Grandkid-loving judges running from the bench and the fate of state Judicial Conduct/Qualification Commissions, starting with the State of Georgia

State Judicial Qualifications/Conduct Commissions are notoriously slow to discipline judges.

A judge must commit something outrageous - or become the focus of national and international media frenzy - to be even considered for discipline.

In Georgia, that has been especially so, and especially when, until lately, the Judicial Qualifications Commission, the allegedly "independent" watchdog of judicial behavior, was headed by Brenda Weaver, who herself is now the focus of an FBI investigation for her outrageous shenanigans.

Weaver only resigned as Chair of the Commission after over a month of media storm describing her targeting of a publisher and an attorney for seeking public records of her misconduct with felony charges (since dropped) with the help of her own former law clerk-turned prosecutor Alyson Sosebee.

And, the Commission did not seek to suspend Weaver (which it has the power to do) immediately as the news appeared of her instigating a felony proceeding, through her former law clerk, for as much as seeking access to public records of her misuse (theft) of public funds out of the court operating account.

Instead, Weaver's deputy resigned instead of suspending her - before Weaver resigned herself.

And Weaver is still not suspended by the Commission pending investigation as of now, even though the "independent" Judicial Qualifications Commission does have such power -

• unlike Judge Olu Stevens who was suspended in the State of Kentucky pending investigation of him fighting racism in the courtroom, 
• unlike Chief Judge Roy Moore who was suspended in the State of Alabama pending investigation and prosecution for disobeying a particular precedent of the U.S. Supreme Court - just one precedent out of many that judges are regularly disobeying without any consequences.

And, mostly, the Georgia Commission does not take judges off the bench, instead, like other State judicial conduct commission staffed with judges and attorneys, the Commission only leniently allows their rogue "brothers and sisters", judges who committed misconduct, even criminal misconduct, to not even be taken off the bench, and lose pensions, but to resign and keep their pensions and law licenses.

As it happened, for example, to the Georgia judge Johnnie Caldwell (and a former prosecutor, who prosecuted death penalty cases, Georgia is a death penalty state).

Judge Caldwell just resigned in 2010 turning in a "handwritten letter" that it is "time to visit his grandkids and maybe practice law". 

I remember another judge - a New York judge Carl F. Becker - providing the exact same reason, spending time with this granddaughter, for his abrupt resignation in July of 2015, after a bitter fight for election in 2012 where Becker defrauded voters into believing in his pre-eminent competency (I would not say re-election, because there is no competent evidence that Becker was elected in 2002, and, when I raised the issue of Becker's legitimacy in a motion to vacate his decisions, Becker had the local Republican Election Board Commissioner file a false certification of the 2002 elections in 2011 when all original documents from that election was gone and there was nothing to certify it from, had me sanctioned for the motion, and had my law license suspended without a hearing based on those sanctions, for questioning Judge Becker's legitimacy).

Yet, after Becker resigned - allegedly to spend more time with his granddaughter - who lived out of state according to Becker's public claims to attorneys and parties in the courtroom - Becker continued for a long while to linger around the courthouse, keeping his judge license plates on his car in violation of state law, using the employees-only parking space behind the courthouse and even wearing the black robe and illegally swearing in his own successor, a new judge, the former Delaware County prosecutor Richard Northrup - illegally because at the time of swearing in Carl Becker was only a private attorney and had no authority to either wear a black robe, or to swear in new public officials.

The report of the Commission for Judicial Conduct for the year ending December 31, 2015, indicates that 18 judges resigned that year pending investigation, and only 2 of those judges were under formal charges. 

No formal charges against Carl F. Becker can be found on the site of the New York State Judicial Conduct Commission, but the speed with which Becker left his coveted seat indicates that it is very likely that Becker is one of the 16 judges who resigned before formal charges were filed - to preserve their law licenses and their pensions. 

Also, the fact that Becker was not immediately picked up and made a partner by any law firms on his "retirement" and continues to this day to be a private licensed attorney without an address (despite a requirement that a licensed attorney must publish either his business address, or a home address as part of his mandatory registration process)

says a lot - that the stench of Carl Becker's reputation prevents his employment in any self-respecting law firm.

While Judge Becker does not appear to act - at least openly - to go against the Commission for Judicial Conduct that likely caused him to have so much free time on his hands, the other grandkid-loving former judge who resigned to "spend time with his grandchildren" and to "maybe" practice law - the Georgia Judge Johnnie Caldwell - is not that forgiving.

Judge Caldwell quickly resigned in 2010 during investigation that he has sexually harassed a female attorney, and that then the public evidence of that harassment somehow mysteriously disappeared - Judge Caldwell quickly recovered from his sudden urge to spend time with his grandchildren, decided to occupy his time by being a State legislator, and, upon election into the State Legislature, wielded a campaign to dismantle the Judicial Qualifications Commission that caused him to spend more time with his grandchildren.

The video included with the report of Johnnie Caldwell seeking to dismantle the Judicial Qualifications Commission watches as a detective story involving:

• a transcript of testimony regarding sexual harassment that led to resignation of Judge Caldwell missing from the court file;
• the mentioning of the transcript created in 2010 being erased from the court file in 2016, right after journalists asked for it;
• then the transcript mysteriously appeared, but was mis-filed in an unrelated case; and
• the stenographer now contacted the journalists personally and indicated that they now can have a copy of the transcript.

With the testimony available that a judge:

• crammed his tongue into a female attorney's mouth - obviously without her consent;
• told her to wear tighter pants in court, and
• told her to take her pants down for him to "see it, if he cannot touch it"

it is a wonder why the victim did not sue Judge Caldwell for sexual harassment, and the court system for not protecting her from Judge Caldwell.

The only explanation to it is the fear in which all attorneys live because judges who may be committing misconduct left and right, also hold attorneys' law licenses - and livelihoods - in their hands, and that's why suing a judge is a "professional suicide" for an attorney, no matter what the judge did to an attorney.

But, Johnnie Caldwell could be criminally charged for a battery - for cramming his tongue into a female attorney's mouth.

Right?

So, where are the charges?

Instead, he was allowed to quietly resign, keep his state pension, keep his law license, be elected into the State Legislature, and then seek to dismantle the "offending" Judicial Qualifications Commission entirely.

By the way, I checked out Johnnie Caldwell's attorney status today - and preserved the evidence, knowing how quickly it disappears once it is pointed out in the media.

Johnnie Caldwell, who has resigned as a judge in 2010 and who has been an elected State Representative for the Georgia State Legislature since January 14, 2013

still lists himself, as of today, as a judge:

Not changing his registration information in 6 years, no doubt, violates attorney disciplinary rules in the State of Georgia - yet, attorney disciplinary authorities do not seem to be in any hurry to investigate and prosecute Johnnie Caldwell:

• not for sexual harassment of a female attorney, involving sexual battery, despite available transcript of testimony of the victim;
• not regarding his possible (and likely) role in removing the transcript from the court file;
• not for continuing to register himself in his attorney registration information as a judge for 6 years after his resignation

In April of 2016 the Chair of the Judicial Qualifications Commission, attorney Lester Tate, resigned quoting pressure on the Commission from the Legislature and interference with investigation into egregious behavior of judges because investigated judges had powerful friends.

And, who took over the leadership of the Judicial Qualifications Commission after Lester Tate resigned in April of 2016 because of political pressure?

Judge Brenda Weaver who, in her turn, resigned in August of 2016 (within 4 months since the resignation of Lester Tate) due to a complaint for misconduct filed against her and a reported FBI investigation of her misconduct, which likely includes the investigation of the unlawful release of money from the court operating account, using her influence as a judge to bring unlawful criminal charges against a publisher and his attorney for seeking public records that could expose her misconduct.

Yet, with all the ire of Rep. (formerly, judge) Johnnie Caldwell, The Georgia Judicial Qualifications Commission was actually very forgiving to Judge Caldwell.

Judge Caldwell was not stripped of his pension - as he should have been under the circumstances.

He was not stripped of his law license - as he should have been under the circumstances.

And was not criminally prosecuted -

• not for sexual harassment of a female attorney,
• not for his role in the sudden disappearance of the public evidence of that sexual harassment.

He was not impeached as a Representative due to his criminal behavior in the past.

He was not even sued for sexual harassment.

Yet, Johnnie Caldwell still holds a grudge against the Commission, and, 6 years after he claimed he voluntarily resigned to spend more time with his grandkids, he uses his power - and taxpayers' money - to seek elimination of the Judicial Qualifications Commission.

State judicial disciplinary authorities, including the one in Georgia, are notorious for sending to the waste-bin the majority of complaints against judges, meritorious or not.

Now, the Commission's Chairman resigned quoting political pressure - and the FBI somehow is not investigating it.

The Commission then was chaired by a judge who herself committed monstrous misconduct - and she is still on the bench.

And now the Georgia Legislature is seeking to first, to investigate the Judicial Qualifications Commission, because it allegedly "lost credibility", and, then, eliminate the Judicial Qualifications Commission through an amendment to the State Constitution.

Here are pictures of the authors of the bill to create a "Special Committee" to investigate the Georgia Judicial Qualifications Commission, to bill that was authored by 6 lawyers, both Republicans and Democrats, male and female, black and white: 

• Wendell Willard, a white male, a Republican, and a practicing attorney whose law license is in the hands of the judiciary, and who, through his private practice, has a personal, financial, interest in providing favors for the judiciary.  Thus, Rep. Willard has an irreconcilable conflict of interest to author or vote a bill clearly benefiting the judiciary;

• Mary Margaret Oliver, a white female, a Democrat, and a former judge and a present practicing attorney, with an irreconcilable personal financial conflict of interest that should prevent her from co-authoring or voting on any legislature that would benefit the judiciary;

• Tom Weldon, a white male and a practicing attorney with an irreconcilable financial conflict of interest that should bar him from bringing or even voting on legislation benefiting the judiciary that holds the key to his law license and livelihood;

• Taylor Bennett, a white male, a Democrat, and a currently practicing attorney with a financial interest in passing legislation benefitting the judiciary who controls his law license and livelihood;

• Pam Stephenson, a black female, a Democrat and a "successful attorney" - with an irreconcilable conflict of interest barring her from authoring legislature that would benefit the judiciary, the regulator of her law license and the source of her income;

• Beth Beskin, a white female, a Republican, and a partner in a law firm - which will benefit greatly from Rep. Beskin co-authoring legislation that would benefit the judiciary

Then, 6 Georgia State Representatives sought to abolish the Judicial Qualifications Commission (after it forced too many judges off the bench lately) and to create, through an amendment to the State Constitution, a new commission, and make the new commission's records secret and not admissible in any court.

The authors of this new proposition are:

1. William Willard - a lawyer, with a personal financial interest in such a constitutional amendment, see above,
2. Mary Oliver - a lawyer and a former judge, see above,
3. Johnnie Caldwell - a lawyer and a resigned judge, see above,
4. Jan Jones - a white female, a Republican and, amazingly, not an attorney, but a business executive;
5. John Meadows - a white male, a Republican, and not an attorney, but a business executive;
6. Jon Burns - a white male, a Republican and not an attorney, but a business owner and executive.

So, half of the group of people seeking elimination of the Judicial Qualification Commission, closing determinations of misconduct from public access and declaring determinations of misconduct inadmissible in any court are licensed attorneys, and two of them are former judges.

By the way, out of all above mentioned state legislators, only the grandkid-loving Johnnie Caldwell (who also loves to sexually harass females who come in front of him in his official capacity) did not publish his biography on his official webpage.

Talking about secrecy.

There should be a prohibition for a State legislator to have any other business or profession, other than the job of the legislator, to eliminate conflicts of interests.

Obviously, the Georgia State legislature, same as New York state legislature, allows its representatives to author and vote for laws where legislators have obvious personal financial interest.

Judicial Qualifications Commission in the State of Georgia and in other states are not perfect, and that is a clear understatement.

They toss most of complaints against judges, even meritorious complaints, and mostly without investigation.

Their members are themselves fraught with conflicts of interest.  When judges and lawyers are investigating and prosecuting (supposedly) judges who regulate lawyers' livelihoods - and the lay non-lawyer public does not have a say in how judges are disciplined - that is already bad.

What Johnnie Caldwell and his teams seek though, is even worse:  to make it impossible for the public to ever know whether any of the judges were ever disciplined.

Judicial Qualifications Commission in Georgia and in other states does need to be reformed - in that Johnnie Caldwell is correct.

But, the way it should be reformed is not a plunge into more secrecy and less involvement or scrutiny by the public, but, on the opposite, more scrutiny by the public, more transparency.

Judicial Qualifications Commissions should constitute ENTIRELY of lay individuals who have no ties with the legal profession or the judiciary.

All complaints against judges should be public.

All results of investigations against judges should be public.

All dismissals of such complaints should be subject to appeals by complainants - that is not so in many states.

Judges should be judged and disciplined based on grand jury - like proceedings, and panels reviewing discipline against judges should not only not have ties to the judiciary or the legal profession, but should be randomly chosen from the cross-section of the community, same as jury duty, to prevent formation of "sweet connections" and "sweet deals" with the disciplined judges, and to eliminate political pressure upon members of the panels.

Laws should be introduced to make it a felony to interfere with the work of the Commission and its disciplinary panels.

Yet, to bring about such a reform, the likes of Johnnie Caldwell should be impeached, disbarred and locked up - in accordance with the already existing laws.

At this time, one only wonders, how the State Legislature of the State of Georgia makes sure that female personnel of the Legislature is protected from sexual harassment by Johnnie Caldwell.

A sexual predator on the loose making constitutional amendments.

Oh, well.

Experiences of #JudgeGonzaloCuriel, Part II - is #JudgeGonzaloCuriel fixing the case of the Trump University behind the doors of the American Inns of Court, over dinner with wine with Trump's opposing counsel?

I am continuing to report on my research regarding the "experiences" of federal judge Gonzalo Curiel, who was nearly sainted by the mass media after Donald Trump dared to raise the issue of his bias because of his background.

I was especially interested in reporting on "experiences" of the Latino judge Gonzalo Curiel since recently the "wise Latina woman" Justice Sonya Sotomayor publicly announced that judicial out-of-court "experiences" somehow matter to judicial decisions.

So, I continue describing "experiences" of Judge Gonzalo Curiel which may affect his judicial decision-making - at least, those "experiences" description of which I can obtain from open sources, and reasonable inferences I can make from those "experiences".

Any person in the U.S. is guaranteed a 1st Amendment right to criticize our government - and any member of it, in the executive, legislative or judicial branch, at the federal, state and local levels.

It is an open secret nowadays that judges retaliate severely against critics against them, and especially against those who dare to investigate their personal backgrounds to verify the bases of potential bias and raise those issues publicly.

So, when the media talking heads and, especially, privileged members of the government, jumped on the bandwagon trying to protect federal Judge Gonzalo Curiel from criticism - fair or unfair - by the presidential candidate Donald Trump, my instincts told me to do my own background check, to begin with, as much as is available from public sources on the Internet - and much is available.

Whenever the official mainstream media (heavily financed by corporate businesses and depending on advertisements), claims that a certain public figure is untouchable by criticism - it should only enhance people's desire to look at the background of that public official.

So, I did start to put two and two together as to information available about Judge Gonzalo Curiel - and what I so far uncovered, shows that Donald Trump had more than enough basis to claim bias, appearance of bias and even appearance that Judge Curiel may be fixing his court case through ex parte communications.

This blog is about Judge Curiel's participation in a secret-membership organization American Inns of Court financed by attorneys and free for judges where Judge Curiel can meet with unknown attorneys appearing in his court behind closed doors and, over dinner with wine, agree how to fix court cases - I am not saying he is DOING it, I am saying that ex parte communications are prohibited because of its potential for case-fixing.

What I am revealing in this blog did not require me to use any resources other than time - which raises questions as to why the "talking heads" and media sources that collectively thumped on Trump and idolized Judge Curiel as the all-American hero, an impartial judge beyond reproach and a victim of a racist attack by a demented bully, did not do a proper investigation that showed that not only Curiel is not an angel with a halo, but, very likely, Judge Curiel has been engaged, for a long time, in corruption and fixing of court cases - and doing it now, too.

