ABC 10News ~ Court Motion Accuses DA Dumanis of Political Abuse of Office.

Posted on May 23, 2014 by Sharon Kramer
ABC 10News and much of the local media have been doing a stellar job of exposing the San Diego public to the out-of-control politics and abuses in California’s legal system, particularly in San Diego.  Actually, the public has already been exposed to the abuses. 10News is just letting them know it. 
Yesterday’s 10News cast is, “Motion Asks Judge To Toss Conviction, Accuses Dumanis of Corruption”  The gist is:
In today’s episode of How the DA’s Office Turns, 10News sheds light on how DA Dumanis went on a political witch hunt and used tax dollars to convene a grand jury while trying to get back at one of her political opponents. At the end of the day, it seems that Dumanis’s use of the tax payer funded grand jury uncovered that some guy in Chula Vista misstated fact of when he signed out from work. (Jason Moore, who worked as an intergovernmental affairs coordinator, was the only one charged, accused of lying about being on personal time when he was at a campaign event.)
Under threat of six counts of felony prosecution and incarceration by the DA, he pled down to a misdemeanor of criminal contempt of court. Nothing else came of the investigation except to further establish that Bonnie Dumanis seems power drunk and misuses her DA position to practice politics, not law.
To quote from 10News online: 
“On its face, the DA’s use of a grand jury to investigate whether Mr. Moore had asked for two hours of leave before or after he left work seems ridiculous, petty and a massive waste of government resources,” Johnson [Moore’s attorney] wrote in the motion. “Now, with the knowledge that DA Dumanis had personal, professional, and political reasons to oppose Mayor Padilla (and support his opponents), the investigation of Mr. Moore appears corrupt, biased, and for the personal, professional, and political gain of DA Dumanis.”…The motion also requests that Dumanis release all internal documents that relate to the alleged phone call she had with Padilla. Dumanis has so far refused to make any such documents public or comment on the claims she meddled in the Chula Vista City Council.”
According to the San Diego Union Tribune, nothing will be decided in this matter until June 18th, which is after the elections for County District Attorney on June 3rd.  The UT writes,
“A spokesman for private attorney Bob Brewer, who is one of the candidates running against Dumanis, accused Dumanis of ‘stonewalling’ by not releasing documents to the public relating to the investigation and phone call….Former Chula Vista City Councilman Steve Castaneda has also complained publicly about Dumanis’ 2006 investigation into rumors he was taking free or reduced-price housing. He ended up being charged with perjury. A jury acquitted him of some counts and the others were dismissed.”
Prior recent posts regarding Bonnie Dumanis and her kindred spirits in the courts. Several video clips from 10News in the links below.
 
KPBS ~ DA Bonnie Dumanis in Hot Water again. (She’s earned more along with Judge Schall)
Latest from ABC 10News ~ Keehn Schall race illustrates moral decay in local courts UPDATED
ABC 10News uncovers more Cal Court ethics problems, Elitist perks or chauffeured protection?

 

Posted in Health - Medical - Science | Leave a comment

KFMB Interview of Judge Lisa Schall. Liar, liar, pants on fire?

Posted on May 23, 2014 by Sharon Kramer
From: SNK1955@aol.com
To: mslater@kfmb.com, snk1955@aol.com
Sent: 5/23/2014 2:18:33 A.M. Pacific Daylight Time
Subj: Re: Lisa Schall interview, misstatement of facts 
Dear Mr. Slater,
I am writing to inform you that Judge Lisa Schall made key misstatements of fact on your program yesterday.[1]
[1] May 22, 2014 Slater interview of Judge Lisa Schall http://www.760kfmb.com/story/13781695/mike-slater-show-760kfmb
~~~~
At 9 minutes, 36 seconds, she stated, “I always disclose to parties my history in case they are unaware of it. Because they may not choose to appear for me. I have to tell you everybody I have disclosed to has elected me to hear her case” This is false and I can personally attest that her lack of disclosure has adversely impacted litigation outcome.
In August of 2008, she oversaw a trial in which I was accused of libel over the words “altered his under oath statements” in a 2005 writing of mine — exposing a massive fraud in U.S. public health policy and U.S. courts.[2] The plaintiffs from the case are expert defense witnesses in toxic torts, who influence U.S. public health policy.
They were paid by a think-tank to author questionable environmental policy for the U.S. Chamber of Commerce; and they serve as toxic tort expert defense witnesses for the USDOJ. See the linked 2007 Wall Street Journal article regarding them and their courtroom science for a greater understanding of what the libel suit was really all about.[3] Their company was called GlobalTox, Inc. It is now known as Veritox, Inc.
 [2] March 9, 2005 writing http://freepdfhosting.com/466dff3403.pdf
[3] Jan 2007 WSJ article http://freepdfhosting.com/a9fa3f628e.pdf

