Friday, August 29, 2008

Commissioner advised not to view this site

I just got this letter from the local family court commissioner:
Dear Mr. AngryDad and Ms. AngryMom:

Approximately four weeks ago, I received notice from court staff that the "Angry Dad" website included postings that were previously ordered confidential and/or sealed by the court. I was told that materials from CPS were included in the postings.

The purpose of this letter is to advise that I passed that information on to County Counsel and specifically requested that I be excluded from any communications regarding this issue. They have respected my request.

I also asked for an opinion from the California Judges Association as to the efficacy of me viewing the website for the purpose of determining if a contempt had occurred. As before, I was advised not to view the site, except in one circumstance; if the issue is properly before the court in a noticed motion or OSC, the court may view the site in open court to make such a determination.

I was advised by CJA to make this disclosure to the parties.

Very truly yours,
Irwin Joseph
Bc: Judge Atack, PJ
No, County Counsel did not respect his request. I received a letter from Shannon M. Sullivan on the matter. It was dated Aug. 4, 2008, and at the end it said "cc: Santa Cruz County Superior Court". Commissioner Joseph is the only acting judge who hears family court cases in Santa Cruz County. So her letter went straight to his office.

The funniest thing about this is that Comm. Joseph has to ask the CJA for permission to view a web site. It takes four weeks to get an opinion that he should not look at the web site. Apparently he had previously asked for an opinion, and they previously told him not to look. So it took four weeks to tell him what they had already told him. Nevertheless, he has his staff look at the web site, advise him what is there, and act accordingly.

Comm. Joseph continues to amaze me with his willingness to break the rules, and to lie about it. If it is really improper for him to view the web site, then he should not be having his staff view it and report to him about it, and he should not be writing letters about what he has improperly learned.

I am tempted to notify Presiding Judge Atack about Comm. Joseph's misconduct in this matter.

No comments: