January 16, 2012
Dear Mr. Finke,
I am writing in response to your letter dated August 5, 2011, which was in response to my letter dated June30, 2011, which I addressed to the present Chief Justice. I have enclosed your letter to me in order to refresh your memory.
I understand the Assigned Judges Program and its purpose Mr. Finke and I really don't have a problem the set rate of pay for an assigned judge or even the implied purpose of the program.
What I and lots of others do have a problem with, is that rate being paid continuously for more than 15 years to any one retired judge; your assertion that this is somehow fiscally advantageous, is absurd.
I am familiar with the process for getting an assigned judge to a particular county,you see, my interest, research, letter writing and information gathering did not start the Day before I wrote to the Chief justice. This process is an obligatory formality and does not change the fact that Judge halpin is not temporary, technicalities notwithstanding.
The Judicial branch has done and "end around" the constitution by placing its hit men in robes on our family court benches under the guise of the Assigned Judges Program, and offered them endless payola to do its bidding, but we are supposed to trust the Chief justice to punish her own cronies.
Judge Halpin is on the bench by way of a shady program, at best, and he is complained about to your "AOC" and the local presiding, yet he remains, unrecorded, playing fast and loose with the rights of the citizens; he does what he wants, when he wants to the detriment of the people who's lives he is destroying.
I am sure you are aware by now that this issue has taken root and is gaining strength with people well versed in law.
You may want to consider removing halpin before this becomes something you can no longer keep quiet.
Please do not patronize me Mr. Finke, we both know what is really going on.
Thank you, Robert Hovey
ARTICLE 1 SECTION3 (a) OF THE CALIFORNIA CONSTITUTION
Friday, January 20, 2012
Letter to Chief Justice : Response
August 5, 2011
Dear Mr. Hovey
I am writing in response to your letter dated June 30, 2011, which you addressed to Hon. Tani Cantil-Sakauye, Chief Justice of California. As the director of the division that administers the Assigned Judges Program, the Chief Justice asked me to respond to your letter.
Your letter takes issue with the compensation paid to Hon. Jack Halpin, a member of the Assigned judges program. Please note, however, that the compensation of any retired judge sitting on assignment is set by state statute. (see Gov. Code, sec. 68543.7) Currently, the statutory rate of pay is $657.93 per day.
You also take issue with the fact that Judge halpin has sat on assignment as a member of the program for an extended period of time in the Superior Court of Shasta County. In addressing that issue, it may be helpful for you to understand the assignment process. Superior courts call in requests for assigned judges, and my division receives numerous such requests from courts across the state every business day. These requests usually com through what we call a "court contact" or "contact clerk." These are dedicated staff members in each of the superior courts who have among their duties the coordination of the courts assigned judge needs. When requesting an assigned judge, the court contacts are usually acting at the behest of their presiding judge or assistant presiding judge, the supervising judge of a particular court location or division, or the court executive officer (or his or her deputies).
Sometimes the request is for the assignment of a specific judge (e.g., a judge who has been assigned to the court in the past and is therefore familiar with the court staff, local rules, internal court procedure, etc.) and sometimes the request is more general (e.g., the court needs a judge adept at handling felony trials who is available for 60 days ). In making recommendations to the Chief Justice as to which of the program's approximately 400 judges to assign in response to a particular request, staff to the Assigned Judges Program considers numerous factors, including availability, expertise, geographic proximity to the requesting court, and of course the preferences of the court itself. That is, if a requesting court asks for a specific judge, staff to the Assigned judges Program will take that prefrence into account when making a recommendation to the Chief justice. Sometimes, if a retired judge is a particularly good fitin a court, that court-even through a series of successive presiding judges- will continue to request that judge be assigned. Particularly in these difficult budget times, such assignments can be very efficient, as they ensure that the court will not expand time and resources "training" a new assigned judge on the court's processes and procedures.
Thus, While we appreciate the points you have made regarding retired judges who on consecutive assignments in the same superioe court for extended periods of time, we also hope that you will appreciate the factors that go into our decision to recommend such assignments to the Chief justice, e.g., the needs and preferences of the requesting court, efficiency and the resulting cost-effectiveness, and the like.
