Whistleblower alleges extravagant court spending

 

Be sure to click on the link below to watch this 6 min story about extravagant judicial waste on the KGO website- the written story below is not a full transcript of the expose that appeared on Channel 7 KGO TV at 6pm last night.

 

Whistleblower alleges extravagant court spending

 

http://abclocal.go.com/kgo/story?section=news/state&id=7603881

 

 

Vic Lee

More: Bio, E-mail, News Team

 

SACRAMENTO, CA (KGO) -- Charges of questionable and extravagant spending are being leveled against the state's judiciary. The charges come from a whistleblower and a group of judges.

 

These are serious charges made by a former senior staffer who worked in the Offices of the Judicial Council, the body which controls the multi-billion dollar budget for the state courts.

 

That whistleblower spoke to ABC7 News exclusively. He says there is a lack of accountability in the way they spend taxpayers' money.

 

State judicial administrators approved $8,000 to remove gum from the entrance of the Sacramento courthouse.

 

"We are spending untold amounts of money on projects that shouldn't be even on the radar screen," Judge Maryanne Gilliard said.

 

Gilliard, a member of Alliance of California Judges, calls the expense outrageous, considering the state's massive budget deficit.

 

"There are courts up and down the state that don't have the funds to keep their courtroom doors open, you know, Monday through Friday from eight to five," Gilliard said.

 

Gilliard also points to the clock in her courtroom, which was replaced even though the old one worked. In fact, all 44 courtrooms will get new clocks at an estimated cost of $20,000.

 

In Merced, nearly $6,000 was spent to replace plants with rose bushes on the courthouse grounds.

 

A work order for repairs in San Diego's courthouse was for $45,000. The work included new tiles, painting and repairs on the courtroom doors, but the $45,000 bill seemed steep so ABC7 asked a contractor to look at the work.

His estimate was that it should have cost between $20,000 and $30,000. ABC7 also asked another contractor who said he would do the work for $28,000. Both estimates are more than one-third less than what it cost taxpayers.

 

These are examples of work orders that the Judicial Council approved last year to maintain California's courthouses. The council administers the multi-billion dollar budget for the state's courts. Its 27 members are appointed by the chief justice of the California Supreme Court.

 

The Judicial Council's staff is the Administrative Office of the Courts, a bureaucracy which has grown to nearly 1,000 state employees.

"You have people making decisions that become isolated and removed from the day to day working operations of the court," Judge David Lampe said.

 

Lampe, from Kern County, is a founding member of the Alliance of California Judges. The group advocates for reforms in the state judiciary.

 

"These are outrageous costs and they make no sense," he said.

Michael Paul was a senior technical analyst at the AOC. Part of his job was to review cost estimates for various projects. Paul says he uncovered fraud, waste and abuse and told his superiors what he was finding.

 

"The AOC knowingly used unlicensed contractors to maintain, remodel and renovate courthouses statewide," Paul said.

The AOC went to the state attorney general's office, which subsequently sued the contractors.

 

Paul filed a taxpayer lawsuit against his employer in early June, saying he was frustrated that the AOC was not addressing other abuses he was discovering. He was fired a month later, he says, for not following procedure in reporting what he thought was bid rigging on a project. But he believes the real reason was because he sued the AOC.

"I had embarrassed them by doing this, so it was time to get rid of me," Paul said.

 

The AOC responded with a written statement saying, "Mr. Paul's assertion that he was fired because of his whistleblower activities is absolutely untrue."

 

Paul also questioned the costs of building 52 new courthouses. Most will cost more than $1,000 per square foot.

 

"Those figures don't match up with any cost-estimating guides anywhere for construction costs estimating," Paul said.

By comparison, the federal government is building a new court annex in San Diego and a new courthouse in Bakersfield for $500 to $700 per square foot.

 

Paul says the most outrageous example is Alpine County's new $26 million courthouse that will replace the historic one. There are only 1,061 people in all of Alpine County. That adds up to $1,700 a square foot -- $24,800 per Alpine County resident.

 

In Kern County, the Delano courthouse will be replaced with a new one for $42 million. It will have three courtrooms. One will be empty.

"We can only afford to staff two judges in Delano and for the foreseeable future we don't see that changing," Lampe said.

That ends up being $21 million per judge.

 

In response to court maintenance, the AOC wrote the expenditures go through "...an exhaustive review and approval process ... before any work is undertaken."

 

The AOC also said, "New construction projects go through a competitive bidding process and are scrutinized by our business services office before bids are awarded."

 

The AOC also says two other state agencies review construction projects.

 

As to Paul's lawsuit, the AOC says they have not been served so they cannot respond.

 

Wednesday, the Assembly Accountability Committee is holding a hearing on these and other controversial issues surrounding the Judicial Council. ABC7 will be there.

 

 

Kathleen Russell

Executive Director

Center for Judicial Excellence

Note our new info- we just moved!

495 Miller Avenue, Suite 304

Mill Valley, CA 94941

Main 415.388.9600 Fax 415.388.9610

www.CenterforJudicialExcellence.org

 

 

 

 

WordPress Tags: Whistleblower,transcript,expose,Channel,news,Team,SACRAMENTO,judiciary,judges,Judicial,Council,dollar,courts,money,State,courthouse,Judge,Maryanne,Gilliard,member,Alliance,California,expense,deficit,clock,fact,cost,plants,bushes,repairs,Diego,tiles,contractor,Both,orders,justice,Supreme,Court,Administrative,Office,bureaucracy,employees,David,Lampe,Kern,Michael,Paul,analyst,Part,fraud,attorney,lawsuit,employer,June,procedure,statement,assertion,activities,Most,foot,figures,construction,comparison,government,Bakersfield,example,Alpine,Delano,ends,response,maintenance,approval,services,Committee,Russell,Executive,Director,Center,Excellence,Note,info,Miller,Avenue,Suite,Mill,Valley,Main,CenterforJudicialExcellence,Offices,administrators,doors,clocks,examples,members,decisions,operations,contractors,agencies,multi,billion,taxpayers,courtroom,courtrooms,courthouses,million

ABUSIVE FATHERS ARE MORE LIKELY TO SEEK SOLE CUSTODY IN CHILD CUSTODY BATTLES

Source American Mothers Political Party

This is from the Presidential Task Force Report produced by the American Psychological Association, where it is cited fathers who batter frequently file for sole custody and often get it.

Report of the American Psychological Association Presidential Task Force On Violence And The Family

ISSUES AND DILEMMAS IN FAMILY VIOLENCE

Issue #5: WHEN PARENTS SEPARATE AFTER AN ABUSIVE RELATIONSHIP, SHOULDN’T FATHERS HAVE AS MUCH RIGHT AS MOTHERS TO BE GRANTED PHYSICAL CUSTODY OF AND VISITATION RIGHTS WITH THEIR CHILDREN?

Tensions exist between children’s need for contact with their father and their need to be protected from the physical, sexual and psychological abuse that is common in families where there has been other forms of violence such as woman abuse.

Although most people believe that fathers should have equal access to their children after the termination of a relationship between the parents, the equal-access option is based on the assumption that the fathers will act in their children’s best interests. However, that is a naive assumption in situations where family violence has occurred.

Fathers who batter their children’s mothers can be expected to use abusive power and control techniques to control the children, too. In many of these families, prior to separation, the men were not actively involved in the raising of their children. To gain control after the marital separation, the fathers fight for the right to be involved.

Often children who have been exposed to violence in the family are frightened to confront their father’s negative or abusive behavior, and mothers cannot protect them. Sometimes the father tries to alienate the child from the mother by using money and other enticements, negative comments, or restricted access to the telephone during visitation with him. Other times, fathers may threaten or actually kidnap the child to punish the mother for leaving, or to try to force her to return.

Most people, including the battered woman herself, believe that when a woman leaves a violent man, she will remain the primary caretaker of their children. Family courts, however, may not consider the history of woman abuse relevant in awarding custody. Recent studies suggest that an abusive man is more likely than a nonviolent father to seek sole physical custody of his children and may be just as likely (or even more likely) to be awarded custody as the mother. Often fathers win physical custody because men generally have greater financial resources and can continue the court battles with more legal assistance over a longer period of time.

Family courts frequently minimize the harmful impact of children’s witnessing violence between their parents and sometimes are reluctant to believe mothers. If the court ignores the history of violence as the context for the mother’s behavior in a custody evaluation, she may appear hostile, uncooperative, or mentally unstable. For example, she may refuse to disclose her address, or may resist unsupervised visitation, especially if she thinks her child is in danger. Psychological evaluators who minimize the importance of violence against the mother, or pathologize her responses to it, may accuse her of alienating the children from the father and may recommend giving the father custody in spite of his history of violence.

