Home

TS Radio with Tamir Sukkary: The injustice in family courts

47 Comments

TS RAdioJoin us this evening, December 11, 2015 at 6:00 pm CST!

2court4:00 pm PST … 5:00 pm MST … 6:00 pm CST … 7:00 pm EST

Listen live HERE!

Call in # 917-388-4520

Hosted by Marti Oakley

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Tamir Sukkary joins me this evening to discuss his experience in the family court system.  False allegations were only the beginning. We will be discussing the trial Tamir endured and what it cost him both emotionally and financially, and most importantly the impact it has had on his relationship with his two young daughters.

http://www.gofundme.com/justicematters

Tamir was faced with a controversial family court commissioner with a history of judicial misconduct.  His attempts to get justice and judicial accountability only highlighted the lack of transparency and accountability in this system and the secrecy under which this system operates.

Also, we will be discussing possible changes and reforms in family law and how access to justice adversely affects low and middle income Americans.

Mr. Tamir Sukkary, M.A.

Adjunct Professor of Political Science
American River College, Sacramento City College, San Joaquin Delta College, and Sierra College

http://www.blogtalkradio.com/marti-oakley/2015/12/12/tamir-sukkary-the-injustice-in-family-courts

More transparency is needed to adequately judge the judges

4 Comments

new-logo25by

:Sending off brief, impersonal form letters offering no explanation for the CJP’s decisions, holding private meetings and closing off information access certainly does not inspire public trust and leaves the average citizen wondering why the need for secrecy, more characteristic of authoritarian regimes.”
________________________________________________________
The California Commission on Judicial Performance is the state’s judicial watchdog agency. Based in San Francisco, the commission is made up of judges, lawyers and members of the public. They are the judges of the judges, the sole public agents charged with investigating magistrates accused of judicial misconduct. Yet the commission’s deliberations are conducted completely under the radar, with no public scrutiny.
dd395-Judge%20(site)The CJP meets about seven times per year and receives its authority from Article 6, Section 18 of the California Constitution. The current chair is Erica Yew, a Superior Court judge.The commission’s task is to provide oversight and accountability over California’s 1,825 judges. The CJP handles complaints (primarily from litigants) regarding judicial misconduct, bias and abuses of power. Last year, the CJP received 1,212 such complaints against judges, court commissioners and referees. It chose not to take action on 1,039 complaints of those submitted last year. That’s less than 9 percent of complaints that it acts on.

It’s understandable the CJP would not take action on many of the complaints that it receives. In numerous cases, although the litigants are clearly not happy with the judges’ decisions, not enough evidence points to judicial misconduct.

In other cases, the judge made legal errors. In most situations, legal error is not misconduct unless it involves “bad faith, bias, abuse of authority, disregard for fundamental rights, intentional disregard of the law or any purpose other than the faithful discharge of judicial duty” as established in the California Supreme Court’s 1999 ruling in the Oberholzer v. CJP case.

Unfortunately, the only option for cases involving legal error is to appeal the trial court’s ruling. Appeals are expensive and enormously time-consuming.

More

%d bloggers like this: