Legal Pad likes to think of itself as your one-stop e-shop for courts news. But someone out there has decided that the Administrative Office of the Courts needs more attention — and we’re not talking about the flattering kind.
Earlier this month, an anonymous blogger launched “AOC Watcher,” a site that takes a critical look at the state’s judicial administration and leadership. It includes links to various media reports, plus a few editorial zingers.
Zinger, of a sort, after the jump.
“… AOC Watcher likes to refer to [Chief] Justice [Ronald] George as King George,” the mystery blogger writes. “Especially when some years ago he made a comment that any questioning of the AOC and how it does its business would be taken as a declaration of war on the AOC. Excuse me?? Questioning a government agency funded by taxpayer dollars is a declaration of war? Okay, then.”
[A 2006 article (.pdf) by Bob Egelko in the California Courts Review tells the tale like this: "… the chief justice told a 2003 gathering of the California Judges Association that any attempt to democratize selection of Judicial Council members and reduce his appointment power would be considered 'a declaration of war.'"]
Anger with the chief justice and other judicial leaders has been simmering — some might say it’s approaching a full boil — since statewide, once-a-month courthouse closures were announced earlier this year. Judges, court workers, labor groups and lawyers are not happy with the judiciary’s decision-makers. And recent revelations about questionable AOC spending have only fanned the flames.
Yolo County Superior Court Judge Timothy Fall, who’s been critical of various Judicial Council and AOC actions, said he’s not the “AOC Watcher.” But he likes the blog’s tone.
“Respectful public discussion is always welcome, even when it’s critical,” he said. “Everybody in the judicial branch should be doing what they can to keep the discussion going.”
Whoever is writing “AOC Watcher” has at least a passing knowledge of Latin: “As the saying goes,” he or she writes, “Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?”
Or maybe s/he just read “Watchmen.”
— Cheryl Miller
Follow me on Twitter
Free speech is one thing. However an all out assault on any person with the intent to harass and annoy by utilizing a psudonym to hide behind is cougruent to federal law.
Specifically, 18USC223 which says and I quote:
"Whoever...utilizes any device or software that can be used to originate telecommunications or other types of communications that are transmitted, in whole or in part, by the Internet... without disclosing his identity and with intent to annoy, abuse, threaten, or harass any person...who receives the communications...shall be fined under title 18 (uh, that would be 50K per post) or imprisoned not more than two years, or both."
Judge Tim Fall and Judge Chuck Horan posted there as a judges under their real names. For this, they win the award for free speech.
The rest who post under alias with the intent to harass and annoy are likely court employees (specifically, union reps) who will later claim they were unknowingly violating federal law utilizing judicial branch resources under the guise of "union business".
The AOC is quite transparent. Unless of course, like these individuals, you've stuck your head in the sand for years.
Posted by: JudicialReform | September 10, 2009 at 01:01 PM
Make that 47USC223.
Posted by: JudicialReform | September 10, 2009 at 01:03 PM
Three cheers for AOC Watcher. And here's another site the courts and their so-called, Blue Ribbon panels, (chosen by AOC personnel) won't like, either.
http://www.ElkinsTaskForce.org
Those darn facts.
Posted by: Bonnie Russell | September 20, 2009 at 06:47 AM
Somebody is frazzled and "watching" the AOC watcher word for word. Then doing hours of research and making references to case law.
"Specifically, 18USC223 which says and I quote:"
and in a later post
"Make that 47USC223"
LMFAO!! Typical. Good job AOC watcher!
Posted by: Judicial Deform | February 19, 2010 at 12:03 PM