Monday, May 4, 2009
Fairfax Bar Association Racket in Judge Appointment
Long-Overdue Reforms needed to elect Judges
The Centerville Times, The Chantilly Times
by Rob Whitfield
In November 2002, a number of fathers and one mothers went to Richmond to testify at a public hearing against the re-election of several Fairfax County judges and a Court of Appeals Judge.
One Circuit Court Judge, in particular, as trial records and abundant testimony in Richmond showed, has demonstrated an ongoing pattern of rampant anti-father bias as well as multiple violations of the Canons of Ethics and Virginia Law in several recent domestic relations cases appealed to the Court of Appeals.
On December 18th 2002, at a "closed door" meeting in Annandale, delegates and senators from the Fairfax County delegation to the General Assembly met to consider the qualifications of several new judicial candidates and to vote on the re-election of four existing judges in the Fairfax County Circuit and General District Court.
Secret votes were taken at the meeting to re-elect the incumbent judges and to submit the candidate chosen as a new judge to the General Assembly for election under "suspension of the rules" votes. Prior to the start of the December meeting, the General Assembly members in the room were provided with confidential packages from the president of the Fairfax Bar Association with information about judges.
This secret process in conducting the review and selecting judicial candidates has been the practice in Fairfax County since Sen. Joe Gartlan headed the Senate Courts of Justice Committee. In most of the last century, Democrats controlled the General Assembly of Virginia and generally excluded Republicans from their meetings about judges. Several members of Fathers for Virginia showed up in Annandale to observe the proceedings. They were prevented from entering the conference room where state Del. David Albo ( R-42nd) chaired the judicial election process for the Fairfax delegation.
At the end of the secret session and private interview of judges, Del. Albo came to the door and gave back the "secret" packages to a man who, when asked, identified himself as John Wascowicz, president of the Fairfax Bar Association. Wascowicz seemed surprised that several people were present outside the meeting room to object to the re-election of existing judges. He declined to answer any questions to those present about the propriety of an "officer of the Court," who regularly appears before the judges up for re-election, providing secret packages about the judges to legislators.
A secret method of evaluating judges subjects members of the General Assembly to the appearance of cooperating in a form of influence peddling by lawyers. The primary duty of General Assembly members is to serve the best interests of the public rather than the pecuniary interest of lawyers and judges.
If public trust in the Virginia court system is to be restored, the General Assembly must pass long-overdue legislative reforms governing the election of judges. They must also adopt more stringent oversight of judicial performance and act to remove promptly those judges who exhibit bias, abuse judicial discretion and lack fairness in their rulings.
By ignoring the complaints of the public and voting to re-elect these judges on the secret advice of lawyers, most in the General Assembly have demonstrated that they place a priority on the rule of lawyers over the rule of law and the public interest. Our founding fathers were rightly concerned about the potential for abuse of power, which is why they provided for a separation of powers. It is time for present-day members of our General Assembly to show due respect for those who created the oldest legislative body in the United States.
----------------------------------------------------------
. . .
ADVISORY ... FAIRFAX COURTHOUSE SLAUGHTERHOUSE For Fit Mothers: Virginia judges say a father may hurt the mother of his child, by abusing her, without hurting his chances of gaining custody (mgbb). Judges surveyed for Influences on Judges' Decisions in Child Custody Disputes in the Commonwealth of Virginia further reveal that children over five go to fathers more than they go to mothers when cases go to court (pdf). Pages 4, 6, 7, 20, 21, 23, 24, 29, 30, 38, 39, 40, 41, 53, 55, and 57 in House Document No. 24, A 2001 Report of The Supreme Court of Virginia Office of The Executive Secretary to The Governor and The General Assembly of Virginia, are especially relevant to the current trend of awarding custody of children to fathers who are abusive, controlling, manipulative, violent men, narcissists, and sociopaths (oes). {According to a 1996 report by the Am. Psychological Assoc., fathers who batter mothers are twice as likely as non-violent men to seek sole custody of children (apa).}
. . .
WARNING ... VIRGINIA COURTHOUSES SLAUGHTERHOUSES For Fit Mothers: In Virginia, rulings by custody judges may result in destitution (even bankruptcy) and childlessness for women who are fit mothers leaving an abusive man and escaping a violent relationship. “Custody transfers to abusive men are rare” and other myths as reported by the American Bar Association Commission on Domestic Violence (ABA Ten Myths, 2006), the Leadership Council on Child Abuse and Interpersonal Violence (LC Six Myths, 2006), and the National Council of Juvenile and Family Court Judges Family Violence Department (NCJFCJ Seven Myths, 2003) -- though still rumored by the public -- contribute to the butchering of fit mothers everyday by our state bench. All fit mothers hoping to preserve their resources and their parenthoods should understand those misconceptions now officially recognized -- though still rejected by the public -- about the well-studied connection between “intimate partner violence” and “child custody litigation” before entering any courtroom of our Commonwealth of Virginia. If you are a fit mother who was slaughtered by a state judge in a disputed case involving custody of a child you produced with an abusive and violent man, please join your sisters each fall in Richmond for JUDICIAL INTERVIEWS. {I will post 2010 event date, time, place and relevant vitals here by mid November, or parents may contact Mary Kate Felch directly. -Veronique W. on 10.5.10} ALL MAULED MOMS FROM ALL ACROSS VIRGINIA SHOULD PLAN TO BE IN HOUSE ROOM C OF THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY BUILDING IN DOWNTOWN RICHMOND FOR 'JUDICIAL INTERVIEWS OF INCUMBENTS 2010' ON DECEMBER 10 ALL DAY LONG (Starts at 8:30AM). {I will post here the link for the Felch Agenda & Interview Schedule. -V. Wyvell on 10.22.10} SCHEDULE FOR DEC. 2010 'JUDICIAL INTERVIEWS' NOW VIEWABLE BY CLICKING HERE. Your offending judge just might be up for re-appointment this year! Look for that judge's name in this list. If you have something to say about the performances of Judges Bonnie Davis, Gerald Daltan and Esther Wiggins-Lyles, please join your sisters in saying it. Sign up with Mary Kate Felch today! Several aggrieved moms are booked to speak already! MEETING INFO BY CLICKING HERE (Scroll Down to "12/10/10 8:30 a.m.").
Fairfax judge Gaylord Finch's performance questioned
Fairfax judge’s performance questioned
January 19th, 2009 · 4 Comments · General Assembly, Judicial Elections
The Northern Virginia delegation to the General Assembly wants to take a second look at Fairfax Circuit Judge Gaylord L. Finch Jr., who is up for reappointment for an eight-year term.
Last Thursday, the House and Senate Courts of Justice Committees certified to the legislature all other incumbent judges seeking reappointment. The General Assembly is scheduled to act on them Thursday.
The delegation asked for Finch’s name to be pulled so that it can give further consideration to complaints about his performance.
Del. David B. Albo, the Fairfax Republican who chairs the house courts committee, said much of the criticism has come from domestic relations litigants who disagreed with Finch’s decisions.
Albo said he has been told that Finch often rules from the bench without explaining the reasons for his decision, and the loser is left with the impression that he or she hasn’t been heard.
Other county residents complained about Finch’s handling of litigation over a change in school-district boundaries.
Two other incumbents, Chesterfield Circuit Judge Timothy J. Hauler and Jacqueline G. Waymack, a J&DR judge who sits in the district that includes Hopewell and Prince George County, were certified but not before a separate votes were taken on them at the request of a committee member. As we reported earlier here and in the VLW’s Dec. 22 edition, both judges were the subject of lengthy hearings before the courts committees.
By Alan Cooper
Judge Finch is a very courteous and considerate judge who in my experience has done an excellent job on the bench. Having been a member of the Virginia State for 30 years and active in the Fairfax Bar Association, I think I have the capability to recognize a good judge when I see one. I am disappointed that any members of the General Assembly would even question his recertification. Thanks.
Sincerely,
Tom Folk
2 Wesley Smith // Jan 21, 2009 at 11:02 am
Delegate Albo is right that there is room to debate Judge Finch’s subjective rulings
where he has to make a judgment call, but when it comes to Constitutionally mandated
procedural requirements, Judge Finch either followed them or he didn’t. In my criminal
trial when he denied me my Constitutional Rights to call witnesses, present evidence,
impeach witnesses, etc, that’s not a judgment call, that is a gross violation of the
Supreme Law of the land. Either Judge Finch is totally incompetent or Judge Finch
intentionally abused his power. Either way he should be removed.
Judged Finch denied me the basics of a fair trial as defined in our constitution. He
accepted the case even though he already had a bias against me due to public comments I
posted about him on my website, refused to recuse himself as required by judicial ethics,
refused to rule on my motion to dismiss, refused to enforce my witness subpoenas, refused
to let me present evidence including an audio recording of the incident to the jury, and
refused to answer a question submitted by the jury during deliberations.
One could argue his decision if he had ruled against my motion to dismiss, but refusing
to rule at all is simply refusing to perform the duties for which his is paid. He said he
didn’t have time to make a ruling, yet he had time, even after an objection was made to
relevance, to let witnesses go on and on about my website which could have no merit in a
trespassing case. Yet he didn’t have time for me to present all the photos and maps I
brought that showed I had left the property. It appeared he wanted to make it clear why
he was denying me a fair trail.