~~~~~~~~~ 

Judge Schall came into the libel case as the trial judge just days before August 2008 trial.[4]* The prior judge had suddenly retired. At no time did she inform us of her record of past admonishments or of her then upcoming public admonishment from the Commission on Judicial Performance (CJP), September 2008.[5] (See fn 4 attached, establishing that she misstated fact on your program yesterday about always disclosing her admonishments to parties.  She did no such thing in our case).
[4] Aug 18, 2008 Trial transcript of first day I met Judge Schall. No mention of Schall’s offenses or admonishments. File is to big to upload. Its attached.
[5] Sept 5, 2008 Schall CJP Admonishment http://cjp.ca.gov/res/docs/Public_Admon/Guy-Schall_09-05-08.pdf

 ~~~~~~~~~~~

Had she informed us, we would have had the opportunity to request a different trial judge. We would have requested one had we known that this was a judge under stress of impending public admonishment for ethics violations.  Judges are rarely publicly admonished.
Additionally, because this was her third CJP admonishment, it also came to public light that she had been privately admonished in 199[6] for giving custody of a child to the child’s sexual abuser.[6] I learned of her ethics violations after the trial by reading of them in the newspaper.[7] Prior to the drunk driving admonishment being made public; the child custody admonishment was also not publicly known.
[6] 1993 Child sexual abuser custody case for which she was admonished: http://scocal.stanford.edu/opinion/re-kieshia-e-31525
[7] Sept 15, 2008 MetNews http://www.metnews.com/articles/2008/guys091708.htm

~~~~~~~~~~~

Lisa Schall is widely recognized as an inept (at best) judge among those who have come before her.[8] There are several complaints against her for which she has never been admonished.[9] 
[8] Jan 2010 Angie’s media “Why is Judge Schall still on the bench?” http://freepdfhosting.com/a9fa3f628e.pdf
[9] 2011 CJP claiming they were reviewing more complaints against Schall: http://angiemedia.com/2011/11/09/cjp-investigation-of-judge-lisa-schall-heats-up-citizen-input-sought/

~~~~~~~~~ 

In my matter, a juror submitted an affidavit after trial, stating (false) hearsay documents somehow got past her clerk, into the jury room, and caused a verdict for the plaintiff Bruce Kelman[10] – based on hearsay for something I never even said.
In post trial motions, Judge Schall refused to even hear oral argument for a new trial.[11] She then threatened me with another defamation lawsuit if I told of what occurred in her court.[12] To my recollection, she cut me off over thirty times in oral arguments.
[10] Oct 2008 Declaration of Juror Shelby Stutz http://freepdfhosting.com/da12d7c1a9.pdf
[11] Dec 2008 Schall refused to hear oral argument for a new trial http://freepdfhosting.com/60fc2386cc.pdf
[12] Dec 2008 Schall threatened me with defamation if I told what occurred in her court. http://freepdfhosting.com/c2adbde015.pdf