Judge Curiel is a member of a secret-membership club,  American Inns of Court, William B. Enright Chapter (called after Judge Curiel still-serving colleague on the bench judge William B. Enright) that can very well include Trump's opponent's lawyers - and it is unverifiable without an extra lawsuit.

Here is the link to that particular chapter of the American Inns of Court.

I encourage my readers to go the website of Judge Curiel's chapter of the American Inns of Court and then to go to the "members" page and to the "meetings" page.

You will be denied access to both the membership database or meetings schedule.

So, you will not be able to discern from the Inn's webpage whether Trump's opposing counsel is a member of the Inn, along with Judge Curiel, nor will you be able to discern whether or when Judge Curiel was meeting with attorneys-members of the Inn, with which attorneys in particular, and whether attorneys Judge Curiel met with were or are appearing in front of him in court.

You will also be denied access to the composition of the "teams" of the Inn.  Information about "teams" contains, necessarily, information about the judge as a "mentor" of the team and of attorneys who are part of the judge's "team".

The Inns' "teams" (the judge and attorneys) meet, according to available descriptions of the Inns' practices, at least once a month and end up or start with receptions with alcohol that attorneys pay for through their steep membership fees, and judges are attending for free.

By the way, Judge Curiel's court has a "gift policy" prohibiting soliciting or accepting gifts of any kind from people who may seek benefits from the judge's court:

But, when gifts are provided through a secret-membership, secret-meeting organization, that's, apparently, ok.

"Committees" of Judge Curiel's Inn are also secret.

Information about officers of the Inn is public.

President

Hon. Barbara L. Major
US District Court Southern District of California
p: (619) 557-7372
e: Send Mail

Secretary

Angela Mullins, Esq.
Office of the SD City Attorney
p: (619) 533-5883
e: Send Mail

Treasurer

Gregory A. Post, Esq.

p: (619) 557-4401
e: Send Mail

Program Chair

John J. Freni, Esq.
John J Freni A Professional Law Corporation
p: (619) 557-9128
e: Send Mail

Membership Chair

Susan Moriarty Hack, Esq.
Higgs Fletcher & Mack LLP
p: (619) 236-1551
e: Send Mail

Program Chair

Hon. Judith L. Haller
California Courts of Appeal 4th District Division 1
p: (619) 645-2751
e: Send Mail

Immediate Past President

Nancy L. Stagg, Esq.
Foley & Lardner
p: (858) 847-6700
e: Send Mail

Board Member

Hon. Kevin A. Enright
San Diego Superior Court
p: (619) 450-5000
e: Send Mail

Brian P. Funk, Esq.
Law Offices of Brian P Funk
p: (619) 233-4076
e: Send Mail

Charles R. Grebing, Esq.
Wingert Grebing Brubaker & Juskie LLP
p: (619) 232-8151
e: Send Mail

John D. Kirby, Esq.
John D Kirby Law
p: (619) 557-0100
e: Send Mail

John D. Kirby, Esq.
John D Kirby Law
p: (619) 557-0100
e: Send Mail

Craig R. McClellan, Esq.
The McClellan Law Firm
p: (619) 231-0505
e: Send Mail

Michelle Pettit, Esq.
US Attorneys Office
p: (619) 546-7972
e: Send Mail

Hon. Joan P. Weber
San Diego Superior Court
p: (619) 450-5051
e: Send Mail

Executive Director

Laura Vest

p: (858) 414-1113
e: Send Mail

Web Administrator

Laura Vest

Let's go through the 15 known officers of Judge Curiel's Inn of Court one by one.

1. Nancy L. Stagg, Esq, a partner at Foley & Lardner

Nancy Stagg is a white female, and a specialist in class actions, an attorney appearing in Judge Curiel's court and, moreover, an attorney hand-picked by Judge Curiel's court to select judges for that court.

  "Affiliations" listed on her own website are:

• co-chair for the Lawyer Representative Committee for the Southern District of California; 
• lawyer representative for the Southern District of California to the Ninth Circuit Judicial Conference; 
• master, director, and president of the William B. Enright Chapter, American Inns of Court; 
• director for the San Diego County Bar Foundation (member, Governance Sub-Committee); 
• member of the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of California Merit Selection Panel (of judges);
• panel member for Appointment and Reappointment of Magistrate Judges; 
• member of the San Diego County Bar Association Leadership Outreach Council; 
• board of governors for the Association of Business Trial Lawyers, San Diego Chapter; and as a 
• member of the board of trustees for the California Western School of Law (1992 – 1993). She is a 
• fellow of the Litigation Counsel of America, and 
• a founding charter member of the IP Institute.

As you understand, the potential of use of the behind-the-doors meetings with judges of Judge Curiel's court, including Judge Curiel himself, are staggering for attorney Nancy Stagg, a practicing attorney who nevertheless gets to pick and promote judges.

And, the whole idea that a practicing attorney appearing in front of a judge finances a judge's participation in her organization, including wining and dining at secret meetings behind closed doors - is a breeding pool for corruption.

Judge Curiel is presumably participating in those wining and dining activities, as a member of that secret club.

2.  Attorney John Kirby is a white male, and a criminal defense attorney specializing in "state and federal criminal law".

John D. Kirby describes himself on the website of his own law firm as a former federal prosecutor with 10+ years of prosecuting experience.

According to John D. Kirby's LinkedIn profile, John D. Kirby worked in the U.S. Attorney's office from June 1995 to June 2005, and "prosecuted individuals involved in major drug and money laundering conspiracies, including members of the Arellano-Felix drug trafficking cartel."

Arellano-Felix drug trafficking cartel is what Judge Curiel prosecuted when he was a federal prosecutor in the U.S. Attorney's office and who put a hit on the then-prosecutor Gonzalo Curiel requiring him to live on a naval base under government protection for a year.

John D. Kirby is, according to his LinkedIn profile, a former law clerk for Judge Curiel's colleague Judge William B. Enright, in whose honor the Inn of court is named.

John D. Kirby is admitted in Judge Curiel's court since 2008 and is thus appearing in front of the court with which attorney Kirby has multiple connections:

1. as a former brother-in-arms of Judge Curiel in his fight against the Arrellano-Felix cartel that nearly took Judge Curiel's life;
2. as a former law clerk of the much-honored Judge Curiel's still-sitting colleague judge William B. Enright (in 1990-1991);
3. as an officer of the secret-membership Inn of court that likely is providing regular wining and dining (if only) benefits to judges of Judge Curiel's court, likely including Judge Curiel himself.

In 2005, according to his LinkedIn profile, John D. Kirby left the U.S. Attorney's office and started his private practice, which includes criminal defense.

In 2-years' time, in 2007, Judge Curiel was appointed by Governor Schwarzenegger to the Superior Court in San Diego.  

In 2008 John D. Kirby is admitted to the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of California, the court where he previously worked as a law clerk to a still-sitting Judge William Enright.

In 3 years' time, in 2011, John D. Kirby's brother-in-arms Gonzalo Curiel makes his way to the same court as a judge.

At the same time, the "brothers-in-arms" are members of the same secret-membership organization that meets behind closed doors.

Only a blind person would not see a suspicious pattern here.

There is at least an APPEARANCE, from the information available in open access, that the "brothers-in-arms" have a business going on here - that Judge Curiel has been appointed first in state, and then in federal court to help out his brother-in-arms John Kirby, and is now doing it behind the closed doors of the American Inns of Court.

3.  Attorney Gregory A. Post is a white male also an attorney admitted in Judge Curiel's court.

Attorney Gregory Post has a background of a Stanford athlete - not a good recommendation nowadays.

Now attorney Post's practice concentrates on arbitration (alternative dispute resolution).

ALL civil rights cases in federal court are required to be turned into paid ADR (paid by the parties) unless the court allows them not to do that, which rarely happens.

So, I wonder whether ADR Gregory A. Post gets assignments from Judge Curiel's courts for the mandatory ADR in civil rights cases based on their discussions behind closed doors at the Inn of Courts.

Gregory Post is the Treasurer of the Inn, having an immense power of rewarding judges who rule his way and bring him business.


4.   Attorney John J. Freni, a "Program Chair" is admitted in Judge Curiel's court. and is a white male.

John J. Freni's passion is hunting and fishing - a valuable "hobby" when you are dealing with American judges in view of the history of hunting trips of U.S. Supreme Court justices, such as Antonin Scalia, with the litigants appearing in front of them.

5.  Judge Judith L. Haller of California's 4th District Court of Appeal.  Judge Haller is a white female.

Judge Haller was a defendant in Judge Curiel's court (U.S. District Court for the Southern District of California) numerous times, including in five lawsuits since Judge Curiel was appointed to that court.

I wonder whether defendant judge Judith Haller influenced the court's decision in lawsuits filed against her through ex parte communications with Judge Curiel at the Inn behind closed doors.

6.  Magistrate judge Barbara Major of the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of California, Judge Curiel's colleague, is the current President of Judge Curiel's Inn of Court.

Magistrate Barbara Major is a white female.

Magistrate Major is also a former colleague of Judge Curiel in the U.S. Attorney's office, and a former law clerk to a judge in the same court.  Magistrate Barbara Major was appointed in 2004, just before her colleague John D. Kirby left the same U.S. Attorney's office and started a private law practice.

It is interesting that Magistrate Major is a member in the same secret-membership organization as Nancy Stagg, an attorney who is a member of "Merit Selection Panel" of that court selecting magistrates.   Names of any other members other than officers of the "Inn" are secret, so other magistrates or candidates for magistrates can also be secret members of the Inn - and the selection could be taking place right over a dinner with wine between the magistrate and Nancy Stagg as member of the panel.


7.  The Inn's past president, attorney Susan Moriarty Hack, of Higgs, Fletcher & Mack LLP is yet another "officer" of Judge Curiel's Inn of Court.

Attorney Susan M. Hack is a white female.

Attorney Susan M. Hack, according to her law firm's website, is also a current president of another Inn of Court - the San Diego Inn of Court.

According to the description of her activities in the Inns of Court on her law firm's website:

"One purpose of the American Inns of Court is to create an atmosphere of camaraderie among lawyers and judges, and to provide attorneys with the opportunity to learn from other attorneys and judges at the monthly meetings."

So, on her law firm's website attorney Hack admits that the Inn of Court members meet on a monthly basis and that the purpose of the organization is to "create an atmosphere of camaraderie among lawyers (members of the Inn - T.N.) and judges".

Naturally, the "camaraderie" is being developed not with pro se parties appearing before judges and not with attorneys who are not members of the Inn (where membership is by invitation only), but only with those attorneys who pay for judges' monthly wining and dining.

Attorney Hack is also a member of the "Lawyers' Club" of San Diego where judges, lawyers and law students participate.  The website of that organization also does not provide public access to its members' list.

When you hit "Membership Directory" on that website, a page opens with information about what the club allegedly does and with links of how to join it, but does not provide access to member lists.


8.  The eighth known officer of Judge Curiel's Inn is Judge David J. Danielsen of California Superior Court

Judge Danielsen is a white male.

Judge Daneilsen is a Supervising judge of California Superior Court.

Pacer.gov shows 16 lawsuits filed against Judge Danielsen as a defendant in Judge Curiel's court from 1990 to 2012, including 4 lawsuits after Judge Curiel was appointed as a member of the court, and several lawsuits filed at the time when Judge Curiel was a colleague of Judge Danielsen, a California state court judge.

9.  Hon. Kevin A. Enright, of San Diego Superior Court, is a white male judge for the State of California, and the son of the still-sitting colleague of Judge Curiel, Judge William B. Enright, the Inn of Court is named after him.

The whole idea that a state judge is a relative of a federal judge whose court may be reviewing cases against state judges, Kevin Enright included, as defendants, smacks of potential for corruption.

When the son is an "officer" of a secret-membership attorney-funded organization named after his still-sitting judge father, and his father's colleagues, judges, are also "officers" of the same organization, the appearance of corruption is only enhanced.


10. The next "officer" of Judge Curiel's Inn of Court is Brian P. Funk, Esq., of the Law Offices of Brian P Funk.

Brian P. Funk is a white male, a criminal lawyer from San Diego, California.

Since Brian P. Funk defends federal criminal cases, he is an attorney who may or does appear in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of California, Judge Curiel's court, which is a direct appearance of impropriety and a potential for ex parte communication and case-fixing behind closed doors.

11. Charles R. Grebing, Esq., of Wingert Grebing Brubaker & Juskie LLP, is a white male.

Grebing is admitted in Judge Curiel's court, which is yet another conflict of interest.

Moreover, Grebing is the Inn of Court "lecturer on jury selection", so, while practicing in state and federal courts, he also has the potential of influencing judges sitting on his cases as to how pick juries so that to win cases - and judges-members of the Inn to whom he may have been lecturing is Judge Curiel.

As a member of the Inn of Court, he is also paying for wining and dining of judges he is lecturing, and since the "membership benefits" are secret, and the meetings are secret - it is a perfect breeding atmosphere for corruption. 

12. Michelle Pettit, Esq., is an Assistant U.S. Attorney in the San Diego, California, and a member of Judge Curiel's former office.  Michelle Pettit is trying cases in Judge Curiel's court.  The potential for corruption, ex parte communications and case fixing is clear.  

There are 649 records on Pacer.gov as of today of cases tried by Michelle Pettit - attorney admitted only in 2007.

So, Michelle Pettit is in federal court, and in Judge Curiel's court, constantly, while having a potential to meet, talk with the judge behind closed doors in the Inn of Court, as well as wine-and-dine the judge.

13. Hon. Joan P. Weber is a judge of San Diego Superior Court, and a recent respondent in Judge Curiel's court.

The potential for corruption and case-fixing is clear.

14. Laura Vest

15. Angela Mullins, Esq., of the Office of the San Diego City Attorney, regularly litigates cases in Judge Curiel's court:

I understand that the whole idea of the onslaught upon Donald Trump for even raising the issue of potential bias of Judge Curiel is to prevent further digging into Judge Curiel's connections and background.

Once Judge Curiel was all but sainted by the mass media, to criticize him in any way became anathema.

Information that I provided above is available from open public sources.

Obviously, Trump's well-paid attorneys had access to that information.

That they did not raise those issues, speaks a lot about the fear instilled into attorneys, even and especially well-paid attorneys, not to rattle their golden cage in any way, not to upset the judiciary that controls their law licenses and livelihoods in any way - even if that inaction hurts their clients.

The logic is simple - you sell out one client, but you save your law license to be paid by other clients.

You protect one client, stepping on the toes of those who control your law license - and you are out on the street, and you will not be able to get any "licensed" or "certified" employment, which is nowadays nearly any more or less well-paid job in the United States.

So, in that respect, of access to honest legal representation, Donald Trump is on par with an average American - attorney regulation makes sure he is being sold out in the same way as poor clients are.

And, ay lawsuit seeking disclosure of membership in the American Inns of Court is an illustration that the issue of the American Inns of Court and of other secret-membership organization is a taboo in the legal industry.

In May of 2014, I filed a lawsuit in federal court to verify the membership of ALL American judges and ALL American attorneys in the American Inns of Court and any other secret-membership organizations.

The lawsuit was dismissed by a judge who I now have a reasonable basis to suspect, since March of 2016, that the dismissing judge was and, possibly, is, a member of at least one of such a secret-membership organization himself, was a hostile witness in the proceeding he dismissed, and dismissed the proceedings to protect himself and members of his secret-membership club from exposure.

At this time, the court that dismissed that case and the supervising appellate court, stall my Freedom of Information Act request regarding membership in yet another secret-membership behind-the-scenes organization - the State-Federal Judicial Council, and, since membership in that organization that seeks to "relieve tension" (fix cases) with state public officials.