Some professionals assume that accusations of physical or sexual abuse of children that arise during divorce or custody disputes are likely to be false, but the empirical research to date shows no such increase in false reporting at that time. In many instances, children are frightened about being alone with a father they have seen use violence towards their mother or a father who has abused them. Sometimes children make it clear to the court that they wish to remain with the mother because they are afraid of the father, but their wishes are ignored.

Research indicates that high levels of continued conflict between separated and divorced parents hinders children’s normal development. Some practitioners now believe that it may be better for children’s development to restrict the father’s access to them and avoid continued danger to both mothers and the children.

WordPress Tags: ABUSIVE,SEEK,SOLE,CUSTODY,CHILD,Source,American,Political,Presidential,Task,Force,Report,Psychological,Association,Violence,Issue,PARENTS,SEPARATE,RELATIONSHIP,SHOULDN,PHYSICAL,VISITATION,RIGHTS,CHILDREN,father,woman,Although,termination,option,assumption,interests,separation,Often,behavior,Sometimes,money,comments,times,Most,caretaker,courts,history,Recent,assistance,period,impact,context,evaluation,example,danger,importance,spite,Some,wishes,Research,development,FATHERS,DILEMMAS,Tensions,situations,techniques,responses,accusations,instances,sexual

How To Spot A Dangerous Man: The Susan Murphy Milano Show- August 11, 2010 at 4:00 PM EST

How To Spot A Dangerous Man: The Susan Murphy Milano Show- August 11, 2010 at 4:00 PM EST

Today's guest Sandra L. Brown, M.A., CEO of The Institute forRelational Harm Reduction & Public Psychopathy Education is a psychopathologist, program development specialist, lecturer, and an award-winning author. Her books include the award winning Women Who Love Psychopaths: Inside the Relationships of Inevitable Harm with Psychopaths, Sociopaths & Narcissists as well as How to Spot a Dangerous Man Before You Get Involved, and Counseling Victims of Violence: A Handbook for Helping Professionals.
Sandra is recognized for her pioneering work on women’s issues related to relational harm . She specializes in the development of Pathological Love Relationship clinical training and survivor support services. Her books, CD’s, DVD’s, and other training materials have been used as curriculum in drug rehabs, women’s organizations and shelters, women’s jail and prison programs, school and college-based programs, inner city projects, and various psychology and sociology programs and distributed in almost every country of the world.

To listen to the show live for Wednesday August 11, 2010, and participate in the chat room, the direct link for the show is HERE
We will take your call live. The number to call in with questions or comments is:
The number is 347-326-9337

 

 

How you can escape a violent relationship and get out with your life. ALSO NOW AVAILABLE ON KINDLE

WordPress Tags: Spot,Dangerous,Susan,Murphy,Milano,August,guest,Sandra,Brown,Institute,Relational,Harm,Reduction,Public,Psychopathy,Education,development,lecturer,author,Women,Love,Psychopaths,Inside,Relationships,Inevitable,Sociopaths,Narcissists,Victims,Violence,Handbook,Pathological,Relationship,services,curriculum,drug,prison,college,world,room,HERE,comments,life,ALSO,AVAILABLE,KINDLE,organizations

INTERVIEW WITH DOMINIQUE LASSEUR, PRODUCER OF “BREAKING THE SILENCE: THE CHILDREN’S STORIES”

INTERVIEW WITH DOMINIQUE LASSEUR, PRODUCER OF “BREAKING THE SILENCE: THE CHILDREN’S STORIES”

Written by Staff

Saturday, 24 July 2010 10:31

PBS Documentary “Breaking The Silence The Children’s Stories”

What Breaking the Silence Means

Interview with Dominique Lasseur

Documentary film producer Dominique Lasseur set out to explore the failures of the family court system in “Breaking the Silence: Children’s Stories.” But when public television broadcast the program in the fall of 2005, the father’s rights movement was quick to react with scathing criticism and a deluge of viewer complaints.

What compelled you to take on this issue?

