San Diego Superior Court Seeks New Grand Jury For 2011 / 2012Written by: Chris Print This Article
Use of Our Content (Reposting and Quoting)
Each year a new set of 19 San Diego citizens is seated as the San Diego Grand Jury. Applications for the 2011 / 2012 Grand Jury are now being accepted through January 14, 2011. The Grand Jury could be hugely helpful to cleaning up the mess in San Diego’s courts, but despite the evidence of widespread misconduct particularly in the family law courts, the current and past Grand Juries have been stymied from going after judicial criminals. In this article I aim to point out how this could change if the right people get into the next Grand Jury and are willing to take some personal risks to protect the public from the out-of-control abusive judicial system in the county. If you and your family have been harmed by the government and courts of San Diego, I strongly suggest that you consider taking a year out of your life to get a seat on the Grand Jury and use it to pursue the government criminals who are harming and destroying so many families in the county.
Grand Juries Stymied from Investigating Courts
California’s county Grand Juries are tasked with investigating and reporting on problems in county and local governments. However, the San Diego County Grand Jury has been effectively prohibited from investigating the San Diego Superior Court itself for a variety of reasons. Aside from whatever legal technicalities there may be for this, it is clear there is a strong motivation for the government officials who control the county to prevent investigation of the court system itself. The government wants naive citizens to believe that the courts in the county are fair and obey the law when neither is true.
The San Diego Superior Court is filled with abuse, corruption, illegal conduct, and disreputable judges such as drunk driver Lisa Schall, cover-up scam artist Lorna Alksne, abusive Christine Goldsmith with her nepotistic control over the San Diego City Attorney, and TV-star-wannabe DeAnn Salcido (who recently resigned over her misconduct) that the Grand Jury would literally have to investigate most judges for misconduct and eventually verbally eviscerate the judiciary and file criminal indictments against many of them to even get a start on cleaning up the corrupt mess that these judges wish to remain hidden.
Many of these judges and court officials have ties to other “civil servants” such as San Diego City Attorney Jan Goldsmith, District Attorney Bonnie Dumanis, Sheriff William Gore, and others who use the courts and government offices as their personal playthings to harm their opponents and critics alike. Consequently, there is every intent by the government to hide the widespread judicial corruption and lawlessness. Aside from keeping secret their illicit plans and connections, they also endeavor to maintain their tyrannical grip on power by attacking and marginalizing their victims. They do this because if the public were to understand how many people have been badly harmed by the lawless tyrants seated in government positions throughout San Diego, there might be a public uprising against them.
Alksne and Goldsmith Significant Threats to Citizens’ Rights and Interests
Lorna Alksne and Christine Goldsmith are particularly frightening threats to San Diego citizens because of their abusive use of their political influence and ties to government officials to attack the family law reform movement in the county combined with their ability so far to evade disciplinary action for their misconducts. While we are more familiar with Alksne’s habitual misconduct and dishonesty given her highly public supervising role over the entire broken family law system of the county, Goldsmith is a big problem herself. Both are extensively involved in cover-ups and malicious abuses of power against family law reform advocates in the county.
Judicial Harassment of Family Reform Movement
Both Alksne and Goldsmith were apparently involved with a wrongful arrest incident on April 15, 2010. The arrest was apparently rigged by these judges and their allies and then executed by San Diego Police Department officers acting under malicious and improper orders. The intent was intimidate parents who have been abused by Alksne’s disgusting family law courts and have banded together as the California Coalition for Families and Children.
Members of this organization were peacefully picketing a family law seminar on April 15, 2010. The evidence we have collected suggests that when Alksne, Goldsmith, and many other San Diego Superior Court employees learned of the impending protest via an article on this website, these judges then fingered founder Cole Stuart for arrest based upon a temporary restraining order either Goldsmith or Schall had just issued days earlier based upon false and misleading claims of TV reporter Lynn Stuart (ex-wife of Cole Stuart) who is a known parental alienator and false accuser who has worked for years to keep their son from ever seeing his father again. The TRO was never served, therefore it could not have been violated. Further, the apparent “violation incident” was before the TRO was issued. But facts and the law matter little to judges like Alksne and Goldsmith, their own power is all that is at issue for them. It appears that Goldsmith had her husband, City Attorney Jan Goldsmith, issue an “arrest on sight” warrant manipulated to make it look like a felony warrant to help his wife quash demand for reform in the family law courts. Peaceful protesters who simply want to see their children again don’t like being arrested, and these judges knew that and knew they could intimidate them via attacking their leader.