Lastly, I must address your statement that "retired judges are not held accountable because they are not under the jurisdiction of the "CJP". While it is true that retired judges sitting on assignment are not under the Commission on judicial Performance's purview, it certainly is not correct to conclude from that they "are not held accountable." Indeed, they are directly accountable to the Chief justice, who holds the judges in the program to the highest of standards of excellence. Indeed, the Chief justice has specifically tasked my division with reviewing every complaint and negative presiding judge evaluation that we receive on judges in the program. These reviews sometimes lead to full investigations sometimes result in appropriate disciplinary action, including in extreme circumstances removal from the program altogether.
I hope you find this information helpful
Yours very truly, Chad Finke
Director, appellate and trial court judicial services
Dear Mr. Hovey
I am writing in response to your letter dated June 30, 2011, which you addressed to Hon. Tani Cantil-Sakauye, Chief Justice of California. As the director of the division that administers the Assigned Judges Program, the Chief Justice asked me to respond to your letter.
Your letter takes issue with the compensation paid to Hon. Jack Halpin, a member of the Assigned judges program. Please note, however, that the compensation of any retired judge sitting on assignment is set by state statute. (see Gov. Code, sec. 68543.7) Currently, the statutory rate of pay is $657.93 per day.
You also take issue with the fact that Judge halpin has sat on assignment as a member of the program for an extended period of time in the Superior Court of Shasta County. In addressing that issue, it may be helpful for you to understand the assignment process. Superior courts call in requests for assigned judges, and my division receives numerous such requests from courts across the state every business day. These requests usually com through what we call a "court contact" or "contact clerk." These are dedicated staff members in each of the superior courts who have among their duties the coordination of the courts assigned judge needs. When requesting an assigned judge, the court contacts are usually acting at the behest of their presiding judge or assistant presiding judge, the supervising judge of a particular court location or division, or the court executive officer (or his or her deputies).
Sometimes the request is for the assignment of a specific judge (e.g., a judge who has been assigned to the court in the past and is therefore familiar with the court staff, local rules, internal court procedure, etc.) and sometimes the request is more general (e.g., the court needs a judge adept at handling felony trials who is available for 60 days ). In making recommendations to the Chief Justice as to which of the program's approximately 400 judges to assign in response to a particular request, staff to the Assigned Judges Program considers numerous factors, including availability, expertise, geographic proximity to the requesting court, and of course the preferences of the court itself. That is, if a requesting court asks for a specific judge, staff to the Assigned judges Program will take that prefrence into account when making a recommendation to the Chief justice. Sometimes, if a retired judge is a particularly good fitin a court, that court-even through a series of successive presiding judges- will continue to request that judge be assigned. Particularly in these difficult budget times, such assignments can be very efficient, as they ensure that the court will not expand time and resources "training" a new assigned judge on the court's processes and procedures.
Thus, While we appreciate the points you have made regarding retired judges who on consecutive assignments in the same superioe court for extended periods of time, we also hope that you will appreciate the factors that go into our decision to recommend such assignments to the Chief justice, e.g., the needs and preferences of the requesting court, efficiency and the resulting cost-effectiveness, and the like.
Lastly, I must address your statement that "retired judges are not held accountable because they are not under the jurisdiction of the "CJP". While it is true that retired judges sitting on assignment are not under the Commission on judicial Performance's purview, it certainly is not correct to conclude from that they "are not held accountable." Indeed, they are directly accountable to the Chief justice, who holds the judges in the program to the highest of standards of excellence. Indeed, the Chief justice has specifically tasked my division with reviewing every complaint and negative presiding judge evaluation that we receive on judges in the program. These reviews sometimes lead to full investigations sometimes result in appropriate disciplinary action, including in extreme circumstances removal from the program altogether.
I hope you find this information helpful
Yours very truly, Chad Finke
Director, appellate and trial court judicial services
Letter to the Chief Justice and following correspondence
This is a letter written by a citizen, concerned about the fact that "temporary Judges" are not temporary at all.
June 30, 2011
Dear Chief justice,
I am writing to you as a concerned citizen that has witnessed many inequities in the family law system, here in Shasta County. I have no case in court.
I see that you have expressed concern about the proposed budget cuts to the state court system, I wonder if you are aware of the money leaking out through the "Assigned Judges Program"; it appears to me if that spending were reigned in, there would be no budget problem.
Case in point, Judge jack Halpin sits on the bench here in Shasta county, out of the "Assigned Judges Program", Judge Halpin has served here as a "temporary judge" since 1997 and is paid his full pension plus 90% of a regular judge's salary; a combined estimated total of $4000,000 per year.