 ~~~~~~~~

Although I did not raise my voice, I understand why the woman who she had incarcerated [in 1999] probably lost it from not being able to get a word in edgewise. Another key misstatement of fact on your program yesterday, according to the CJP record Judge Schall did indeed sentence the woman to five days in jail and held her in contempt when the woman refused to re-enter Schall’s courtroom. To quote from the official CJP record[13]:
“In Ms. Slivka’s absence, without citing her for contempt or having her returned to the courtroom, Judge Guy-Schall found her in contempt and sentenced her to five days in jail. The order issued by Judge Guy-Schall stated that Ms. Slivka was in direct contempt and was to serve five actual days in jail. With respect to the facts underlying the finding of contempt, the order stated, “full order and findings are set forth in the reporter’s transcript that is order [sic] this date.” Ms. Slivka was taken into custody outside the courtroom and remained in custody for five days.”
 [13] Oct 1999 Public admonishment of Schall http://www.cjp.ca.gov/res/docs/Public_Admon/Guy-Schall_99.pdf
 [In the KFMB interview, Judge Schall explained the above to Mr. Slater that she did not have Ms. Slivka jailed for five days.  Instead, it was stated by Judge Schall that Ms. Slivka was taken to a county mental health facility.  No explanation was given as to why the CJP would issue a public admonishment if this were the case or the correct judicial action to take.  The CJP does not issue public admonishments of jurists based on frivilous allegations or justifible acts. The “procedural error” Judge Schall describes is that an officer of the court (judge) cannot issue an order that a U.S. citizen is in direct contempt of court, if they are not even in the courtroom — let alone that they should be immediately falsely imprisoned by whim of a judge.  One can listen to Judge Schall’s self-justification, which contradicts the official CJP record, beginning at 9 minutes and 55 seconds of the KFMB interview]

~~~~~~~~~~ 

I was her last victim on her last day, December 12, 2008, before she was moved from civil court to family court. I suspect her “volunteering” to go from the prestige of being a civil court judge down to a family court judge directly after her third CJP admonishment, was highly encouraged by the powers that be.
Shortly thereafter, she changed her name from Guy-Schall to Schall. Were it not for so much media attention, this change would make it difficult for any litigant searching her background from public records to know of her admonishments – that I can assure you she does not disclose to all parties who come before her. (Search CJP admonishments under “Schall”, None appear.  They are under “Guy-Schall”)
Schall is currently being sued for racketeering along with several of her jurists peers by the California Coalition for Families and Children, for her actions in Family court.[14] I, too, am soon to file a federal lawsuit for racketeering of Schall, et.al. She falsified the judgment from my case, and all her judicial peers covered up for her.[15] Falsifying court documents is a felony under Penal Code 134. The concealment by her peers of Schall’s felony, has cost me all I own for daring to expose a massive public fleecing, and refusing silence of how corruption in the San Diego courts aids it to continue, including Schall’s corruption.[16]
[14] Jan 2014 CCFC RICO suit http://www.weightiermatter.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/01/CCFC-Letter-to-Daphne-Hearn-Attachments.pdf
[15] Feb 2014 Notice to CA Chief Justice of intent to sue her for RICO with Schall, et.al. over falsified court documents, pgs 4-6 http://freepdfhosting.com/2017c80649.pdf  
[16] Not a pretty story!!! https://katysexposure.wordpress.com/environmental-advocate-sharon-kramer-us-doj-expertscal-courts-mold-not-a-pretty-story/

 ~~~~~~~~~~

From my perspective and that of many others, Judge Schall is the poster child of severe ethics problems within the California judicial branch, particularly in San Diego.[17] [18] One does not acquire “the least favorable record” of all state judges by shear bad luck.[19]
[17] Feb 2014 SD Free Press, “Thou Shalt Not Challenge a Sitting Judge” http://sandiegofreepress.org/2014/02/thou-shalt-not-challenge-a-sitting-judge-and-other-legal-oddities/
[18] March 2014 Cal Court Monitor “Judicial Election Intimidation on Display in San Diego” http://californiacourtsmonitor.com/community/judicial-election-intimidation-on-display-in-san-diego/
[19] May 2014 UT, http://www.utsandiego.com/news/2014/May/12/judge-admonished-three-times/

 ~~~~~~~~~~~

That Schall publicly misstated fact on your program of what she discloses to those who must come before her, and publicly misstated fact of why she was admonished in 1999; further solidifies her continued lack of honesty. The LA Times first wrote of her honesty problems in 1986, “Judge’s Credibility Lacking.”[20] 
[20] 1986 LA Times http://articles.latimes.com/1986-09-28/local/me-9731_1_judges-credibility-lacking

~~~~~~~~~~ 

If you could let your listeners know of the discrepancy between what Judge Schall stated on your program yesterday and the truth of what really occurs in her courtroom, it would be a great public service.  The woman has harmed the lives of too many people to allow her to continue.
Sincerely,
Mrs. Sharon Noonan Kramer
Posted in Civil Justice, Environmental Health Threats, Fourth District Division One Appellate Court, Health - Medical - Science, US Chamber of Commerce | Tagged , , , | Leave a comment

KPBS ~ DA Bonnie Dumanis in Hot Water again. (She’s earned more along with Judge Schall)

Posted on May 21, 2014 by Sharon Kramer
by Sharon Noonan Kramer, advocate for integrity in health marketing and U.S. courts. 
According to a KPBS broadcast of yesterday, a “Former Chula Vista Aide Seeks To Undo Plea Deal Over Dumanis Call”. KPBS states,
“An aide to former Chula Vista Mayor Steve Padilla wants a court to set aside his misdemeanor guilty plea he said he wouldn’t have made if he’d known about a call District Attorney Bonnie Dumanis reportedly made to his boss back in 2005…In a sworn declaration, Padilla said Dumanis asked him to appoint her aide Jesse Navarro to a vacant city council position. Padilla said he turned her down. Within weeks of the refusal, Dumanis opened investigations into Chula Vista city officials…The District Attorney’s Office charged Jason Moore [Padilla’s aide] with five counts of felony perjury in 2006….Moore was accused of lying to a grand jury…Moore later pleaded guilty to a misdemeanor… Moore’s lawyer, Knut Johnson, said he would have advised against that guilty plea if he had known that District Attorney Dumanis had called Moore’s boss, Padilla, months earlier.”
less hot water in theWhat???? San Diego County District Attorney Bonnie Dumanis prosecutes for perjury in San Diego County courts?  To my knowledge, she won’t prosecute perjurers or the local jurists who suborn the perjury as they falsify court documents to conceal the damage from the fraud. See “Environmental Advocate Sharon Kramer ~US DOJ Lying Experts~Cal Courts & Mold~ Not a pretty story!!“
To quote from the above blog:
“Note the file stamps on the below linked documents, meaning the courts have all of the below concealed evidence of plaintiff Kelman’s perjury to manufacture a reason for malice in the SLAPP suit, to be able to continue defraud the public with scientific fraud when serving as an expert defense witness in courts all across the country…San Diego District Attorney Bonnie Dumanis has REPEATEDLY refused to prosecute the county’s judges, justices, Veritox or their attorney for falsifying court documents — as the falsified court documents have continued to be used to harass me in the San Diego Courts…. See 2013 Notice to Justice McConnell and DA Dumanis to “Stop harassing me, you have no jurisdiction” 
 And I’m still waiting on DA Dumanis and Judge Schall to have to explain why Dumanis was stated in February 2014 as Schall’s #1 endorser for re-election to Jurist Seat 20; with the endorsement removed from public view on Schall’s campaign website in March.  I happen to know that Dumanis happens to know that Schall has falsified court documents, that have been used by federal contractors to be able to continue to fleece the U.S. public. 
Could Schall’s falsified court documents be the reason for the now hidden DA Dumanis endorsement of Judge Schall? Or maybe its because Dumanis knows that not only is material perjury a felony, but so is willfully suborning it; and she wouldn’t want to be seen as endorsing someone for re-election to a San Diego County Superior Court judicial office who she and some of her deputies are proven to know is a felon, Judge Schall.
Posted in Civil Justice, Environmental Health Threats, Fourth District Division One Appellate Court, Health - Medical - Science, Mold Litigation, Toxic Mold, US Chamber of Commerce | Tagged , , , , , | Leave a comment

