is entitled to summary judgment.” (Emphasis in original.) And Ernesto Fuentes, Director of the AOC’s Human Resources Division, stated in a declaration under penalty of perjury: “Plaintiff was employed by the AOC, not the Judicial Council. The Judicial Council does not have any employees.”
So what are the CJ and JC members intending to do now that it is established that they clearly understand their legal counsel and one of their employees lied in a federal court case?
They claim to have turned over a new leaf, right? If that’s true, surely this would cause them to undo and stop the continuing harm to Ms. Negley, caused by criminal acts of their employees; and to see those who committed criminal acts, punished. Right?
Or is it yet another lie that they have turned over a new leaf — in order to gain access and control of a greater amount of tax-dollars?
Is there a continuing pattern of lying to gain access and control of tax dollars that are allocated to the judicial branch?
katy
August 8, 2014
“As all of Plaintiff’s claims are predicated on the existence of an employee/employer relationship, the Judicial Council is entitled to summary judgment.”
“Several courts have held that RICO claims are preempted by the National Labor Relations Act (“NLRA”) where the “underlying conduct of the plaintiff’s RICO claim is wrongful only by virtue of the labor laws.”…The First Circuit similarly concluded that a RICO claim alleging that the defendants intimidated and coerced the plaintiff into quitting his job in retaliation for his union activities as a union steward was subject to the primary jurisdiction of the National Labor Relations Board (“NLRB”), and thus preempted….On the other hand, the NLRA does not preempt RICO claims based on predicate acts that are illegal independent of the labor laws…
Courts have uniformly held that a cause of action that would be time-barred if it was brought independently may nevertheless serve as a predicate act for an otherwise timely RICO claim…
RICO plaintiffs should be careful to note that both equitable tolling and fraudulent concealment require the plaintiff to plead sufficient facts to establish that despite its due diligence, the plaintiff could not have discovered its RICO claim. The plaintiff must also plead fraudulent concealment with particularity as required by Rule 9(b) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. Also, a RICO plaintiff facing a statute of limitations problem should consider arguing that the limitations period should be equitably tolled until it could determine, exercising reasonable diligence, that its injury stems from conduct that was part of a pattern of racketeering. A plaintiff will not be able to avail itself of equitable tolling if it cannot demonstrate that it exercised reasonable diligence in its effort to investigate its injuries and its claim…”
http://jenner.com/system/assets/publications/12740/original/Civil_RICO_2014.pdf?1393971640
JusticeCalifornia
August 8, 2014
OBT, Lando, I hope no one goes.
Everyone brings a different and valuable perspective.
Lando, I hope that was not a farewell. I would really miss you.
Paula J. Negley
August 8, 2014
I would very much appreciate it if people would stop invoking my name because it has suddenly become politically convenient or politically useful for them to do so.
katy
August 8, 2014
Paula,
I apologize if my comments have aided to cause you more undue stress. I understand why you might feel a bit used.
unionman575
August 13, 2014
http://www.vvdailypress.com/article/20140812/NEWS/140819937
MaxRebo5
August 13, 2014
Great link unionman575. I saw the press release on their new report and I actually think it is a great report (I don’t just complain). Here is a link to the report:
http://www.courts.ca.gov/26853.htm
What I don’t like is the spin on it from the Judicial Council insiders like Justice Miller. Filings are down 10% since last year alone and are down far more statewide when you see the multi-year trends on pages 39-44 of their own report. Yet the Chief still says the branch needs 2 billion more money just to tread water? Something doesn’t add up.
The fact is the branch is doing less work (has less weighted cases). This report proves it and is consistent with the decrease in fees and fines which the Legislature is having to backfill already for the branch. Meanwhile Tani keeps asking for additional money as if she has a growing workload need when she does not. The Chief’s message is way off from the reality presented by her own staff!
If the Judicial Council was an independent and credible policy making body they would tell her not to ask for more money from the other branches because it is inconsistent with the data gathered by the Judicial Council’s own analysts. The reality is Superior Court statewide filings are down significantly since 2009. Some areas like Fresno, Stockton, Riverside County, San Bernardino may be hurting as those communities are poorer and have had more crime since the recession. Other communities are seeing less cases so what has to happen under the workload model is resources (funding) should shift to where the need is greatest (where case filings are increasing the most).
That workload funding system was just imposed on the branch recently and will begin to happen now under the model being phased in over several years. This is the main work of the Judicial Council in terms of the budget. The council will begin to take from one court to help fund another court in greater need. Why should the state pay more overall to the branch when statewide case filings are down three years in a row? The Judicial Council is starting to do this tough work now (because they were forced too by the Legislature and Governor). Meanwhile Tani and Miller still call for more money and they are completely out of step with their own staff’s data. It is painful to take from one area and give to another but that is the job for this Chief and her appointed Judicial Council given the decline in filings.
To gain credibility as a policy making body, which follows the logic of basic math, the Judicial Council should stop asking the Legislature for more money when overall workload for the branch is clearly down. The collective wisdom of the bench on the council looking at the data should override the politcal posturing of the Chief in this case (but they don’t).
Lord knows the Judicial Council needs to repair their image after CCMS, the SEC Report, telecomuting staff from Switzerland, four directors of the AOC in the past few years, and now the rebranding of the AOC as the Judicial Council’s staff. This report was great but 800 staff for a policy making body? Is that really necessary? Looking forward to that audit in October to see the answer to this and other questions. Should be another great opportunity for the Judicial Council to make real reforms and stick to it’s important but very limited constitutional duties
wearyant
August 13, 2014
“Lord knows the Judicial Council needs to repair their image after CCMS, the SEC Report, telecomuting staff from Switzerland, four directors of the AOC in the past few years” …
Hi Max! I thought the repairing of their image was the schlepping forward without a name in an obvious attempt to fade into obscurity. LOL! First real transparent move the evil empire has made, in my humble opinion. I too look forward to Elaine Howle and staff’s report. It should be very interesting to a lot of people. With the probable leaks from the ongoing investigation to those currently in power, these continual requests for more money from the queen and Miller are curious indeed.
unionman575
August 13, 2014
To put it in the vernacular I have “wood” while waiting for Elaine Howle’s report.
😉
wearyant
August 13, 2014
Ah-hem, UMan! If that’s the vernacular, I cringe at what you term slang. 🙂