“Publicity is justly commended as a remedy for social and industrial diseases. Sunlight is said to be the best of disinfectants; electric light the most efficient policeman.” Buckley v. of Contra Costa, 202 F.R.D. 614, 620 (N.D. Cal. 2001); Fair Political Practices Com. Suitt, 90 Cal. App. 3d 125, 132, 153 Cal. Rptr. 311, 316 (Cal. Ct. App. 1979); Original publication: L. Brandeis, Other People’s
Money at 62 (National Home Library Foundation ed. 1933)
Chief Counsel & Director Victoria B Henley - writes .. " to Honorable Edmund G. Brown, Jr. Honorable Tani Cantil-Sakauye. Honorable Darrell Steinberg and Honorable John A. Pérez. This letter is written at the request of the Commission on Judicial Performance to alert you to a problem that the commission believes impairs its ability to fulfill its mandate to protect the public, and undermines the administration of justice in court proceedings in California." "... A review of pending investigations involving court proceedings at the commission’s December 2011 meeting revealed, however, that transcripts or recordings exist in only half of the cases, which means that it may not be possible to establish with certainty whether or not misconduct occurred in half of the cases. The absence of transcripts or recordings thus impedes the commission in determining that misconduct has occurred and in protecting the public from abusive judges." Director Victoria B Henley continues... " 95 percent of the complaints submitted to the commission concern conduct by judges in the course of performing judicial duties in court proceedings. Because the standard of proof in commission disciplinary proceedings is clear and convincing evidence, it can be very difficult, if not impossible, to establish what was said and what occurred in the courtroom without any record of the proceedings." " ...Without any official record, the trial courts will be required to produce settled statements in those cases in which appeals are taken, a time-consuming and imprecise process at best. The use of private court reporters hired by one party in litigation raises numerous concerns, including the questionable admissibility of the transcript as an official court record and access to justice for those with limited financial means." The California State Financial Crisis has forced the under-funded courts to cut use of court reporters. Now the Commission on Judicial Performance as the governing body mandated to regulate the statutorily "immune" Judges and their actions and protect the public from corruption admits they fear that without a recorded or reported transcripts the burden of "clear and convincing evidence" required to establish legality any action of unethical, or corrupt actions of the judges cannot be met therefore the judge is basically free do anything they want . The depth of this urgency is found in relationship to Elkin's Commission's findings that more than 70% of litigants in family law are now unrepresented is that they would have not only no protection from abusive Judges they would have no recourse. The Elkin's Commission already found the existing system wide pattern of "due process violations" against Pro Se litigants
They noted: "Responding attorneys and litigants have made it clear that the ability of litigants to testify at their hearings on such important substantive issues is critical to their perception of procedural justice in the family court." and in accordance The Judicial Council adopted the recommendation and amended in conformance with this recommendation.
[Effective 1/1/2011] Live Testimony
§ 217. (a) At a hearing on any order to show cause or notice of motion brought pursuant to this code, absent a stipulation of the parties or a finding of good cause pursuant to subdivision (b) the court shall receive any live, competent testimony that is relevant and within the scope of the hearing and the court may ask questions of the parties. It would stand that in the State of California where 70% of litigants are now Pro Se' and cannot afford attorneys, 1/2 of the people who come to court in are without means to protect their Federally Protected Civil Rights as guaranteed by the U.S. Constitution. The Constitution is the authority that delegates the both authority and immunity to Judges only while acting under their Jurisdictional authority. Acts that are unconstitutional are void
Quite similar to the concerns expressed here they fail to address what is worse... "In-Chambers" actions missing not only a recorded record... but the litigant and party to the case too... In my case Attorney Cameron Astiazaran of Macksoud and Macksoud who I hired and Commissioner Glenda Veasey conspired to give me 45% state mandatory guideline child support and presented it to me as a "Judicial Order" violating my right to be heard and object. Now neither will admit their violation nor address and report this violation of Constitutional Rights by the other which both are ethically bound
The regulating agency of California Judges is asking for help because half of the cases in California are most likely Constitutionally unprotected for the 70% of California residents. The failure to correct this situation appears to likely result in the systematic change from "Rule of Law" to "Rule by Law". The difference being that "under the rule of law, the law is preeminent and can serve as a check against the abuse of power. Under rule by law, the law is a mere tool for a government, that suppresses in a legalistic fashion "( Li Shuguang:Poly-Science Professor).