We didn’t set out to produce a piece about custody issues. We had planned to make a documentary about the impact of domestic violence on children. We really wanted to show stories of what was being done to help children who were raised in domestic violence environments.

What we found was one story after another of protective mothers having their children taken away from them and given in sole or partial custody to the very man who terrorized the mother and the children. It was so outrageous, that when we heard the first stories we thought they were aberrations, but then we found that this was in fact happening often and everywhere. We knew at that point that this was the story to concentrate on.

When did you become convinced that there was a systemic problem within the family court system?

I met a woman in New Jersey and I spent an afternoon listening to her story. She had been divorced for two to three years and had lost custody of her kids. Her ex-husband was making her life a total prison by dragging her into court every month. She was a professional, intelligent woman, and I thought this can’t be happening. This is clearly a horrible story, but it has to be one case in a million.

But looking further we found the same story everywhere, in Florida, New Orleans, Ohio, California, etc. I spoke with dozens of women who were very candid about what they had endured. After listening to one story after another, there was no way to ignore the extent of the problem.

We chose to feature the stories where there were extensive court proceedings so that we could verify that what the women was telling us was what she had testified in court as well. So there was a clear history of allegations of domestic violence and/or child physical or psychological abuse. All the women we interviewed went to court believing the system was fair, not thinking for a moment their kids could be taken from them.

It seems that we are now on this issue where we were 20-25 years ago on domestic violence. I would assume that it was as difficult at that time to talk about domestic violence, as it is to talk about this particular issue now. People don’t want to believe it. They don’t want to know about it. To tell you the truth, many in my interviews I said to the woman I was interviewing, “It would be easier to believe that you were fabricating all this because what you’re telling me is so horrendous. It feels like you’re telling me a story about some remote country where there is no notion of justice.” And the fact that it’s happening here in America was unbelievable, is unbelievable.

In your opinion what is the underlying problem?

In my view, the problem is that while criminal courts have made tremendous progress in dealing with domestic violence, family courts are not as informed about the dynamics of family violence.

Why hasn’t the family court system progressed in the same way as the criminal court system?

On the record family court judges say to women, “You’re an intelligent, professional woman, so I don’t believe you’ve been abused.” You would not hear a judge in criminal court say that because people know that domestic violence is not just happening in inner city, poor neighborhoods. That’s one example.

The other example is people who are aware of the dynamic of domestic violence know what an abuser looks like and behaves like; they know that someone who is professional looking can be behind closed doors someone who has terrorized his wife and family. In fact, you have doctors, attorneys, actors who all look fabulous to the community but who are violent abusers. I think it comes down to a lack of training, lack of accountability.

What is the long-term impact of this problem?

As long as this situation continues we will undo years of progress on domestic violence because women are put in a Catch-22. If they don’t report child abuse or domestic violence, they stand the risk of losing their kids because they failed to protect them. But if they do disclose domestic violence or sexual abuse then the kids are at risk of being taken away because the mothers will be blamed for alienating them or fabricating charges.

Was it difficult to find a network to back your show?

No, I can’t say it was hard. We’ve been producing programs for Public Television for more than 20 years. I’m glad and proud that they are broadcasting our programs. We co-produced Breaking the Silence with Connecticut Public Television and it was aired nationally by PBS.

But the backlash has been pretty strong. There’s been an organized campaign mostly by father’s rights groups to demand that PBS stop distributing the program. They characterized it as an attack on fathers. This is akin to saying because you’re doing a documentary on the Holocaust you’re accusing all Germans. It makes no sense. But it has given them a forum and they have jumped on it.

Our point was not to deny that some men are victims of domestic violence. We did not seek to portray all men as rabid violent abusers. What we wanted to say is simple: children should not be put in the custody of a parent who is endangering them. In reviewing the show, ombudsmen for both the Corporation for Public Broadcasting and PBS criticized Breaking the Silence for lacking balance.

How do you respond?

The CPB Ombudsman, Ken Bode, clearly had some personal axe to grind. He did not bother to contact us before writing his “report” and simply regurgitated the fathers’ rights arguments. He went on to write two more “updates” without any indication that he was interested in the fairness and balance he claimed our documentary was lacking. The PBS Ombudsman did a more honest job even if we disagreed with his conclusions. And unlike Ken Bode, he published letters he received from people who disagreed with his report.