What does Judge Schall know of her challenger’s ads’ destruction? UPDATED

Posted on May 19, 2014 by Sharon Kramer
East County Magazine (ECM) is the latest news outlet to write of the nasty race for San Diego County Superior Court Seat 20. The May 15th article is titled, “JUDGMENT CALLS? CONTROVERSY CONTINUES AS BILLBOARDS COME DOWN IN KEEHN VS. SCHALL JUDICIAL RACE” | East County Magazine
The article seems a bit odd.  Its about an interview with incumbent Judge Lisa Schall.  Inconsistent with the article’s title, it does not appear that the interviewer asked Schall what she knows of the continuing controversy of Schall challenger, Carla Keehn’s, billboard campaign ads being destroyed on May 9th.

~~~~~~~~~~~

UPDATE May 20th
East County Magazine informs us that a quote from Judge Schall regarding Carla Keehn’s campaign and advertising was inadvertently left out of their article that is the subject of this blog. The May 15th ECM article “JUDGMENT CALLS? CONTROVERSY CONTINUES AS BILLBOARDS COME DOWN IN KEEHN VS. SCHALL JUDICIAL RACE” | East County Magazine is now updated to include this quote from Judge Schall:
‘‘I have no information regarding Ms. Keehn’s campaign strategies and advertisement efforts.”
The ECM interview questions were emailed to Judge Schall, “BEFORE the billboards came down“. Schall’s response to the questions were received by ECM shortly after their destruction and containing Schall’s quote as noted above.  Earilier ECM coverage of the race regarding additional questionable acts may be read at: MORE JUDICIAL CANDIDATES SPEAK OUT, CRITICIZE SAN DIEGO BAR’S RATING SYSTEM 
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Citing News 10 as its source, the ECM article states that the official reason Clear Channel, the involved billboard company, provided for their sudden unilateral decision to tear down Keehn’s campaign billboards was:
“Unfortunately our protocol for political ads was not followed and we took the ad down. We have offered the client a variety of resolutions, including the fullest refund allowable under the laws governing political contributions”
But the ECM article does not  mention that their cited source,  News 10, also reported that a local Clear Channel representative stated they were “pressured” to destroy the Keehn campaign ads. The Clear Channel employee’s acknowledgement of pressure to destroy Schall’s challenger’s ads, came prior to the Clear Channel official statement of unfollowed protocol for the reason. 
News 10 was not able to track Schall down to ask what she knew of the matter.  (See video of them trying in the link above). ECM just wrote a whole article about the billboards while interviweing Schall and apparently did not find it important to ask her.  (See UPDATE above, the ECM Schall interview questions were asked of Schall before the Keehn advertising destruction)
Shouldn’t someone be getting answers from candidate Schall of what she knows of candidate Keehn’s campaign ads’ destruction?
The fact remains, NO ONE is talking about WHO put pressure on Clear Channel to destroy $14,000 worth of Keehn’s campaign ads – in a race for a government job with its sole job function being to oversee upholding of laws.  If someone running in that race, knows something about laws being violated in the campaign via the use of political pressure; then shouldn’t that person(s) be made to tell what they know and tell if they or their supporters played a role in the pressuring and campaign ad destruction?
If everything was above-board about the Keehn ad destructions, it seems the anonymous pressurer(s) would be coming forward and wanting to share why they felt it to be morally and legally right to use political clout to have them taken down.  It also seems that Clear Channel would have worked with Keehn to edit the advertising for which she had already paid, if it was deemed in need of change — rather than simply unilaterally deciding to destroy it.
Also not in the May 15th ECM article, which again is supposedly about the billboards, is that the billboard company, Clear Channel, had input into the final product, including the final text,  before they were erected.  This relevant fact  was reported earlier by San Diego Free Press on May 12th, while providing the Clear Channel email stating some of the changes the company suggested.   To quote from the Clear Channel April email to Keehn:  
“I think that you should maybe just leave it at THE ONLY CANDIDATE NOT CONVICTED OF A CRIME. For the freeway board and drop the rest of the words on the right side of the board.”
 Additionally, while apparently not asking Schall what she knows of the billboard destructions or contacting the local Clear Channel office to ask what they know of who caused the destruction; ECM instead used the debacle to provide Judge Schall a platform to give reasons for her longtime and publicly known poor track record as a judicial court officer.  It is a portion of this poor track record that was publicized on Keehn’s now destroyed billboards. (see Clear Channel suggested edit above).
According to the ECM article, Schall is claiming that stress, and her non-understanding rules of law causing her overstepping of legal boundaries; are the reasons for her prior poor judgment calls and their resultant public admonishments from those who are to oversee judicial ethics in California — the Commission on Judicial Performance. 
The reasons given seem counter-productive if Schall’s goal for granting the ECM interview was to instill voter confidence in her abilities.  Trial court judges must work under stress daily, while deciphering complex and often contentious problems. Being able to handle stress is a required ability needed to do a proficient job. Assuring laws are understood, upheld, and their bounds not overstepped, is the primary function of a trial court judge. 
The ECM article also makes no mention that this is the first time Judge Schall has ever had a challenger to her judicial office since first appointed in 1985.  It makes no mention that Schall’s fellow appointed judges and endorsers have been unethically harassing Keehn and her endorsers since February of this year.
Why the collusive jurists’ harassment to Schall’s benefit?  Answer: Because if Schall can be removed from office by voter choice, then the same thing could happen to all of the appointed judges in the future.  The local judges are using this race to back-door advocate for their own life time Superior Court judicial appointments by default; and by curtailing voter ability to remove them.  No brave challengers to their judicial seats equals their automatic judicial re-elections. If challenger candidates are intimidated to drop from the race, then voters have no choice but to vote for the incumbent judge — no matter how inept or compromised that they are.
Again, the collusive judicial misconduct by the local judges is confirmed by a February 10th email  sent from Tom Homann LGBT Law Association (THLA) President Nicholas Fox to Keehn. To quote:
“As you know, both Judge Rubin and Judge Rosenstein have expressed a concern coming from
their colleagues on the Superior Court regarding your running against a sitting judge. As strong
supporters of THLA, Judges Rubin and Rosenstein wanted to alert THLA of these concerns.
As you know, many judges on the Superior Court support THLA and its mission. They attend our
events, including our annual dinner. In fact, I think the THLA annual dinner has the best showing
from the Superior Court as compared to all other diversity bar associations. Our good
relationship with the bench is something we have worked hard to establish, and something we
cherish and need to protect.
The underlying tension is that these supportive judges are concerned by a THLA Board member
taking on one of their colleagues in an election. Although all judges are individuals and subject
to electoral challenge, they also collectively form part of the greater “Superior Court.” There is
a great deal of collegiality among judges, and having a Board member of an organization that
the judges strongly support directly challenge one of their own colleagues has raised concern.
Of course, THLA strives to build a healthy relationship with the bench, and we have been
successful over the years in doing so by being supportive of the bench’s efforts. Openly
challenging a sitting judge can be seen by some as undermining the support and relationship we
have worked so hard to build….
There is a generally expressed a concern that a Board member openly challenging a sitting judge will reflect poorly on the organization and be seen as an affront to the Superior Court and its sitting judges
generally. The Superior Court’s perception of THLA may be negatively affected (as is perhaps
evidenced by the concerns received thus far)…
Because of the concerns coming from various sectors in the legal community, we ask that you
consider resigning from the Board during the pendency of the election. This will protect THLA
by not having a current Board member directly challenge a sitting judge, and hopefully will
alleviate concerns from the Board and bench that THLA’s reputation may be damaged as part of
the electoral process.”