If this is the case, Judge Halpin has been paid around 5.6 million dollars, just during his new career as a "temporary" judge.
According to preliminary statistics gathered from the "AOC", 400 judges served in temporary assignments in 2010 and 133 of them over many years. If 133 judges served for a comparable amount of time as Judge Halpin in this capacity and at presumably the same rate of pay, Then we are talking about an estimated figure of 6.6 Billion dollars; taking away the pension they would receive anyway still leaves a monstrous figure of over 3 billion dollars.
Chief Justice, you know as well as I do that the "Assigned Judges Program" was not crated to make retired judges or to put retired judges in to permanent positions; especially when retired judges are not held accountable because they are not under the jurisdiction of the "Center on Judicial Performance", therefore they have no motivation to act appropriately and objectively.
Judge halpin has had numerous complaints lodged against him and they have all been ignored.
I implore you to make policy changes concerning the "Assigned Judges Program", so that they can not become permanent "temporary" judges.
Thank you, Robert Hovey
June 30, 2011
Dear Chief justice,
I am writing to you as a concerned citizen that has witnessed many inequities in the family law system, here in Shasta County. I have no case in court.
I see that you have expressed concern about the proposed budget cuts to the state court system, I wonder if you are aware of the money leaking out through the "Assigned Judges Program"; it appears to me if that spending were reigned in, there would be no budget problem.
Case in point, Judge jack Halpin sits on the bench here in Shasta county, out of the "Assigned Judges Program", Judge Halpin has served here as a "temporary judge" since 1997 and is paid his full pension plus 90% of a regular judge's salary; a combined estimated total of $4000,000 per year.
If this is the case, Judge Halpin has been paid around 5.6 million dollars, just during his new career as a "temporary" judge.
According to preliminary statistics gathered from the "AOC", 400 judges served in temporary assignments in 2010 and 133 of them over many years. If 133 judges served for a comparable amount of time as Judge Halpin in this capacity and at presumably the same rate of pay, Then we are talking about an estimated figure of 6.6 Billion dollars; taking away the pension they would receive anyway still leaves a monstrous figure of over 3 billion dollars.
Chief Justice, you know as well as I do that the "Assigned Judges Program" was not crated to make retired judges or to put retired judges in to permanent positions; especially when retired judges are not held accountable because they are not under the jurisdiction of the "Center on Judicial Performance", therefore they have no motivation to act appropriately and objectively.
Judge halpin has had numerous complaints lodged against him and they have all been ignored.
I implore you to make policy changes concerning the "Assigned Judges Program", so that they can not become permanent "temporary" judges.
Thank you, Robert Hovey
Wednesday, January 18, 2012
STOP "SOPA", SIGN THIS PETITION !
http://sopa.boldprogressives.org/survey/survey_sopa_reddit/?source=link-typ&referring_akid=.1437920.VD33et
Don't let them take our right to the internet and right to free speech.
Don't let them take our right to the internet and right to free speech.
Tuesday, December 20, 2011
No "Merry" in Christmas for court abducted children
During this season that is meant to be full of joy and thanks,it is for so many children and parents a season of sadness and regret that one must weather like a bad storm.
A time when some parents and children can only think of what it would be like to be with their family member that has been removed from them by a corrupt court and the parasites that use the court to sale children in to slavery and banish them to the control of an abuser, or at best, an uncaring parent that only fought for custody to punish the other parent.
Because of our corrupt family court system and the cottage industry attached to it,this Christmas Season for many children, is just one more link forged in the chain of their ultimate emotional and/or mental instability that will result in the inability to love, trust and possibly even function as an adult in our society.
Because of all blood money made by corrupt court officials and the practicing professionals within, many children will turn to drugs, sex,alcohol and many other self destructive behaviors that will, for a short time ease their pain but in the long run destroy their lives.
Those of you who do not have a case in court, must pay attention and give the same assistnce to these children of the court that you might give to any child with an incurable disease; or that far off ethiopian child that you give a few cents per day.
Ask questions and when you get the answer, act !
Remember,for every moment of laughter you experience, a child child separated from her loving parent, for no good reason, experiences an hour of anguish, for every tear you shed in joy during this holiday season, the court causes a thousand unjust tears of pain.