PBS’s official statement on the film indicated that, “The producers approached the topic with the open mindedness and commitment to fairness that we require of our journalists. Their research was extensive and supports the conclusions drawn in the program. Funding from the Mary Kay Ash Charitable Foundation met PBS’s underwriting guidelines; the Foundation had no editorial influence on program content. However, the program would have benefited from more in-depth treatment of the complex issues surrounding child custody and the role of family courts and most specifically the provocative topic of Parental Alienation Syndrome (PAS). Additionally, the documentary’s ‘first-person story telling approach’ did not allow the depth of the producers’ research to be as evident to the viewer as it could have been.”

Did you look for a father who had a similar experience to some of the mothers featured in your show?

Yes, I spoke with a father’s organization and it was clear that that they had a specific political agenda that they wanted to bring to this. The women we interviewed were simply mothers who were trying to protect their kids.

Your main source of funding for Breaking the Silence, the Mary Kay Ash Charitable Foundation, has also distanced itself from the program. Are you surprised by this?

The Mary Kay Ash Charitable Foundation did not distance itself from the program. There are very strict guidelines for PBS underwriters who are not to exercise any control over the editorial content of the programs they support. Mary Kay simply made it clear that these rules had been respected and that we the filmmakers had full editorial control. The work of the foundation and of Mary Kay Corporation on the issue of domestic violence is remarkable and will continue to affect positively the lives of thousands of women across the country.

It seems that the discussion about Breaking the Silence has turned into a debate over style rather than substance. Would you agree?

If the documentary helps in any way to open a dialogue about how family courts are victimizing the very families they are supposed to protect, then any debate will have been positive.

Has there been any positive outcome?

Yesterday, I was in Westchester County where I showed an eight-minute excerpt of Breaking the Silence to family court judges and personnel. Some were aware of the issues we presented and others were surprised. But it was very positive to see this information being used. You are not the first journalist to get into hot water after reporting on this topic. Kristen Lombardi, another contributor to this book, was sued and lost after writing an expose in the Boston Phoenix.

Why do you think these stories generate so much of a backlash?

These are complex stories filled with pain and extreme passions. There are strong vested interests that want to keep the public from knowing what is going on in family courts. I believe we’re approaching a tipping point when people will demand more accountability from our courts.

What advice do you give to other journalists who want to cover this issue?

My only advice is, get your facts straight, get good insurance and get a good attorney.

Are you planning to do a follow up to Breaking the Silence?

While our next project will not be on domestic violence, we are committed to do more on this issue and to follow up on what we have learned with Breaking the Silence.

View the Entire PBS Documentary - Breaking The Silence; Children's Stories here.

WordPress Tags: INTERVIEW,DOMINIQUE,LASSEUR,PRODUCER,SILENCE,CHILDREN,Written,Staff,Documentary,Means,system,television,father,rights,movement,criticism,viewer,piece,custody,impact,violence,fact,woman,Jersey,afternoon,kids,husband,life,prison,Florida,Orleans,Ohio,California,extent,proceedings,history,moment,People,truth,notion,justice,America,opinion,courts,judges,example,abuser,wife,doctors,situation,Catch,Public,Connecticut,backlash,Holocaust,Germans,forum,victims,parent,Corporation,Ombudsman,Bode,arguments,indication,statement,topic,commitment,journalists,supports,Mary,Charitable,Foundation,guidelines,editorial,depth,treatment,role,Parental,Alienation,Syndrome,person,organization,agenda,rules,discussion,substance,dialogue,outcome,Westchester,excerpt,personnel,Some,journalist,Kristen,Lombardi,contributor,expose,Boston,Phoenix,pain,interests,advice,insurance,attorney,View,Entire,failures,complaints,environments,aberrations,allegations,doors,actors,fathers,conclusions,producers,passions,women,abusers,itself

Women in crisis need help from lawyers (Chicago, Illinois)

Women in crisis need help from lawyers (Chicago, Illinois)

Great piece by reporter Phil Kadner on the very real dilemnas that mothers and children face in leaving abusive fathers especially--but not exclusively--in Cook County, Illinois. Based on the stories I've been hearing out of Cook County for years, the cases he cites are the rule, not the exception.

http://www.southtownstar.com/news/kadner/2573870,080810Kadner.article

Women in crisis need help from lawyers

August 8, 2010

BY PHIL KADNER

Sara's unem ployed boyfriend, the father of her two children, had been beating her for some time.

