Maha Abdel Rahim extradition hearing continued until April 4th 2013.

Maha Abel Rahim faced an extradition hearing today in Puerto Rico on 2/21/2013. The hearing was as a result of an arrest warrant issued by Judge Gary Tranberger of the Riverside Superior Court on 1/9/2013, in case RIF 130021, who accused Ms. Rahim of allegedly failing to hand over her son.  Abdel Rahim is facing a felony kidnapping charge under CA penal code 278.5. Judge Tranberger issued a $ 200,000 bond with the arrest warrant which violated her right to be free of cruel and unusual punishment under the eighth amendment, demonstrating his malicious intent and was excessive by the Riverside Superior Court standard bail practices.

Judge Becky Dugan of the Riverside Superior Court has in the meantime modified the bond to $ 100,000 and the District Attorney has filed an amended complain on 2/11/2013. The initial complaint was only filed on 1/31/2011.

She was released from jail in Puerto Rico without bail pending an extradition hearing to California scheduled for today.  The ACLU,  Puerto Rican defense team, represents Abdel Rahim and the extradition hearing was continued until April 4th 2013.  The burden of proof is on the Riverside District Attorney’s office who has to prove malice to substantiate any conviction beyond a reasonable doubt.   The case against Eva Ruiz-Gomez  was dropped after a two year battle as the District Attorney in that case failed to prove malice, and the criminal judge cited family law issues.  https://viewsandnewsriversidesuperiourcourts.wordpress.com/2013/01/29/after-a-two-year-batttle-the-charges-for-felony-kidnapping-against-eva-ruiz-gomez-were-dismissed-due-to-confusing-court-orders-a-case-for-family-law/

Mass protest against Abdel Rahim’s arrest warrant has been accumulating and the petition to halt the extradition of Maha Abdel Rahim to the Governor of Puerto Rico has gathered 6546 signatures http://www.change.org/petitions/gobierno-de-puerto-rico-gobernador-garc%C3%ADa-padilla-no-firme-la-orden-de-extradici%C3%B3n-de-maha-abdel-rahim

Abdel Rahim is of Syrian and Palestinian descent. The Riverside Superior Court has repeatedly discriminated against a mother’s immigration and national status and has discriminated on the application of penal code 278.5 in cases where the mother could conclusively demonstrate a malicious custodial deprivation standard under CA penal code 278.5.  https://viewsandnewsriversidesuperiourcourts.wordpress.com/2013/02/16/1378/

Sarah Tyrrell admits to stalking and that she was instrumenal in having Lori Handrahan fired.

Sarah Tyrrell, who claims to be a child advocate, although she is not registered with any recognized organization as such, continues with her obsession of getting involved in high profile cases.  Sarah goes out of her way to contact the alleged abuser and the child involved in high profile cases and stalks, harasses and obsessively sets out to destroy the lives of protective parents. It appears that she also discusses the other parent with the child, thereby sabotaging any relationship with the other parent.

In the latest Lori Handrahan stalking saga, Sarah Tyrrell publicly admits that she has been instrumental in suing Handrahan, attaching a lien against her property and having her fired from her position as professor at the American University.

Image

Image

Appellate division of the Riverside Superior Court applies an incorrect standard of law to uphold an illegal eviction.

Malicious retaliation in the Riverside Superior court is not a new concept. Those litigants that expose the Court’s blatantly wrong and malicious rulings are very familiar with the oppressive and despicable retaliation.  In this case, however; the Riverside Superior Court appellate division has out done itself to rubber stamp an incorrect judgment of the Riverside Superior Court unlawful detainer court. The reason is simple enough, namely to perpetuate malicious, oppressive and despicable retaliation against one litigant, rather than upholding the law.

Not only did the appellate division judges invent a new standard of evidence that doesn’t exist when deciding civil unlawful detainer cases, they invented and fabricated evidence that was not presented by either party to uphold an illegal eviction.

At heart of this case is that a preliminary injunction was in place halting the sale of joint community of title property. There was an appeal pending at the same time. The trustee, in this case Recontrust Company NA, went ahead and sold the property without notice to the joint title of community property owners.

The new owners filed an unlawful detainer actions and proceeded with an illegal eviction. It does not come as a surprise that numerous procedural and substantive due process violations occurred in this case, as after all retaliation is the law that exists in the Riverside Superior Court.

A motion was on calendar to rescind the sale of the property in the case that granted the preliminary injunction but the owners were granted a trial with a mere two days verbal notice after an exparte application was already previously granted to allow the motion to rescind the sale of the property to proceed.

At the trial evidence of a preliminary injunction halting the sale of the property was presented as well as evidence of an appeal and that Recontrust company NA was notified to halt the sale of the property.  The trial court went ahead anyway and awarded judgment to the owners with the words “but you can appeal the decision”.  An appeal was indeed filed.