Rightfully Protesting Government Abuse in San Diego Risks Wrongful Arrest
From what we have been able to determine, the truth of the matter is that Cole Stuart had at the time been prevented from seeing his son for nearly a year. It reportedly has now been well more than a year, since March 2009, since he last saw his son. This is happening due to malicious violation of court orders by his ex-wife Lynn Stuart, a TV news reporter in San Diego. Cole Stuart tried to set up phone contact with their son via email with mother Lynn Stuart, but she continued to block contact. At some point he referred to her as a “bitch” in an email (certainly understandable if you haven’t seen your child in nearly a year due to a malicious mother who is a parental alienator) and this was used as an accuse to have him slapped with a TRO. The wrongly obtained TRO was then used by Alksne and Goldsmith to have him arrested for political reasons at their urging and with the full cooperation of the San Diego County Bar Association over which they have much influence.
It’s still not entirely clear what the exact roles of Judge Lorna Alksne, Judge Lisa Schall, Judge Christine Goldsmith, and City Attorney Jan Goldsmith were in arranging for an arrest warrant in what appears to be an effort timed to harass and intimidate political protesters upset with the San Diego family law courts. Reports are that Alksne identified Stuart to Sheriff deputies on her security detail and then may have involved herself in the effort to arrest him. Judge Christine Goldsmith was also at the family law seminar. She reports to Alksne. Her husband, Jan Goldsmith, allegedly signed the arrest warrant. The nature and timing of events and connections between these parties causes there to be a distinct appearance of a conspiracy to cause false arrest for political purposes involving all of these parties in addition to the SDCBA.
Why San Diego Grand Jury Investigations Don’t Target and Indict Sitting Judges
Fortunately for the crooked judges, California Penal Code Section 888 outlines the functioning of county grand juries and requires that they are tasked primarily with investigating county and local governments:
888. A grand jury is a body of the required number of persons returned from the citizens of the county before a court of competent jurisdiction, and sworn to inquire of public offenses committed or triable within the county.
Each grand jury or, if more than one has been duly impaneled pursuant to Sections 904.5 to 904.9, inclusive, one grand jury in each county, shall be charged and sworn to investigate or inquire into county matters of civil concern, such as the needs of county officers, including the abolition or creation of offices for, the purchase, lease, or sale of equipment for, or changes in the method or system of, performing the duties of the agencies subject to investigation pursuant to Section 914.1.
With the changes in the legal definition of local courts making them into subdivisions of state courts that occurred in the 1990s, San Diego Superior Court and all other county courts in the State of California are to a great degree immune from investigation by county grand juries because they are considered state agencies. This is despite the exposure that JudicialWatch and Richard Fine have given to the the illegal payments being made by nearly every California county to the judges in their area with the apparent intent of influencing them to rule favorably to county government.
Furthermore, it appears that the Grand Jury members have been manipulated to avoid issuing criminal indictments even when they are warranted. Instead of indictments, year after year they issue reports that are largely ignored by the governments being criticized. The typical response of many of these agencies is to deny responsibility for their misconduct and refuse to correct the shortcomings cited by the Grand Jury. This is why future Grand Juries need to strongly consider issuing criminal indictments against government officials. Merely writing critical reports generally accomplishes nothing at all to improve the problems the Grand Jury has uncovered.
However, California Penal Code Sections 917 to 919 may provide an opening for investigating criminal activities and misconduct by Alksne, Schall, Salcido, and many other San Diego judges:
917. The grand jury may inquire into all public offenses committed or triable within the county and present them to the court by indictment.