One day, Sara decided she had enough.

She was financially supporting the household, the apartment lease was in her name, and she worked up the nerve to go to a suburban courtroom and ask a judge fo r an emergency order of protection and an order removing the man from their home.

Sara got the order, and another court date was scheduled to make the order of protection permanent, but this time the judge had a change of mind. He not only removed the order of protection but told Sara's abusive boyfriend he could move back into the apartment.

Sara was obviously nervous and shocked to discover that the man who had been beating her was going to be living with her once more. She figured he was going to be more angry now than before and told the judge she feared for the safety of herself and the children.

The judge told her if she didn't feel safe living with the fellow, she should move out.

That's only one of several stories relayed to me by court advocates for the Crisis Center for South Suburbia. The shelter for women and their children is trying to launch a project to get free legal representation for those in abusive and often dangerous domestic relationships.

Mary Kay is a more typical example of the problems faced by Crisis Center clients. The south suburban mother of three children decided to leave her husband because of his violent and abusive behavior.

She was economically dependent on her husband, and he told her that if she ever filed for divorce or tried to leave him, he would seek custody of their three children. He was the breadwinner of the family, after all. He controlled all the money. She didn't have anything.

Mary Kay called various organizations that provide legal aid to low-income people but discovered they're overwhelmed by the numbers seeking help. That's a complaint repeated over and over again by Crisis Center advocates.

So Mary Kay must endure a daily dose of increasingly vulgar insults as her husband realizes she doesn't have the financial ability to file for divorce.

Like it or not, Mary Kay feels she is doomed to stay with her abuser. "Until death do us part" has taken an entirely new meaning in this marriage.

"If Mary Kay was able to obtain an attorney through our Pro Bono Project," a Crisis Center court advocate wrote, "she might be able to get the assistance she needs to make the decision of filing for a civil order of protection and/or filing for divorce."

The Crisis Center has seven court advocates working at the Cook County courthouses in Markham and Bridgeview, but they are not lawyers. They offer guidance and advice based on training but can't act as lawyers in a courtroom.

In these economic times, even law firms are having trouble making ends meet. So I'm not sure how many family court or divorce attorneys would be able to volunteer their time to represent women in trouble.

But when I told Evergreen Park attorney Burton Odelson about the Crisis Center's dilemma, he immediately volunteered his support.

"I will do everything I can, offering the services of my law firm and my influence with the Chicago Bar Association, to urge pro bono assistance for the Crisis Center," Odelson said.

He noted that he was on the Moraine Valley Community College Board when Crisis Center founder Dianne Masters first proposed locating a shelter for domestic violence victims on the college's property.

"I supported that then and feel a personal attachment to the center due to my connection to Dianne," Odelson said.

Masters was murdered while seeking a divorce from her husband. Prosecutors who convicted attorney Alan Masters on conspiracy charges claimed that custody of their only child was one of the motives for her slaying.

For many women, these are literally life-or-death situations.

The difficult economic times aggravate already abusive relationships. Husbands and boyfriends lose their jobs. They become frustrated and angry as their unemployment continues. They drink more. They abuse drugs. They pick on those closest to them because there's no one else around to strike out at.

Angela, I am told, appeared in court seeking an emergency order of protection. Her husband, who hasn't worked in five years, appeared in court with an attorney, although there's no explanation of how he could afford one.

Angela, a nurse working two jobs and 60 hours a week to pay the household bills, couldn't afford an attorney. The husband had his order of protection lifted.

Women stuck in abusive relationships need help. They often don't have the financial resources to hire an attorney.

Maybe Odelson's offer of assistance will be the first of many.

