In May 2010, I became the first sitting Judge in the history of the United States to file a lawsuit against her court. I was not seeking money from the court. I was not seeking fame. And contrary to media reports, I was definitely not doing it to win re-election votes. I simply did it because SOMEONE needed to call attention to the dirty little secret that Judges and attorneys and court administrators are playing politics with the public’s safety.
The Writ asked for the Court of Appeals to confirm what the state of the law was and then order my fellow judges to comply with it. In legal terms the type of action I filed is called a “Writ of Mandamus”. Specifically, California Penal Code Section 1203.097 governs Domestic Violence laws. It was this law that the San Diego judges knowingly and willfully refused to follow, no matter how many lives were endangered. This Domestic Violence law is very strict because it is designed to reduce the number of repeat offenders. It is also strict because due to the nature of the crime domestic violence victims are likely to be unable or unwilling to protect themselves.
Historically, judges have not treated this crime as a “real crime”. In fact one of my colleagues on the bench said at a Judges meeting that these cases are nothing more than a woman having a hissy fit when she is on her menstrual cycle. Of course this is the same judge whose wife requires him to hire the most overweight courtroom clerk in the courthouse. That should tell you how “modern” his viewpoint is towards women if his wife cannot trust him to work with women without viewing us as sex objects. With that kind of sexist attitude prevailing behind the scenes, the legislature took away the discretion that is traditionally given to judges on sentencing issues and told them what terms of probation are mandatory on domestic violence.
Most but not all victims of Domestic Violence are women and children. According to California’s Judicial Handbook on Domestic Violence this law comes into play whenever the relationship between the defendant and the victim(s) is as defined in Family Code Section 6211. If the defendant agrees to a plea deal in which the crime that is charged changes but the victim remains the same then this California Penal Code section still applies. The problem that I experienced was that other judges, in collusion with the attorneys on these domestic violence cases would agree to accept plea bargains that did not follow the strict requirements of this law. I refused to sign off on these plea deals for two reasons: (1) they were illegal; and (2) they were done for political or economic reasons unrelated to the fair administration of justice.
To be more specific, there were two laws at issue: California Penal Code 1203.097 (governs the terms of criminal probation) and Family Code 6211(defines what is considered Domestic Violence for both family court and criminal court purposes). As for the criminal terms of probation they are MANDATORY and designed to protect the most vulnerable of crime victims. Certain terms of criminal probation must be applied whenever the relationship status between the Defendant and the victim was one of those listed in the Family Code. Further, it does not matter if the charges are later changed as part of a plea deal. The training guide for Domestic Violence cases distributed to judges instructs judges to NOT accept any plea deals that attempted to circumvent this law.
My legal action exposed the fact that judges were chronically and systemically engaging in these unlawful plea bargains. This website would not exist if I thought this problem was isolated to San Diego’s court system. Sadly, the problem exists everywhere because there are systemic problems in how we both select and then retain judges. The first thing we should do is remove the ability of attorneys to give money to judges for election campaigns. Attorneys put pressure on the weak judges and then the weak judges are somehow “elevated” to positions of power in the courthouse. Then these politically motivated judges put pressure on the remaining judges to be “team players”. I made the mistake of allowing myself to get bitter at this "injustice system". As a result I made some regrettable comments that my detractors used against me as part of a political witch hunt. Ultimately, I retired from my position as a Judge rather than participate in a farce of an administrative proceeding in which the decision was already a "fait accomplis" even before the first witness was called.
In January 2008 Judge Peter Deddeh became my Supervising Judge. His father is former State Senator Waddie Deddeh. Unlike his father, Peter Deddeh is not the sharpest tool in the shed. However, he learned well from his father how politics are played. It did not take long before he came to my private chambers for his first of many “friendly” chats. He wanted to inform me that attorneys (aka future campaign donors) were complaining to him about me; he said I was making their lives difficult by interfering with plea bargains. He told me that it was not my job to interfere with plea bargains; I just needed to sign them and move on to the next case. He condescendingly explained that plea bargains reduced the number of trials. That was code for plea bargains save the court money. I could not believe what I was hearing; since when were the inmates running the asylum?
To my utter horror and disgust, Judge Deddeh told me that while I was correct on what the law required he was still equally firm in requesting that I stop wasting court resources on what he considered cases worthy of what he called “Chevy Justice”. He told me to get these cases and others resolved without a trial. He explained that court resources were limited and that my stubborn insistence on following the law was taking time and resources away from cases that were worthy of “Cadillac Justice”. I refused to comply with his request that I administer two tiers of justice.Consequently, Deddeh, the court administrator, some attorneys, other supervising judges and anyone else whose lives I apparently made difficult by not being a “team player” labeled me a troublemaker and the rest is history.
I was compelled to speak out via the Writ after I learned that it was Judge Deddeh (and his refusal to question any plea bargain), that put a predator on a deadly collision course with two teenage girls. More details on my personal journey and the behind the scenes corruption at the courthouse are revealed in my soon to be published autobiography: "Silence Kills (or How Career Suicide Saved My Life).