918. If a member of a grand jury knows, or has reason to believe, that a public offense, triable within the county, has been committed, he may declare it to his fellow jurors, who may thereupon investigate it.
919. (a) The grand jury may inquire into the case of every person imprisoned in the jail of the county on a criminal charge and not indicted.
(b) The grand jury shall inquire into the condition and management of the public prisons within the county.
(c) The grand jury shall inquire into the willful or corrupt misconduct in office of public officers of every description within the county.
The San Diego Superior Court has attempted to hide a lot of its misconduct by keeping internal communications and records hidden from public view. However, the Grand Jury is entitled to access to those records according to California Penal Code Section 921:
921. The grand jury is entitled to free access, at all reasonable times, to the public prisons, and to the examination, without charge, of all public records within the county.
But being a Grand Juror comes with a price — the price of staying quiet and helping to hide the government’s dirty secrets under threat of prosecution:
924. Every grand juror who willfully discloses the fact of an information or indictment having been made for a felony, until the defendant has been arrested, is guilty of a misdemeanor.
924.1. (a) Every grand juror who, except when required by a court, willfully discloses any evidence adduced before the grand jury, or anything which he himself or any other member of the grand jury has said, or in what manner he or she or any other grand juror has voted on a matter before them, is guilty of a misdemeanor.
(b) Every interpreter for the disabled appointed to assist a member of the grand jury pursuant to Section 939.11 who, except when required by a court, willfully discloses any evidence adduced before the grand jury, or anything which he or she or any member of the grand jury has said, or in what manner any grand juror has voted on a matter before them, is guilty of a misdemeanor.
924.2. Each grand juror shall keep secret whatever he himself or any other grand juror has said, or in what manner he or any other grand juror has voted on a matter before them. Any court may require a grand juror to disclose the testimony of a witness examined before the grand jury, for the purpose of ascertaining whether it is consistent with that given by the witness before the court, or to disclose the testimony given before the grand jury by any person, upon a charge against such person for perjury in giving his testimony or upon trial therefor.
924.3. A grand juror cannot be questioned for anything he may say or any vote he may give in the grand jury relative to a matter legally pending before the jury, except for a perjury of which he may have been guilty in making an accusation or giving testimony to his fellow jurors.
924.4. Notwithstanding the provisions of Sections 924.1 and 924.2, any grand jury or, if the grand jury is no longer impaneled, the presiding judge of the superior court, may pass on and provide the succeeding grand jury with any records, information, or evidence acquired by the grand jury during the course of any investigation conducted by it during its term of service, except any information or evidence that relates to a criminal investigation or that could form part or all of the basis for issuance of an indictment. Transcripts of testimony reported during any session of the grand jury shall be made available to the succeeding grand jury upon its request.
924.6. If no indictment is returned, the court that impaneled the grand jury shall, upon application of either party, order disclosure of all or part of the testimony of a witness before the grand jury to a defendant and the prosecutor in connection with any pending or subsequent criminal prodeeding before any court if the court finds following an in camera hearing, which shall include the court’s review of the grand jury’s testimony, that the testimony is relevant, and appears to be admissible.
Obviously this presents a problem for Grand Jurors with ethics. If they know of abusive and corrupt conduct of government officials but cannot get the Grand Jury to vote for an indictment, they must stay quiet to avoid potential prosecution. This helps the government keep its dirty secrets. That’s bad, but the real situation is actually much worse because of the composition of typical Grand Juries.
Current Grand Jury Polluted by Former Government Employees
Legal technicalities are hardly the only obstacle to ensuring the Grand Jury can fight crime and corruption in the government. Perhaps a bigger obstacle is how the Grand Jury is typically stacked with former government employees and their relatives.