My lawsuit is directly related to Judge Gonzalo Curiel - because it is confirmed that Judge Curiel is a member of one of these secret-membership organizations, and Donald Trump can thus question whether the opposing counsel in his lawsuit pays for Judge Gonzalo Curiel's travels, whether those opposing counsel wine and dine Judge Curiel behind closed doors, or provide monetary and non-monetary benefits to the judge's personnel, friends and family members.

Because, otherwise - why keep the membership of attorneys and judges (with few exceptions) in such organizations secret?

And, once again, here is Judge Curiel's court's "gift policy" - which provides lip service to what judges of that court are doing through American Inns of Court and similar secret-membership attorney-funded organizations:

#JudgeGonzaloCuriel, his life experiences, and the right to impartial judicial review of those we do not like - Part I

The "wise Latina woman" U.S. Supreme Court Justice Sonya Sotomayor just made yet another public blunder, by claiming that the U.S. Supreme Court needs more diversity - now not "by appearance, but by experience", which, in Justice Sotomayor's opinion, is the equivalent of the need of a Protestant judge.

That is the same judge who, back in 2001, endorsed herself as a "wise Latina woman" who will enrich a federal appellate court with the "richness of her experience" - even though appellate judges may only base their decisions not on their experiences, whoever rich they are, but on the record on appeal and the applicable law.

Apparently, to Justice Sotomayor her race-related experiences - and now religion-related and other experiences - matter in judicial decision-making.

From that point of view, let's look at the experiences of Judge Gonzalo Curiel - the one judge who was criticized by Donald Trump for an appearance of bias based on, specifically, the judge's race and experiences.

"Gonzalo, the youngest of four children, was born at an East Chicago hospital in 1953.  His mother was a devout Catholic, and their family was active in the St. Patrick parish, where the children attended school. Before Gonzalo reached high school, however, his father died. And the cost of the parochial education became a greater burden. “I think it was a financial hardship,” said Greg Vega, who has been close friends with Gonzalo since the ninth grade."

So, no diversity here - Judge Curiel was not a pagan, not an atheist, not a Muslim, he was from a devout Christian family.

And, Judge Curiel was brought up in an immigrant community - which, at the time of his birth, could be more fairly characterized as an immigrant ghetto.

"It was a thriving blue-collar town, and also ethnically diverse, with Mexicans, African-Americans and an assortment of immigrants from Poland, Serbia, Croatia and Lithuania."

Why ghetto?

Why only immigrants lived in that location?

And why only blue-collar immigrants (not highly qualified and highly paid workers) lived in that location?

Obviously because blue-collar immigrants either could not afford, or were not allowed to live in more integrated communities.

There is a reason to believe that Judge Curiel's parents came to the U.S. illegally, and his mother obtained citizenship in the 60s, after the birth of Judge Curiel and after the death of his father.

Since Judge Curiel's mother did not obtain citizenship through marriage to a U.S. citizen father, but after the birth of her American-born children and after the death of her husband, there is a reason to believe that Judge Curiel is an "anchor baby" - and that his early life experiences were shaped not only by poverty, but by illegal status of his parents.

Whether Judge Curiel's parents were or were not illegal immigrants, is easily proven or disproven - through public records.  Apparently, with all the money that was poured into the campaign to brand Donald Trump as bigot when he raised the issue of appearance of bias because of Judge Curiel's background, the media was unable to produce documents proving legality of Judge Curiel's parents' presence in the United States.

But, since there is a clear implication that, since Judge Curiel's mother only became a citizen in 1960, even though his father came to the U.S. in 1920s, and only after the birth of her children within the U.S. and after the death of his father - it is likely that Judge Curiel's parents were both illegal parents when they came, and thus the comparison with Donald Trump's mother who came to the U.S. through marriage to a U.S. citizen - Donald Trump's father - is not appropriate.

It is also apparent that, under these circumstances, survival and education came at a hard price to Gonzalo Curiel.

Under the circumstances of such "experience", anybody who would be rich enough to set up a private university, and who would then be accused of cheating students, can expect an "experience-based" bias from such a judge.

Here is a picture of Judge Curiel as a young man.

   

Moreover, unlike the spoiled rich kid Donald Trump, Gonzalo Curiel had to give up his true calling - music - in order to earn a living.

"He played football but seemed to have a greater affinity for music, playing the guitar, keyboards and even the organ. He was in a number of bands and, after graduation from Bishop Noll in 1971, his brother Raul remembers that Curiel initially hoped to study music at IU. Eventually, his brother said, “he didn’t think he was going to earn a living out of it.”

So, unlike the rich kid Donald Trump, Gonzalo Curiel, after the death of his immigrant father, when his immigrant mother with only elementary school education was struggling to raise the children and give them education, gave up his dream for his true calling in music because of money issues.

All the more reasons for Judge Curiel to hate Trump and be biased against him.

Trump is a bully - and that is clearly visible in his speeches as a presidential candidates, and in how he handles his campaign, where anybody who appears to be non-white can be expected to be thrown out of a campaign rally.

Yet, "for many of Curiel’s friends and acquaintances, what comes through most clearly are the stark differences between the Hoosier-born judge and the presidential candidate who now criticizes him.

“You couldn’t find two people with a sharper contrast,” said Warren, the California lawyer."

And that's exactly the point - these two people are very different, and Judge Curiel's background prepared him to hate Trump and people like Trump, rich white kids who had no problems with advancing their careers that were smoothed by parents' money.

Gonzalo Curiel himself had to forgo his dream of a career in music because he had no money to pursue that career or survive in it.

