Santa Clara County Court Administrators thought they could avoid pubic protests by quietly rescheduling the Grand Opening of the new courthouse in San Jose. They were wrong.
The national outrage and attention that ensued following Santa Clara County's Judge Persky's sentencing of Brock Turner in the Stanford Rape case is not going away and public outrage is bringing more attention to the Santa Clara County Courts specifically how Santa Clara Courts have been violating the rights of women and children for decades.
Noticeably absent from the protests was Santa Clara County's State Senator Jim Beall. Beall initially ran for office on a platform of supporting family court victims , resulting from court issues in the late 1990s. Beall was also seated on boards and committees aimed at addressing the fiduciaries who serve in Santa Clara County probate and divorce cases, after public outrage over these fiduciaries stealing from women, children disabled and poor citizens. But Beall's work since he was in office appears to be more self serving, and he appears to have quickly aligned with the very judges he was critical of when he initially sought public support.
In January 2016 members from the media began investigating Santa Clara County's misuse of the vexatious litigant statute, which appears to be being used as a judicial weapon by Santa Clara County judges against women engaged in custody and property disputes in the county's divorce cases.
In March 2016 Court Reform LLC presented state legislators with a privately funded report on the failures of California's Commission on Judicial Performance, the state funded watchdog agency that is supposed to protect the pubic and the integrity of the state's legal system .
In May 2016 Santa Clara County activists had discovered an alarming increase in what appeared to be judicial corruption complaints related to family law cases, which caused a firestorm after a well known custody expert and family lawyer, for a number of white collar crimes. The district attorney had ignored decades of family law based complaints against Ms Houghton, but suddenly was compelled to investigate her when a private business partner filed a complaint.
Ms. Houghton was not only known to countless mother's she had stripped of custody, she was closely aligned with family lawyer Brad Baugh, who represented her in a restraining order matter and who has used Ms. Houghton in custody cases against women and children for decades. Rich Roggia, also closely connected to Houghton is another lawyer who , along with Brad Baugh, has a long record of engaging in Hometowning, with Judges Towery and Grilli , where favored lawyers are awarded millions of dollars in fees at the expense of socioeconomically disadvantaged litigants , and out of favor local lawyers, or out-of- towners are awarded nothing.
By June 2016 , when Judge Persky's ruling in the Stanford rape case was revealed, an investigation of Persky was already underway for the role he played in the custody case, with Judge Vincent Chiarello, , where the Santa Clara County judges deprived a mother of legal representation , support enforcement and eventually awarded custody of a teen girl , to a father with a known history of child abuse. The father drugged , raped and killed his daughter within months of being awarded custody by Santa Clara County judges. Over the eight years Santa Clara County destroyed that child, saying they " missed the signs", persky was one of the judges missing the signs and sending a young child to be raped by her father. These cases are not unusal in Santa Clara and lawyers or litigants who speak up about them are retaliated against with the full arm of the county's court corruption.
Judge Chiarello , rather than shape up after the role he played in killing a kid, has continued conduct that shows gender bias and bad judicial conduct. And so has Judge Persky, showing there is no effort to correct the judicial ethical compass in the Santa Clara County courts.
Santa Clara County judges have been ignoring rape vicitms for decades. The misconduct of Persky is sanctione and employed by every family lawyer and civil law judge who denies a women legal partiy and equal access to commutniy fudns to fight in a dissolution case. Such is also done to men, when they are socioeconomically disadvantaged.
The protestors who have come to Santa Clara County should be looking far beyond Persky at the systemic pratices and proceedures of the Santa Calra Courts that that tolerates violation of law, judicial retaliation and harm to the state's most vulnerable citizens and victims.
The head of the monster in Santa Clara Courts are not the individual judges like Persky, but court administrators like Pichon and David Yamasaki .
David Yamasaki has spent his career ingratiating himself with California's judicial elite and state politicians . His efforts are mainly self serving , as seen by a 2015 award Yamasaki was given by the Judicial Council, as Yamasaki is reported to have been burying judicial complaints in the county, and misappropriating public funds while using billons in state funds to build the new San Jose courthouse.
Most troubling is what has been reported by court Whistleblowers and members of Anonymous , and that is there appear to exist information that shows Yamaski has been working with publicly paid court staff members, including Joe Macaluso , the county's public information officer, to unleash judicial retaliation on lawyers , litigants and members of the media who threaten to expose the flaws on Santa Clara County's bench,, or that could lead to exposing the misconduct of David Yamasaki himself. The conduct is especially distributing when it appears to infringe on First Amendment Rights of California citizens.
As protestors focus on Persky, the attention those protestors bring to Santa Clara is long overdue, but a deeper investigation will reveal that Persky is not the biggest problem in Santa Clara Courts. .