The current San Diego County 2010 / 2011 Grand Jury consists of these 19 members:
|Bingham, Joseph||5||Carlsbad||Retired Lifeguard Captain|
|Bingham, Robert||3||Del Mar||Retired Technology Executive|
|Blakney, Lynette||4||San Diego||Retired Educator/Counselor|
|Carlson, Richard||3||San Diego||Retired Law Enforcement-SDPD|
|Dell’Acqua, Anne||1||San Diego||Retired Registered Nurse|
|Deluna, Jose||2||El Cajon||Retired Real Estate Director-US Navy|
|Dwyer, Lauraine||3||San Diego||Retired Registered Nurse Executive|
|Ferrara, Jim||1||San Diego||Retired Small Business Owner|
|Forsberg, Patricia M||2||El Cajon||Retired Educator|
|Foster, Michael||5||Carlsbad||Retired Educator/Counselor|
|Gale, Sydelle||5||Oceanside||Retired Management/Administration|
|Hobson, Nekita||5||Vista||Retired Public Affairs Consultant|
|Jessop, Edward||2||El Cajon||Retired Technical Writer|
|Lawless, Blake||1||San Diego||Retired Scientist and Executive|
|Lawrence, Sr. Nathaniel||4||San Diego||Retired Law Enforcement-SD Sheriff|
|Malinoski, Thomas||3||San Diego||Retired Public Relations/Management|
|Travis, Patricia||2||Lakeside||Retired Pharmacy Technician|
|Wagner, Lil||4||San Diego||Retired Public Relations/Writer|
Of these 19 people, it appears at least half of them were government employees as of when they retired. This is not unusual as past Grand Juries have been similarly coopted by such people.
Furthermore, some of their occupation titles don’t make it entirely clear whether they were or were not government employees as certain titles could be used either way. Others may have ties to government officials that are not disclosed publicly even if they did not work for the government recently. It is likely that much more than half of the Grand Jury is aligned with the government by history and affiliation.
In the defense of the few government employees who actually do believe that government criminals should be exposed, removed from office, and prosecuted, it is possible to work for the government and later be willing to fight against it when it violates the law. As proof of this, Richard Fine is a former US federal government employee who pursued the County of Los Angeles government for its role in illegal payments to judges in that county. He was then illegally imprisoned for a year and a half as retaliation by one of the judges who was receiving the illegal payments.
The matter is a textbook example of the rampant abuse of power by California judges and county government officials and how one person gave up so much to expose and fight it. But keep in mind that Fine was a former US federal employee who went after state and county governments. Would a person who had worked for corrupt local or county government be willing to challenge the government in a similar fashion?
In my mind, it’s open to debate as to whether some former government employees such as teachers will side with government or citizens. Some teachers are social activists and clearly side with the oppressed against government tyrants.
But it is clear that many other government jobs are far more authoritarian than education. Particularly disturbing is the frequent presence of multiple former law enforcement employees from the San Diego Police Department and San Diego Sheriff’s Department. These are agencies which have conspired with San Diego Superior Court to violate people’s rights and the law and want their roles covered up, too.
For instance, consider the abusive actions of the Sheriff’s Department bailiff assigned to Judge DeAnn Salcido in her rude remarks and involving her husband in video recording in Salcido’s courtroom in session to help get Salcido a job as a TV judge. This same bailiff was involved in improper discussed of the use of violent force against a public defender:
Salcido Denigrates and Discusses Violent Threats Against Public Defender
Salcido participated in insulting and denigrating Deputy Public Defender Richard Longman and discussing having her bailiff use a Taser against him.
Similarly, on July 28, 2009, near the end of the court day, during a discussion in open court not connected to a particular case, you repeatedly referred to DPD Longman as “Mr. Federal Case” and complained that you never get out of court early when he is in your department. And, on May 1, 2009, while waiting for DPD Longman, the bailiff jokingly asked if you wanted her to Taser him; after responding in a joking manner that you did not want her to Taser him, you asked either the bailiff or someone else present in the courtroom, “Do you want to Taser him?”
As it is the bailiff who brought up the mockery and discussion of violence, the bailiff should be subjected to disciplinary action for this misconduct. But if these reports are accurate, Salcido played right along with it and she is not simply an innocent bystander. If you read the full text of the complaints, it is clear she routinely ridicules Longman in her courtroom and encourages others to do so, also.
