JUDGES ARE NOT IMMUNE FROM POLITICAL PRESSURES. As a RETIRED Superior Court Judge, I have firsthand knowledge of the behind the scenes pressures that your judges are facing. On this page I will list two areas of reform that need to be addressed in order to restore justice to the court system. The two areas of reform that I wish to educate the public on will be rotated and updated as needed.
1. LIMITS ON CAMPAIGN DONATIONS FOR JUDICIAL ELECTIONS: I faced re-election in 2010 (I won) and was shocked to learn that there are no limits on campaign donations for judicial elections. This means that individuals and businesses who have either political connections or financial wealth have the power to not only influence the outcome of judicial elections but also the power to put pressure on sitting judges to "go along to get along" or face an election challenge. It was not uncommon for my fellow jurists, in the year or two before they were up for re- election to "joke" amongst themselves about how they had better be nice to certain wealthy or politically connected attorneys or else they may find themselves in a contested election to keep their jobs. Without limits on donations for judicial elections, the average citizen is left behind when it comes to having an influence on which judges are elected or which judges are even on the ballot to begin with. How many of you know what the campaign finance laws are for the judges in your state? Please find out and report back to me. We need to make changes to this practice to ensure that the judges who are on the bench understand that they work for the public, not the special interests that are currently the major donors to their campaigns for election or re-election.
2. JUDGES NEED BETTER TRAINING: Traditional evidence analysis is counter-intuitive to the reality of domestic violence and child sexual abuse victims. Without better training and corresponding proficiency exams, many well meaning judges are currently mis-informed on these dynamics. This results in tragic mistakes being made in criminal courts, juvenile courts, family court and civil cases. For example, as I cited in the FAMILY COURT CRISIS page, traditional courtroom standards would view with suspicion any person who first reports either domestic violence or a child sexual assault AFTER a divorce proceeding has commenced. Of course, traditionally one method of judging a witnesses credibility is to determine whether any motive to lie or to exaggerate exists. However, domestic violence is often a crime of manipulation and control first, and only escalates to physical violence after an extended period of emotional abuse. Typically this means that a victim has been threatened with violence if they tell anyone or call the police. It is only after the person has summoned the personal strength to end the relationship that they are sometimes willing to go to the police or tell a friend about the abuse. Therefore, a judge who has not been properly trained on the dynamics of abuse may discredit a victim's claim simply based on the fact that the claim is first being made public once divorce proceedings are initiated.
Be that as it is, even when judges do attend training seminars, they are not always paying attention. I have attended many seminars where I witnessed judges not being present (or alert) for the entire educational series. By this I refer to the attitude among too many judges that these seminars are nothing more than paid vacations. More often than not these educational programs are held in cities that are widely considered vacation destinations. This is how the promotors get the teachers to volunteer their time and how they entice judges to attend. I encourage each of you to inquire of your local court's Executive Committee or Chief Administrator about how they handle expenses for judges to attend these educational presentations. Any judge who receives reimbursement for travel, lodging, food and or enrollment fees for these educational seminars, should be required to demonstrate they they actually paid attention and learned something while on the taxpayers' dime.