WordPress Tags: Women,crisis,Chicago,Illinois,Great,piece,reporter,Phil,Kadner,children,Cook,cases,exception,news,article,August,Sara,father,apartment,nerve,emergency,protection,Center,South,Suburbia,representation,relationships,Mary,example,problems,clients,husband,behavior,custody,breadwinner,money,income,numbers,complaint,insults,abuser,death,marriage,attorney,Bono,Project,assistance,needs,decision,Markham,Bridgeview,guidance,advice,times,ends,volunteer,Park,Burton,Odelson,dilemma,services,Association,Moraine,Valley,College,Board,Dianne,Masters,violence,victims,attachment,connection,Prosecutors,Alan,conspiracy,life,Husbands,unemployment,Angela,explanation,Maybe,lawyers,fathers,organizations,situations,boyfriend,courtroom,didn,three

Judge gets slapped for being rude to mom (the norm by Judges ONLY he got charged

Family Judge's Rant at Pro Se Litigant Draws Ethics Charges

Charles Toutant

New Jersey Law Journal

Atlantic County Superior Court Judge Max Baker has been hit with ethics charges for allegedly launching into a tirade against an unrepresented family court litigant who complained about a child-visitation schedule he ordered.

The heated invective called into question Baker's ability to remain impartial, Advisory Committee on Judicial Conduct counsel Candace Moody alleged in a complaint made public Friday.

The outburst allegedly took place during a hearing last Dec. 31 on cross-complaints for restraining orders brought by Michael and Dana Pilla, both of whom were pro se. After granting Dana's request for an adjournment to obtain counsel, Baker inquired about the couple's minor child and visitation.

On learning that Michael had not seen the child for more than a week, Baker imposed a temporary visitation schedule. When Dana expressed concern about the arrangements, Baker "became irate ... screamed at her, and, among other things, accused her of being a bad parent, and threatened her with incarceration if she disobeyed his Order regarding visitation," the ACJC complaint says.

Baker then made a series of additional remarks "again in an extremely harsh and loud tone, that created an appearance of or reasonable belief that he was not objective and impartial," the complaint continues.

Moody called the remarks "disrespectful and insulting" and in violation of Code of Judicial Conduct Canon 3A(3), which requires that judges be "patient, dignified, and courteous to all those with whom they deal in an official capacity."

Baker also violated Canons 1 and 2A of the code in that he did not maintain high standards of conduct and did not act in a manner that promotes public confidence in the integrity and impartiality of the judiciary, Moody said.

Baker has been sitting in the Criminal Part since July 1, though Winnie Comfort, the judiciary's spokeswoman, says there is no information to suggest that the transfer was related to job performance.

But Baker has a reputation for poor demeanor, according to the New Jersey Law Journal's most recentSuperior Court Judicial Survey, published last year.

In the category of courtesy and respect to litigants and lawyers, lawyers graded Baker 4.76 on a 1-to-10 scale -- the lowest score in the Atlantic-Cape May vicinage and 349th out of 350 judges statewide. His overall score of 6.63 was also dead last in the vicinage.

Baker, 64, was appointed to the bench by Gov. Christine Todd Whitman in 1998 and was granted tenure in 2005. He did not return a message left at his chambers on Friday.

Judge gets slapped for being rude to mom

http://www.law.com/jsp/article.jsp?id=1202464404207&src=EMC-Email&et=editorial&bu=Law.com&pt=LAWCOM%20Newswire&cn=nw20100810&kw=

 

Family Judge's Rant at Pro Se Litigant Draws Ethics Charges

 

WordPress Tags: Judge,norm,Judges,Rant,Litigant,Ethics,Charles,Toutant,Jersey,Journal,Atlantic,Superior,Court,Baker,tirade,invective,Advisory,Committee,Judicial,Conduct,Candace,Moody,complaint,outburst,orders,Michael,Dana,Pilla,adjournment,arrangements,parent,incarceration,Order,ACJC,series,remarks,appearance,belief,violation,Code,Canon,manner,judiciary,Criminal,Part,Winnie,Comfort,spokeswoman,performance,reputation,demeanor,Survey,category,courtesy,Cape,bench,Christine,Todd,Whitman,tenure,message,article,Email,editorial,LAWCOM,complaints,Canons,lawyers,chambers,visitation,whom,vicinage

ANOTHER CORRUPT CUSTODY EVALUATOR COMMITS SUICIDE…ADIOS MUCHACHO Dr. Roy W. Bradbury! (San Bernadino. CA)

ANOTHER CORRUPT CUSTODY EVALUATOR COMMITS SUICIDE…ADIOS MUCHACHO!