Also consider the inappropriate arrest of one of Judge Lisa Schall’s victims, a distraught parent Joanna Slivka who was greatly upset by the treatment she was receiving in family court including denying her right to tell her side of the story. The Sheriff’s Department bailiff did not consider that he was being given an illegal order and should have refused to execute it. Later Schall was disciplined for abusing her contempt of court powers in this incident. But she was not the only one at fault, the Sheriff’s Department has a responsibility to train their officers to refuse to obey illegal orders issued by a judge and to report such judges for misconduct.
Also consider the highly inappropriate involvement of San Diego Sheriff’s Department and San Diego Police Department in the abusive arrest with goals of political intimidation against CCFC founder Cole Stuart at the influence of San Diego family law court judges Lorna Alksne and Christine Goldsmith who wanted to silence opposition to the divorce industry abuses in which they participate and benefit.
Police Abuse Hidden By Stacking Grand Jury With Former Cops
The three incidents mentioned above are issues of police abuse with family law court complicity. But there are many other police abuse incidents in San Diego that are executed apart from illegal orders from San Diego’s abusive family law judges.
Despite the role of law enforcement agencies in abusing and coercing the public on behalf of the corrupt San Diego judiciary, it is fairly common for former law enforcement officials to have dominant roles in the Grand Jury, typically as foreman, much like current foreman and retired SDPD police officer Richard Carlson does:
Mira Mesa resident, Richard Carlson has been selected to lead the 2010/2011 San Diego County Grand Jury. Carlson and 18 other Grand Jurors officially began service on Wednesday, July 7, 2010. Carlson, 63, retired from the San Diego Police Department in 2004. During his 35-year career, he served in Patrol, Crime Prevention, Child Abuse, Homicide, Special Investigations and as a SDPD Spokesperson.
Carlson says he is honored to serve on the Grand Jury, “I always like to give back to the community because the community has given me so much and I believe people should get involved. I am especially honored to serve as this Grand Jury’s foreperson.”
Not infrequently, we receive reports regarding how SDPD and the Sheriff’s Department conspire with abusive CPS social workers to harm children and parents who have done nothing wrong. We have also learned of cases in which malicious parents work with CPS and law enforcement to deprive their children of one of their parents with the full cooperation of the San Diego Superior Court by using lies, perjury, and harassment executed by not only the malicious parent but also CPS and law enforcement agencies, particularly “child abuse units” that want a good relationship with CPS and are willing to go so far as to execute their own distortion and intimidation campaigns against parents who file rightful complaints against CPS.
Grand Jury Fails From Corruption By Retired Government Employees
If the intent of the Grand Jury is truly to force broken and abusive government agencies to clean up their acts, then the Grand Jury itself is clearly ineffective at its purpose. I’d suggest this has less to do with the intentions of most of its members and more to do with the presence of former government officials in their midst. These people have personal reasons to continue to help the government agencies to which they have allegiances avoid disclosure of their misconduct. After all, they worked in these agencies and continue to have friends and associates whose secrets (abusing children, perjury against innocent parents, etc.) they must protect.
Making the San Diego County Grand Jury Work for Citizens
If there is any hope for citizens to be properly represented by the Grand Jury, the foremost task is to rid the organization of influence by the county’s corrupt and abusive governments. The Grand Jury should be comprised of people who have no ties to government officials and no recent or long-term employment in the government to ensure that it is fully independent of government control.
For that to happen, there must be many more applicants for Grand Jury positions and pressure on the government to select people who are not beholden to the government.
As our readership includes many who have been extensively abused by the San Diego courts and government, it is likely that many of our readers would make ideal candidates for Grand Jury members. We strongly encourage those of you who have experience being victimized at the hands of San Diego government to apply for a seat on the Grand Jury and to use that seat to pursue the abusers in local governments and courts.
If you want to apply for a seat on the Grand Jury, visit San Diego County Grand Jury Application Form to read the instructions and get the application form.
|Child Abuse, Child Custody, Children, Civil Rights, Courts, CPS, Crime, Divorce, Family, Government Abuse, Legal, Parental Alienation, Police, Politics, Prosecutor|