The reality is, that no matter how one spins it for publication or what questions Judge Schall is not made to answer, the facts remain the same.  Lisa Schall has the worst record of violating the Code of Judicial Ethics in the entire state; and among all judges who are still on the bench. Typically, a judge with this poor of a performance record would have already been removed from office by the Commission on Judicial Performance. These facts were confirmed by the San Diego Union Tribune on May 12th.   
California Judicial Canon 2 states,
“A judge shall avoid impropriety and the appearance of impropriety in all of the judge’s activities. B. Use of the Prestige of Judicial Office (2) A judge shall not lend the prestige of judicial office or use the judicial title in any manner, including any oral or written communication, to advance the pecuniary or personal interests of the judge or others.”
Judicial Canon 5 states,
“A judge or candidate for judicial office shall not engage in political or campaign activity that is inconsistent with the independence, integrity, or impartiality of the judiciary.”          
Given that campaign tactics by and on behalf of appointed and never before challenged, Judge Lisa SCHALL, continue to raise eyebrows to the point that they have been found newsworthy by several professional journalists (not including East County Magazine’s latest writing); a reasonable person would conclude that the Schall and fellow local jurists have given “the appearance of impropriety in their judicial activities” by misuse of “prestige of judicial office” and “judicial title” to “advance the personal interests” of themselves and other appointed “judges”. A reasonable person would conclude that they have given “the appearance” they are “engaged in political and campaign activity that is inconsistent with the independence, integrity, or impartiality of the judiciary”; and have therefore, violated Canons 2, 2.B.(2) and 5.
As is true for the Clear Channel official self-justification for questionable acts; a reasonable person would conclude that the Schall recent self-justifications provided for the ECM article, ring hollow as mere excuse for repeated and apparent continuing misconduct.
As relevant and true as if it were written today, the LA Times reported way back in 1986 about the then newly appointed Judge Schall, “Judge’s Credibility Lacking”.  The same point seems aptly stated in the May 16th, San Diego Free Press article, “Dumanis, Schall and Dronenburg: Three Bad Apples Needing to Be Voted Out of Office” . To quote:
“Who knew a judicial race could get so nasty?”
We still want to know: Why is no one asking Judge Schall to explain the reason why her campaign website first stated endorsement by San Diego County District Attorney Bonnie Dumanis, with the stated endorsement then removed from the site at a later date?
Posted in Civil Justice, Environmental Health Threats, Fourth District Division One Appellate Court, Politics, US Chamber of Commerce | Tagged , , , | Leave a comment

ABC 10News uncovers more Cal Court ethics problems, Elitist perks or chauffeured protection?

Posted on May 16, 2014 by Sharon Kramer
by Sharon Noonan Kramer, advocate for integrity in health marketing and U.S. courts.
We’ve been blogging much lately of the ethics problems among San Diego’s jurists and their self-perceptions that they are above the law with no fear of repercussions. Thanks to ABC 10News and other local investigative reporters, the pervasive elitist attitude, which has harmed so many, is finally getting some public sunlight. 
See our yesterday’s blog of “Latest from ABC 10News ~ Keehn Schall race illustrates moral decay in local courts UPDATED” The gist is:
Federal prosecutor, Carla Keehn, is the challenger to incumbent Judge Lisa Schall’s Seat 20. Keehn had $14,000 of her campaign advertising destroyed last week by “pressure” being put on a sign company of national stature, Clear Channel.  No one is talking of who ordered the destruction.
Its pretty obvious that the pressure is originating from San Diego Superior Court judges. The vast majority were appointed to the bench and do not want to see voters be able to oust one of their own via election. They have been bullying Keehn to drop from the race; and bullying her endorsers to not endorse or unendorse her.
This is because if it could happen to Schall that she could be voted out; it could also happen to the bullying appointed judges in the future. Keehn is being made an example of the wrath of retribution which occurs when one challenges a sitting judge in San Diego, so that no one does it again; and so judicial appointments become appointments for life by default.  As a result of the local jurists’ bad behavior, the public’s right to oust bad judges by non-re-election, is being egregiously violated, now and in the future.