You can read more about the case, including the motions file, audio recordings and
transcripts that were not allowed, on my website:
http://www.liamsdad.org/court_case/trespassing/trespassing.shtml
http://www.liamsdad.org/hall_of_shame/gay_finch.shtml
3 Isidoro Rodriguez, Esq. // Jan 22, 2009 at 10:10 am
Presentation made on January 10, 2009, to members of the General Assembly from N. Va. at http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VAkEfjcA5sQ
RE: STOP THE OBSTRUCTION OF THE RIGHTS OF PARENTS BY THE COURTS OF VIRGINIA.
As I have previously written, irrespective of you being either a Democrat, Republican, or an Independent, you must as members of the General Assembly restore the Rule of Law, the integrity, and public confidence in the Courts of Virginia.
Thus, you must vigorously act on my Petition for Investigation and Impeachment of the Judicial Branch and the Office of Attorney General, for violating statutory mandates under both Treaty and VA UCCJEA to obstruct the rights of parents, and violating Va. Code § 54.1-3935, to establish an unauthorized attorney disciplinary system within the Virginia State Bar so to restrict the independence of attorneys in service to the public.
The Virginia Tort Claim Act is unenforceable because the courts now have declared “absolute judicial and ministerial immunity” for criminal and tortious acts outside of jurisdiction or official capacity.
The citizen can no longer easily hold government officials accountable for malfeasance.
Therefore, for the good of the future of our Commonwealth the General Assembly must not permit the ongoing usurping of the power granted only to it.
For the above reasons, I respectfully request that your staffs meet with me to discuss the issues in the attach Petition for Investigation and Impeachment.
4 Gail Lakritz // Feb 14, 2009 at 5:26 am
All judges in Virginia J&DR and Circuit Courts need to have their Courts examined and their rulings questioned.
When judges can assign public tax dollars and the use of pro bono lawyers for individuals with $300,000 in the bank, and than seal the records so that the proof of such acts are withheld from the public, there is a problem. These are High Crimes and Misdemeanors, whereby judges regularly apply the public funds to aid wealthy individuals, and than seal the records of the misappropration. Investigate the rulings in James City County and unseal the records sealed by the judges there.
The maladmistration of high office is practiced in many courts within the Commonwealth, and the House and Senate Courts of Justice Committees is well aware of the practice. They prefer to allow the continuance for their own gain. They need the backing of their respective political machines to continue in office. When presentation of testimony of wrongdoing is presented, Justice Committee members leave the hearing rooms. What they do not hear and see does not exist. There is no viable avenue for consideration of complaints. The JIRC is designed to be the “black hole” for evidence.
Mr. Albo has been informed by many people of such practices as using public funds to aid the wealthy, not allowing for presentation of evidence and backroom deals.
The Virginia State Bar and all local Bar Associations are self-policing. They are a governments unto themselves. Until there is public oversight of these brotherhoods and investigations into judges who are lawyers first, the public will continue to be raped by these individuals and their organizations.
If you want the proof of local misapproations of public funds, I have it.
January 19th, 2009 · 4 Comments · General Assembly, Judicial Elections
The Northern Virginia delegation to the General Assembly wants to take a second look at Fairfax Circuit Judge Gaylord L. Finch Jr., who is up for reappointment for an eight-year term.
Last Thursday, the House and Senate Courts of Justice Committees certified to the legislature all other incumbent judges seeking reappointment. The General Assembly is scheduled to act on them Thursday.
The delegation asked for Finch’s name to be pulled so that it can give further consideration to complaints about his performance.
Del. David B. Albo, the Fairfax Republican who chairs the house courts committee, said much of the criticism has come from domestic relations litigants who disagreed with Finch’s decisions.
Albo said he has been told that Finch often rules from the bench without explaining the reasons for his decision, and the loser is left with the impression that he or she hasn’t been heard.
Other county residents complained about Finch’s handling of litigation over a change in school-district boundaries.
Two other incumbents, Chesterfield Circuit Judge Timothy J. Hauler and Jacqueline G. Waymack, a J&DR judge who sits in the district that includes Hopewell and Prince George County, were certified but not before a separate votes were taken on them at the request of a committee member. As we reported earlier here and in the VLW’s Dec. 22 edition, both judges were the subject of lengthy hearings before the courts committees.
By Alan Cooper
Judge Finch is a very courteous and considerate judge who in my experience has done an excellent job on the bench. Having been a member of the Virginia State for 30 years and active in the Fairfax Bar Association, I think I have the capability to recognize a good judge when I see one. I am disappointed that any members of the General Assembly would even question his recertification. Thanks.
Sincerely,
Tom Folk
2 Wesley Smith // Jan 21, 2009 at 11:02 am
Delegate Albo is right that there is room to debate Judge Finch’s subjective rulings
where he has to make a judgment call, but when it comes to Constitutionally mandated
procedural requirements, Judge Finch either followed them or he didn’t. In my criminal
trial when he denied me my Constitutional Rights to call witnesses, present evidence,
impeach witnesses, etc, that’s not a judgment call, that is a gross violation of the
Supreme Law of the land. Either Judge Finch is totally incompetent or Judge Finch
intentionally abused his power. Either way he should be removed.
Judged Finch denied me the basics of a fair trial as defined in our constitution. He
accepted the case even though he already had a bias against me due to public comments I
posted about him on my website, refused to recuse himself as required by judicial ethics,
refused to rule on my motion to dismiss, refused to enforce my witness subpoenas, refused
to let me present evidence including an audio recording of the incident to the jury, and
refused to answer a question submitted by the jury during deliberations.
One could argue his decision if he had ruled against my motion to dismiss, but refusing
to rule at all is simply refusing to perform the duties for which his is paid. He said he
didn’t have time to make a ruling, yet he had time, even after an objection was made to
relevance, to let witnesses go on and on about my website which could have no merit in a
trespassing case. Yet he didn’t have time for me to present all the photos and maps I
brought that showed I had left the property. It appeared he wanted to make it clear why
he was denying me a fair trail.
You can read more about the case, including the motions file, audio recordings and
transcripts that were not allowed, on my website:
http://www.liamsdad.org/court_case/trespassing/trespassing.shtml
http://www.liamsdad.org/hall_of_shame/gay_finch.shtml
3 Isidoro Rodriguez, Esq. // Jan 22, 2009 at 10:10 am
Presentation made on January 10, 2009, to members of the General Assembly from N. Va. at http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VAkEfjcA5sQ
RE: STOP THE OBSTRUCTION OF THE RIGHTS OF PARENTS BY THE COURTS OF VIRGINIA.
As I have previously written, irrespective of you being either a Democrat, Republican, or an Independent, you must as members of the General Assembly restore the Rule of Law, the integrity, and public confidence in the Courts of Virginia.
Thus, you must vigorously act on my Petition for Investigation and Impeachment of the Judicial Branch and the Office of Attorney General, for violating statutory mandates under both Treaty and VA UCCJEA to obstruct the rights of parents, and violating Va. Code § 54.1-3935, to establish an unauthorized attorney disciplinary system within the Virginia State Bar so to restrict the independence of attorneys in service to the public.
The Virginia Tort Claim Act is unenforceable because the courts now have declared “absolute judicial and ministerial immunity” for criminal and tortious acts outside of jurisdiction or official capacity.
The citizen can no longer easily hold government officials accountable for malfeasance.
Therefore, for the good of the future of our Commonwealth the General Assembly must not permit the ongoing usurping of the power granted only to it.
For the above reasons, I respectfully request that your staffs meet with me to discuss the issues in the attach Petition for Investigation and Impeachment.
4 Gail Lakritz // Feb 14, 2009 at 5:26 am
All judges in Virginia J&DR and Circuit Courts need to have their Courts examined and their rulings questioned.
When judges can assign public tax dollars and the use of pro bono lawyers for individuals with $300,000 in the bank, and than seal the records so that the proof of such acts are withheld from the public, there is a problem. These are High Crimes and Misdemeanors, whereby judges regularly apply the public funds to aid wealthy individuals, and than seal the records of the misappropration. Investigate the rulings in James City County and unseal the records sealed by the judges there.
The maladmistration of high office is practiced in many courts within the Commonwealth, and the House and Senate Courts of Justice Committees is well aware of the practice. They prefer to allow the continuance for their own gain. They need the backing of their respective political machines to continue in office. When presentation of testimony of wrongdoing is presented, Justice Committee members leave the hearing rooms. What they do not hear and see does not exist. There is no viable avenue for consideration of complaints. The JIRC is designed to be the “black hole” for evidence.
Mr. Albo has been informed by many people of such practices as using public funds to aid the wealthy, not allowing for presentation of evidence and backroom deals.
The Virginia State Bar and all local Bar Associations are self-policing. They are a governments unto themselves. Until there is public oversight of these brotherhoods and investigations into judges who are lawyers first, the public will continue to be raped by these individuals and their organizations.
If you want the proof of local misapproations of public funds, I have it.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