"Instead, Gonzalo followed an older brother, Antonio, into law, entering the IU law school in 1976. In a class of about 100 students, he was one of a handful of Latino students. Curiel was an able student, but he also had other interests. He performed in the IU Soul Review, a rhythm and blues band. He wore his hair in a big Afro, and he caught the eyes of women he was around. “He looked like a fair-skinned African-American,” said Sherma Wise, who attended Ball State with Curiel’s girlfriend."

So, Gonzalo Curiel was longing for his forfeited calling even in law school, and he was longing for a musical career even long after graduation from law school.  In fact, reportedly Gonzalo Curiel graduated from law school in 1979 and worked in Illinois for 7 years, but then moved from Illinois to California, because he was still hopeful at that time for a career in music.

"For a time, after his law school graduation in 1979, Curiel worked in a law firm in Dyer, about 12 miles south of East Chicago. But by 1986, he was lured to Southern California by the warm sun and the lingering hope of a musical career."

"Even as he sometimes questioned whether the law was for him, he stuck with it. As his friend Greg Vega put it, “I guess somebody must have told him, ‘Don’t quit your day job.’ ” It wouldn't prevent him, though, from keeping a guitar in his office the rest of his career."

So, we have a judge presiding over Donald Trump University's case where the judge himself grew up in poverty and, likely, fearing deportation of his parents during his childhood, and forfeiting a calling in music because of lack of money - a heartfelt loss judging by the fact that Curiel keeps having a guitar in this office throughout his career as a lawyer/judge.

Moreover, when Trump got his seed money the easy way, from his father, and never had a problem in career advancement, because of coming from a rich family, Gonzalo Curiel tried 7 TIMES to get into the U.S. Attorney's office - where his brother already worked, and was turned down 6 TIMES despite his brother working in his office - meaning that his brother was not a connection enough to secure that job for Gonzalo Curiel.

Thus, Gonzalo Curiel had a long history of overcoming discrimination against him clearly based on his background of a son of poor Mexican immigrants without connections - contrary to Donald Trump who was born with a silver spoon in his mouth.

"Throughout the 10 years he spent in private practices, Curiel had been inspired by his brother to work for a U.S. attorney, but he kept getting turned down. On his seventh try, he succeeded. Vega, who by then was a California resident himself, already worked in the southern district of California as an assistant U.S. attorney. He became U.S. attorney in 1999."

Gonzalo Curiel then dedicated himself to a career in drug enforcement, and eventually became a chief of narcotics division in 10 years - fighting crimes pertaining to money, not violence.

"For about a decade, Curiel paid his dues in the office, eventually gaining an appointment as chief of the narcotics enforcement section. “He was hardworking. He was street smart. He resolved turf battles between the various agencies,” Vega said. “He was a leader.”"

Curiel's persistence as a prosecutor, including the situation where he had to be put into a witness protection program because he was put on a hit list, helped him get a judgeship.

"Curiel was known as an aggressive prosecutor, and his work on drug cases and money laundering no doubt helped bring him to Schwarzenegger’s attention for the judgeship, in 2007, and for the federal bench in 2011."

Reportedly, Governor Schwarzenegger appointed Judge Curiel to the Superior Court of San Diego in November, 2006, and he was
reelected to that position in 2008, and then proceeded to the federal bench within 3 years of his election in 2008.

"During his tenure he has been exposed to a wide variety of cases, assigned to domestic violence, criminal cases, family court cases, civil cases, presiding over more than 40 that have gone to verdict or judgment.

In confirmation proceedings of Judge Gonzalo to the federal bench, it was stressed that "He's the son of immigrant parents from Mexico, who came to this country with an elementary school education."

Once again, Judge Curiel's humble background and the humble educational background of his parents were paraded.

It is apparent that Judge Curiel's "experiences" could form nothing but an in-built bias against Donald Trump, simply because of the hardships that Judge Curiel's family and he himself had to overcome - while Donald Trump had an easy road to money and success paved by his father's wealth.

It is also apparent that the fact that he has reportedly "tried over 300 cases, the vast majority of
them Federal criminal jury trials where he served as the sole or lead counsel" and was
"the lead attorney on the Presidential Organized Crime Drug Enforcement Task Force in 1999 to 2002" defined and sealed his Judge Curiel's prosecutorial mentality - a big concern as to how judicial experiences (praised by Justice Sotomayor) may have shaped Judge Curiel's outlook on cases like the civil case for fraud against the Trump University.

Even without more, Donald Trump would have had concerns about how Judge Curiel's "experiences" as a prosecutor shaped his pro-plaintiff views in a fraud case, and how his experiences of hardship, as a child of likely illegal and barely literate immigrants from Mexico, a child who had to forego his dream of a career in music to go into law in order to earn a living would shape his biased attitude against a rich son of rich parents and a founder of a private university sued for fraud.

But, Donald Trump had much more to be concerned about - and, naturally, his lawyers did not dare to raise those concerns for fear to lose their law licenses, which are in the hands of the judiciary, so lawyers' criticism of judicial misconduct in this country is, as we all know, silenced.

As I said before on this blog, if we do not afford Donald Trump his right to an impartial judge (see my blogs about it here, here and here) - because we do not like Donald Trump - we are shooting ourselves in the foot, because whichever precedent we are creating for those who we do not like, will be equally applicable to everybody else.

For additional description of Judge Gonzalo Curiel's "experiences" and dubious connections that raise the appearance of his bias against Donald Trump that should have disqualified Judge Curiel from presiding over Donald Trump's case - stay tuned.