Adding to the equation, ABC 10News is helping to illuminate that this jurist mind-set of’ “let them eat cake” while parading of naked injustice continues; originates at the helm of the California courts and is trickling down to the Superior Courts.
See May 15th ABC 10News “Calif. Chief Justice gets taxpayer-funded protection detail to exotic locations”  The gist is:
 California’s Chief Justice Tani Cantil-Sakauye has been soliciting legislators for hundreds of millions of dollars more in court funds under the pretext that the courts are stretched to the limit; and because of the lack of funding are unable to provide justice to the people. She is simultaneously using court funds (tax dollars) to be chauffeured and accompanied by California Highway Patrol (CHP) officers to such exotic places as resorts in Hawaii and San Juan, Puerto Rico. Other justices are also being made privy to the high-priced taxi service to their offices while being accommodated by the CHP; and while courts are closing and cutting hours all across the state from lack of funding.
According to Judicial Council Watcher (JCW), a blog contributed to by current and former California court employees, including San Diego trial court judges, “ Nearly 22 million dollars – or enough money to employ 220 court clerks” is being spent annually on CHP officers serving as armed chauffeurs and traveling companions of California justices.
JCW is typically accurate with their calculations. Among some of their contributors are many in-the-know whistleblowers of fraud in California’s judicial branch, such as Michael Paul.  The gist of this debacle is:
Paul is a former Administrative Offices of the Courts employee who exposed that five-hundred million dollars was missing from the courts’ construction fund in 2010.  He was retaliated against by being fired under false pretense, for exposing the fraud. 
No one was ever punished for the missing millions or for the retaliation of government employee whistleblower Paul. The lack of punishment is ongoing to this very day; even after a Bureau of State Auditor’s (BSA) report verified that multi-millions were indeed missing.
Yet, former Chief Justice Ronald George unexpectedly announced his retirement while calls for this BSA audit were commencing in 2010. Several Cal Court leaders have subsequently retired (with full pensions) while not being made to answer the question of where the multi-millions went and still are. Upon George’s hastily planned departure in 2010, Chief Justice Cantil-Sakauye was hand-picked by George and Governor Schwarzenegger as George’s successor. She commenced her stewardship of the Cal Courts at the beginning of 2011.
So who are the honorable trial court judges who are now working diligently along side of true whistleblowers at JCW, to shed light on the continuing fraud, waste and abuse at the helm of California’s judicial branch?  Sadly, they are the same judges who are endorsing and even holding fund-raisers for Schall’s re-election to the bench in San Diego.  This, while no one is talking of who ordered the destruction of $14,000 worth of Keehn’s truthful campaign advertising last week, exposing criminal acts among local jurists.  Keehn’s destroyed signs read,
“Because no one is above the law, not even judges.”

Keehn billboards

Point being:
There are severe, systemic and long-term ethics problems in California’s judicial branch. It appears to have become ingrained as part of their culture. There is a pervasive mind-set of judges and justices believing themselves to be above the law as they jockey for position of who controls the courts’ coffers.
Smaller pots in the courtrooms calling bigger kettles at the court helm “black”, does not solve the underlying problem of the rampant and incestuous moral decay in California’s judicial branch. The pleas for help coming from those who also have their own proven ethics problems to address; simply helps to illuminate that in California, jurists perceive themselves as not subject to the same laws and standards of conduct that they are paid as public servants to uphold.  This applies from top to bottom — as the public continues to be harmed, nationwide, from unbridled perversities of the California judicial system.
I could add many links to this blog of people being harmed by the California jurists’ self-perceptions of being above the law. 
Posted in Civil Justice, Environmental Health Threats, Fourth District Division One Appellate Court, Health - Medical - Science, Mold and Politics, Toxic Mold, US Chamber of Commerce | Tagged , , , , , , , | Leave a comment