Some Main Abducters:
Judge Jack Halpin
Timothy Van Schooten and the entire "Family Court Services" crew
Richard M. Bay
Dr. J. Reid Mckellar, now with "CFS" taking children in bulk
Marie Dimmick LMFT
and the list goes on..........
A time when some parents and children can only think of what it would be like to be with their family member that has been removed from them by a corrupt court and the parasites that use the court to sale children in to slavery and banish them to the control of an abuser, or at best, an uncaring parent that only fought for custody to punish the other parent.
Because of our corrupt family court system and the cottage industry attached to it,this Christmas Season for many children, is just one more link forged in the chain of their ultimate emotional and/or mental instability that will result in the inability to love, trust and possibly even function as an adult in our society.
Because of all blood money made by corrupt court officials and the practicing professionals within, many children will turn to drugs, sex,alcohol and many other self destructive behaviors that will, for a short time ease their pain but in the long run destroy their lives.
Those of you who do not have a case in court, must pay attention and give the same assistnce to these children of the court that you might give to any child with an incurable disease; or that far off ethiopian child that you give a few cents per day.
Ask questions and when you get the answer, act !
Remember,for every moment of laughter you experience, a child child separated from her loving parent, for no good reason, experiences an hour of anguish, for every tear you shed in joy during this holiday season, the court causes a thousand unjust tears of pain.
Some Main Abducters:
Judge Jack Halpin
Timothy Van Schooten and the entire "Family Court Services" crew
Richard M. Bay
Dr. J. Reid Mckellar, now with "CFS" taking children in bulk
Marie Dimmick LMFT
and the list goes on..........
A "Judicial Council Watcher" Christmas Carol
The twelve days of an AOC Christmas 2011by Judicial Council Watcher |
On the first day of Christmas
The AOC gave to me
A blind puppet in a fake tree.
The AOC gave to me
A blind puppet in a fake tree.
On the second day of Christmas
The AOC gave to me
Two intoxicated leaders,
And a blind puppet in a fake tree.
The AOC gave to me
Two intoxicated leaders,
And a blind puppet in a fake tree.
On the third day of Christmas
The AOC gave to me
Three hench men,
Two intoxicated leaders,
And a blind puppet in a fake tree.
The AOC gave to me
Three hench men,
Two intoxicated leaders,
And a blind puppet in a fake tree.
On the fourth day of Christmas
The AOC gave to me
Four empty robes,
Three hench men,
Two intoxicated leaders,
And a blind puppet in a fake tree.
The AOC gave to me
Four empty robes,
Three hench men,
Two intoxicated leaders,
And a blind puppet in a fake tree.
On the fifth day of Christmas
The AOC gave to me
Five big lies,
Four empty robes,
Three hench men,
Two intoxicated leaders,
And a blind puppet in a fake tree.
The AOC gave to me
Five big lies,
Four empty robes,
Three hench men,
Two intoxicated leaders,
And a blind puppet in a fake tree.
On the sixth day of Christmas
The AOC gave to me
Six gold-plated closets,
Five big lies,
Four empty robes,
Three hench men,
Two intoxicated leaders,
And a blind puppet in a fake tree.
The AOC gave to me
Six gold-plated closets,
Five big lies,
Four empty robes,
Three hench men,
Two intoxicated leaders,
And a blind puppet in a fake tree.
On the seventh day of Christmas
The AOC gave to me
Seven overpriced courthouses,
Six gold-plated closets,
Five big lies,
Four empty robes,
Three hench men,
Two intoxicated leaders,
And a blind puppet in a fake tree.
The AOC gave to me
Seven overpriced courthouses,
Six gold-plated closets,
Five big lies,
Four empty robes,
Three hench men,
Two intoxicated leaders,
And a blind puppet in a fake tree.
On the eighth day of Christmas
The AOC gave to me
Eight shredders humming,
Seven overpriced courthouses,
Six gold-plated closets,
Five big lies,
Four empty robes,
Three hench men,
Two intoxicated leaders,
And a blind puppet in a fake tree.
The AOC gave to me
Eight shredders humming,
Seven overpriced courthouses,
Six gold-plated closets,
Five big lies,
Four empty robes,
Three hench men,
Two intoxicated leaders,
And a blind puppet in a fake tree.
On the ninth day of Christmas
The AOC gave to me
Nine hundred laid-off trial court employees,
Eight shredders humming,
Seven overpriced courthouses,
Six gold-plated closets,
Five big lies,
Four empty robes,
Three hench men,
Two intoxicated leaders,
And a blind puppet in a fake tree.
