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.