FILED IN: ADIOS MUCHACHO!, BAD CUSTODY EVALUATORS, CALIFORNIA, CHILD CUSTODY, CHILD CUSTODY BATTLE, CHILDREN'S RIGHTS, CORRUPT CUSTODY EVALUATORS, CORRUPT BASTARDS, CUSTODY EVALUATORS, JANELLE BURRILL, NONCUSTODIAL MOTHERS, SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY, CHILD CUSTODY FOR ABUSERS, CUSTODY EVALUATIONS

Dr. Roy W. Bradbury

Wow, just like Janelle Burrill, this guy couldn’t pass the licensure test for psychologists in California.  I’ve heard about this corrupt, biased California custody evaluator for a while.  He offed himself, just like Dr. Richard Gardner did.  Is it because he started getting a heart and couldn’t take what he did to all the children and families he’s harmed?  Or was it he was being zeroed in on for his corrupt activities in family court?  Who knows, but he’s likely to be one of those people you’ll see in hell.

From The San Bernadino County Sentinel (8/6/10):

Suicide Claims Dr. Roy W. Bradbury

The man who did psychological evaluations of children involved in divorce cases in San Bernardino, Los Angeles and Orange counties, guiding the courts in determining custody, and whose recommendations controlled the fate of thousands of individuals for over a decade took his own life earlier this year.

The death of Dr. Roy W. Bradbury, who was a court appointed expert for so-called 730 evaluations, has thrown into question the validity of the determinations that were made in hundreds of divorce cases in San Bernardino County.

Bradbury worked with lawyers, known as minor counsels, who were appointed by the court to represent children caught in the middle of the divorce of their parents.

Those minor counsels would recommend interviews with and reports on the children, known as 730 evaluations, to determine the child’s state of mind, preference toward one parent or the other and to make an evaluation as to which parent should get primary custody of the child.

For his work, Bradbury was paid $120 per hour, or in the neighborhood of $10,000 to $15,000 for each 730 evaluation he delivered.

In virtually all cases in which Bradbury was brought in as an expert witness, the court made a custody decision in accordance with his recommendations. Bradbury was deemed so credible, that judges routinely overlooked contradictory opinions rendered by other psychologists or evaluators brought in on the same cases.

For years, however, critics have alleged that Bradbury was capricious, arbitrary or biased in his findings and that he in fact lacked the requisite training and licensing to function in the role of an expert psychological witness.

Within the last 12 months, evidence to undergird those accusations emerged. In September 2009, according to court records, Bradbury admitted under oath that he had lacked the proper licensing updates with regard to domestic violence since 2003. Such a lack of credentials rendered him unqualified under the family law code to serve as an evaluator.

Despite Bradbury’s possession of a PhD. in psychology from USC, he was unable to pass the state of California’s licensing exam as a psychologist.

Earlier this year, as information about his lack of training and his fraudulent licensing spread, rumors were rife that Bradbury was on the verge of departing the United States and seeking some form of refuge in Costa Rica.

A little more than two months ago, he died by his own hand. His action in taking his own life brings into question his own mental stability, and by extension, the validity of the thousands of conclusions he provided about the mental state of others.

On Saturday May 29, according to the Los Angeles Coroner’s Office, Bradbury who resided in Walnut, drove to an industrial park in the city of Industry. There, at 21508 Ferrero Parkway, a spot secluded by railroad tracks and relatively isolated and remote buildings, Bradbury shot himself while in his vehicle.

According to the coroner’s office, Bradbury expired from a single gunshot wound to the head.

Two years ago, a website, http://courtlawabusers.blogspot.com/2008/11/dr-roy-bradbury.html, was set up for the purpose of chronicling complaints with regard to Bradbury. Since that time, questions about his level of competency, his bias and his tendency to make findings that were considered damaging to children have mushroomed. That adverse publicity may have played a role in the more recent revelations about his lack of accreditation.

Despite those revelations, San Bernardino County Superior Court has maintained Bradbury on its experts list for psychologists.

In one case, an eight year old girl was removed from the custody of her mother. Subsequently, tapes of Bradbury’s sessions with the girl surfaced in which Bradbury could be heard screaming at the child. One counseling professional who has heard the tapes told the Sentinel the tapes demonstrated Bradbury was mocking a child under stress and was not engaged in a therapeutic relationship with his client.

In the aftermath of his death, dozens of Bradbury’s 730 evaluations are due for consideration in various courts in Southern California. Motions to strike several of those evaluations as evidence are now being prepared.