The AOC gave to me
Nine hundred laid-off trial court employees,
Eight shredders humming,
Seven overpriced courthouses,
Six gold-plated closets,
Five big lies,
Four empty robes,
Three hench men,
Two intoxicated leaders,
And a blind puppet in a fake tree.
On the tenth day of Christmas
The AOC gave to me
Ten years of false transparency,
Nine hundred laid-off trial court employees,
Eight shredders humming,
Seven overpriced courthouses,
Six gold-plated closets,
Five big lies,
Four empty robes,
Three hench men,
Two intoxicated leaders,
And a blind puppet in a fake tree.
The AOC gave to me
Ten years of false transparency,
Nine hundred laid-off trial court employees,
Eight shredders humming,
Seven overpriced courthouses,
Six gold-plated closets,
Five big lies,
Four empty robes,
Three hench men,
Two intoxicated leaders,
And a blind puppet in a fake tree.
On the eleventh day of Christmas
The AOC gave to me
Eleven rubber-stamping judicial council members,
Ten years of false transparency,
Nine hundred laid-off trial court employees,
Eight shredders humming,
Seven overpriced courthouses,
Six gold-plated closets,
Five big lies,
Four empty robes,
Three hench men,
Two intoxicated leaders,
And a blind puppet in a fake tree.
The AOC gave to me
Eleven rubber-stamping judicial council members,
Ten years of false transparency,
Nine hundred laid-off trial court employees,
Eight shredders humming,
Seven overpriced courthouses,
Six gold-plated closets,
Five big lies,
Four empty robes,
Three hench men,
Two intoxicated leaders,
And a blind puppet in a fake tree.
On the twelfth day of Christmas
The AOC gave to me
Twelve quarters of disgraceful conduct
Eleven rubber-stamping judicial council members,
Ten years of false transparency,
Nine hundred laid-off trial court employees,
Eight shredders humming,
Seven overpriced courthouses,
Six gold-plated closets,
Five big lies,
Four empty robes,
Three hench men,
Two intoxicated leaders,
And a blind puppet in a fake tree.
The AOC gave to me
Twelve quarters of disgraceful conduct
Eleven rubber-stamping judicial council members,
Ten years of false transparency,
Nine hundred laid-off trial court employees,
Eight shredders humming,
Seven overpriced courthouses,
Six gold-plated closets,
Five big lies,
Four empty robes,
Three hench men,
Two intoxicated leaders,
And a blind puppet in a fake tree.
Friday, December 9, 2011
Judge Gaul Carrys battaan for corrupt court against Kitkowski
Now, in a decision pertaining to attorneys for appellate court, in case #149117/172066, Judge calls Kitkowski a liar and says she is not disabled and simply will not work; even though he has the SSDI award letter.
Gaul further states that Gary Richardson (Kitkowski's ex-husband and reason for Kitkowski's disability) has lost money and owes his attorney so much money that he can't afford to pay the attorney's fees for kitkowski; even though he has an estimated million dollar per year Chiropratic practice, takes frequent vacations and trips and lives in a house that is estimated to be worth $500,000 in the present market. Richardson was also able to move his practice from a newly remodeled and "rent locked" facility and put it in a brand new $300,000 dollar suite he recently purchased.
What is in fact happening is that judge Gaul , just as judge Halpin , is trying to make sure that an unbiased court, IE the appellate court , does not hear this case because Judge Gaul, Richardson's attorney Michael Cogan and the rest of the court know that Kitkowski will win if she is able to break free of this corrupt local system.
Gaul further states that Gary Richardson (Kitkowski's ex-husband and reason for Kitkowski's disability) has lost money and owes his attorney so much money that he can't afford to pay the attorney's fees for kitkowski; even though he has an estimated million dollar per year Chiropratic practice, takes frequent vacations and trips and lives in a house that is estimated to be worth $500,000 in the present market. Richardson was also able to move his practice from a newly remodeled and "rent locked" facility and put it in a brand new $300,000 dollar suite he recently purchased.
What is in fact happening is that judge Gaul , just as judge Halpin , is trying to make sure that an unbiased court, IE the appellate court , does not hear this case because Judge Gaul, Richardson's attorney Michael Cogan and the rest of the court know that Kitkowski will win if she is able to break free of this corrupt local system.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)