Enter the Appellate Division of the Riverside Superior Court who in their opinion, decided to invent a new standard of evidence that does not apply to civil cases,  with a reverse application on the burden of proof and found that the Riverside Superior Court orders and 4th District of Appeal court orders are not credible when it comes to proving the fact that a preliminary injunction existed. They also fabricated evidence relating to the bond of the property in question that was never presented by either party and which cannot be brought up by an appellate court and blatantly misstated the facts of the case. The petition for rehearing was denied yesterday as Judge Hopp, Judge Waters and Judge Prevost who coined the opinion cannot admit that they made a mistake, to perpetuate a malicious retaliatory eviction of the Riverside Superior Court.  Judge Hopp also has a conflict of interest in presiding on the Appellate panel of the Superior Court, as he presides over the civil case that deals with the property after Judge Waters transferred the case to Indio.

The petition for rehearing, with the Appellate Judges’ opinion can be accessed here,  http://www.scribd.com/doc/125510212/Petition-3.

California taxpayers can absolutely rely on the fact that this court is incapable of impartial rulings and addressing the law.

Ho Hum Judge Dale Wells plays God, Riverside Superior Court

In this specific case, a 4 year old boy was living with his mother who was the primary care taker; the mediator recommended that she be left as the primary care taker and Judge Wells plays “God” ordering that a child be moved to a different county, in a different location without examining the repercussions of a move away. Yes that is right folks, Judge Wells plays God with the lives of children committing the ultimate blasphemy.However, Judge Wells has already made his state of mind and the recognition of the sin that he commits clear in his own words:“Romans 7:21-25 So I find this law at work: When I want to do good, evil is right there with me. For in my inner being I delight in Gods law; but I see another law at work in the members of my body, waging war against the law of my mind and making me a prisoner of the law of sin at work within my members. What a wretched man I am! Who will rescue me from this body of death? Thanks be to God—through Jesus Christ our Lord!” http://www.slideshare.net/pdcoc92255/111023-the-big-ten-12-making-the-big-ten-personalS

via Ho Hum Judge Dale Wells plays God, Riverside Superior Court.

via Ho Hum Judge Dale Wells plays God, Riverside Superior Court.

Children are Pawns

Parents have the option of saying NO to a corrupt court system and dismissing the devastating consequences of an insane court, and doing what is best for their children by agreeing to an agreement that will work for their children. Stop feeding the system that over thirty years has devastated children and their families.

via Children are Pawns.

via Children are Pawns.

By San Bernardino and Riverside Superior Court News Posted in Family Law, Law, News

Law offices of Sam Chandra manipulate vindictive ex to maintain illegal eviction in the Riverside Superior Court.

So-called officers of the Court make a mockery of the Riverside Superior Court justice system.

 

Law offices of Sam Chandra manipulate vindictive ex to maintain illegal eviction in the Riverside Superior Court..

via Law offices of Sam Chandra manipulate vindictive ex to maintain illegal eviction in the Riverside Superior Court..

Judge Wells discriminates between US citizens who have active US passports and immigrants who have expired passports

Judge Wells discriminates. It is a fact.  His discrimination is extreme and against all immigrants who enter his court room. He claimed that a mother was a flight risk who has been in this country for over eleven years. Said mother has expired passports and cannot travel.  The US father who has an active passport and ties to other countries because of his immigrant ancestors nationality can travel.  There was no evidence ever presented of any flight risk, except Judge Wells’ belief. Judge Wells claimed to have understood the mothers presentation that she had been in the country for eleven years, but “BELIEF” ruled.

To any normal person, that conclusively would demonstrate that there is no flight risk. However, Judge Wells’ “BELIEF” prevails at all cost. Evidence does not have to be presented, bias, conjecture and Judge Wells own prejudice against immigrants is all that matters.  In this instance Judge Wells created a vexatious exparte on the court’s own motion based upon his own belief that the mother is flight risk and sanctioned the mother under CCP 177.5 with her children and removed them from her on the spot. CCP 177.5 sanctions folks are monetary in nature only.

wells8bb

Judge Wells:

wells85c

Maha Abdel Rahim’s Bond amount dropped to $ 100,000.

bldjg0110708

Judge Becky Dugan of the Riverside Superior Court  has decided to drop Maha Abdel Rahim’s bond amount to $ 100,000 based upon the request of her attorney.

The Puerto Rican territory has erupted in a furor over the arrest of Maha Abdel Rahim on 1/10/2013 for allegedly failing to hand over her son.  The arrest was based on an arrest warrant issued by Judge Gary Tranberger, which contained a $ 200,000 bond amount, excessive by anyone’s standard, even the Riverside Superior Court’s  bail schedule and conclusively proves that the court wanted to maliciously punish Maha Abdel Rahim with a jail term.  The US constitution, specifically the eighth amendment, prohibits such cruel and unusual punishment.

Ms. Rahim is being charged with a felony under California penal code 278.5 in case RIF 130021. The penalties if convicted can include a three year sentence in state prison.

Taxpayers should be outraged that the resources of the District Attorney’s office are being wasted on prosecuting a Puerto Rican mother, to further the vicious and malicious vendetta that a court has against certain litigants.  The initial complaint filed by the District Attorney’s office on 1/31/2013 states that Abdel Rahim contacted the father and pointed out that Kamal was too ill to travel on 1/5/2013.  The complaint was amended on 2/11/2013 and merely states that Abdel Rahim failed to hand over her son on the 5th of January 2013.

The penal code statute which Abdel Rahim is being charged under requires that the District Attorney has to conclusively prove beyond a reasonable doubt that she acted with malice, in allegedly not handing her son over.  Reasonable doubt is the standard required under criminal law and Abdel Rahim has the constitutional right to a jury trial.

It is also apparent that the Riverside Superior Court allows judicial officers to issue rulings that do not adhere to the law as a $ 200,000 bond does not comply with the court’s own bail schedule.

Children’s Rights goes to trial in a class action against the State of MA.

children    Children’s Rights, a New York based national advocacy group, filed suit against the State of Massachusetts in April 2010. The class action, representing the state’s 7500 foster children, is going to trial in a Boston Federal Court this week.

After two years of research Children’s Rights has concluded that the state’s child-welfare system is “one of the most dangerous in the country on a number of significant factors.

The Class Action names six plaintiffs whose alleged neglect is detailed, in conjunction with findings based on data measuring various aspects of children’s care.  The State tried unsuccessfully to get the Court to block Children’s Rights’ pursuit of a Class action.

Massachusetts is the first state to decide to go to full trial, fighting accusations that it is failing to protect children in foster care from unfit foster homes, physical abuse, medical and educational neglect, and the administration of questionable psychotropic drugs.

Children’s Rights has sued fifteen other states, and  foster-care and welfare systems for alleged neglect of children.

Source

Riverside Superior Court announces Judicial Assignments, Riverside County Bar Association announces Presiding Judge and Assistant Presiding Judge.

Riverside Superior Court announces Judicial Assignments, Riverside County Bar Association announces Presiding Judge and Assistant Presiding Judge..

via Riverside Superior Court announces Judicial Assignments, Riverside County Bar Association announces Presiding Judge and Assistant Presiding Judge..

Riverside Superior Court violates eighth amendment when setting bail/bond

In the recent case of Maha Abdel Rahim, who was arrested on the 10th of January 2013 in Puerto Rico, based on the arrest warrant issued by Judge Gary Tranberger, Judge Tranberger set the bond at $ 200,000. The warrant is based on the custody issues in her family law case, where Judge Wells presides.

The Riverside Superior Court’s bail schedule sets the predetermined amount that can be set for bail and can be accessed on the court’s website. http://www.riverside.courts.ca.gov/bailschedule.pdf

In Rahim’s case it is unclear as to whether the District Attorney’s office is charging her for a misdemeanor or a felony under penal code 278.5. It is clear however, that the bond amount is excessive in violation of the eighth amendment which prohibits cruel and usual punishment.

Keith Harmon Snow publishes a summary of Connecticut family court judicial abuse cases

Keith Harmon Snow is the author of A LIFE SENTENCE U.S. FAMILY COURTS SACRIFICING MOTHERS & CHILDREN Family Courts Behind an Epidemic of Pedophilia & Judicial Abuse.

Snow has complied a chart listing over 75 cases in Connecticut documenting malicious and unethical behavior of court professional who have routinely, targeted and exploited Connecticut mothers. The chart can be accessed on his website: http://www.consciousbeingalliance.com/2013/01/summary-of-connecticut-court-judicial-abuse-cases-january-2013/

The statistics show that if a mother reported abuse, the mother eventually lost custody to the father when alienation was raised by the father. Violent fathers obtained sole or joint custody of children. Snow claims that insurance companies and the state are being defrauded by mental health care professionals misdiagnosing mothers and children with mental disorders that they do not have. The process appears to be geared towards developing a treatment plan in order to justify continuous billing and to maintain the fraudulent status quo by deliberately recommending to judges that children be maintained in the care of violent fathers, even rapists, and by protecting offenders from criminal prosecution that might otherwise protect children.

Lady Justice must be rolling in her grave

Justice, as an institution by definition, deals with concepts of moral rightness based on ethics, rationality, law, fairness or equity and the punishment of the infringement of said ethics and law.

Justice is housed in the various Court houses that deal with family, civil and criminal law.

A Court, as an institution housing the concept of Justice, is supposed to implement the very essence of Justice; however, Justice has packed her bags.

In its place there is a lawless anarchy. Courts can do their own motions, can engage in hand holding expartes with themselves, can engage in fraudulent, misrepresenting and criminal activity that substantially harms and deprives a person of constitutionally guaranteed rights without repercussion, and make rulings against any fact-finding standards.

Then we have commissioners that have obsessive compulsive 170.3 striking disorder, Judges who have avoidance personality disorder (What me? No I can’t overturn another Judge’s order despite evidence), Judges with obsessive compulsive sanctioning disorder and a Court system that is aggressive, tries to maliciously, oppressively and malevolently destroy people, has a grandiose sense of self-importance, has a sense of entitlement to not abide by any fact-finding standard or the actual law, has a considerable lack of empathy for the decisions that it reaches and shows arrogant behavior and attitudes by the very people who administer Justice in the Court.

Lady Justice must be rolling in her grave

By San Bernardino and Riverside Superior Court News Posted in Family Law, Law, News

ELECTRONIC STALKING AND HARASSMENT OF LORI HANDRAHAN BY SARAH TYRELL

Lori Handrahan has been involved in protracted litigation and a lengthy social medica campaign to expose the full impact of the Court’s decisions on her daughter. She was a professor at American University until January 2013, when the University terminated her employment.

Handrahan was prominently featured in Keith Snow’s article “A life sentence family courts sacrificing mothers and children in America” http://www.consciousbeingalliance.com/2012/05/a-life-sentence-family-courts-sacrificing-mothers-and-children-in-america/#comments.

The lengthy email conversation that is displayed on her scribd profile which can be accessed here, suggests that Handrahan has been a victim of severe electronic stalking, intimidation and threats by Sahrah Tyrell.

There is no other interpretation for some of the emails that have been pasted below which are very disturbing. For a number of months reports have been cropping up on different social media platforms that have portrayed Handrahan in a certain light. Those reports however, are debunked by the behavior of the person below, who claims to have intimate knowledge of the custody case that Handrahan is involved in. No normal person would go to these lengths to stalk, harass, intimidate, and threaten another person. The end effect was the loss of Handrahan’s employment at the American University again as a result of Sarah Tyrrell’s vicious, obsessive and malicious electronic stalking campaign.

Sarah Tyrell has also contacted people who have testified on Handrahan’s behalf which can only be construed as witness tampering and intimidation.

From: sarah tyrrell [mailto:sarahtyrrell82@gmail.com]
Sent: Friday, December 21, 2012 11:08 PM To:
lorihandrahan5@gmail.com Subject: Christmas Gift
Just sitting here having a sleepover with friends
talking about your crazy ass. Speaking of friends, you
may want to get some in the real world ..All distance
themselves from you in the end though huh?. Bless
your heart..For all the shit you spewed about me.. For
all the lies you tell about me.. And everyone else….I
have put together a Christmas Gift for you. It will
make its debut Christmas Eve…You can’t refute this
much evidence with your usual ‘It’s ALL lies!!” claims.
Also, y’know how we’ve built up pretty good
friendships with some Anons..? You know how you
are trying to convince us you haven’t been running the
FB page? Caught out..Again. Tsk. The only people
you can fool are vulnerable victims and crazy
conspiracy theorists. Thank God the family court,the
supreme court, the federal court ALL saw you for
what you are .And Mila goes ANOTHER Christmas
without you becauae you refuse to follow the court
orders. PS More lies out of you..I’ve been involved
with this for just over one year. NOT 3…yet… Merry
Christmas.

From: sarah tyrrell [mailto:sarahtyrrell82@gmail.com]
Sent: Tuesday, December 25, 2012 4:28 AM To:
lorihandrahan5@gmail.com Subject: Merry
Christmas
http://savingXXXXXX.com/ Giving you the gift of fact and
truth on this special day. It is still a work in progress
mind
you. Love, Dawn,Amber,Kristine,Inesa,Julie,Corrine,
Ashley,Ellie and of course, myself. Happy Holidays :
)
We think/assume this is one of Waxman’s
personalities. We need the FBI to get the technical
details to prove this is Waxman, if it is, it is major
witness tampering.

From: Judy Potter [mailto:judy356@msn.com] Sent:
Monday, January 16, 2012 7:30 AM To: carl baum;
lori handrahan Subject: RE: Mila Molenko
neither do I

From: XXXXXXXXX To:
XXXXXXXXXXXn.com Subject: Fwd: XXXXXXXXXX Date:
Mon, 16 Jan 2012 12:22:23 +0000
Judy:
I’m not going to respond to this–I have no idea who
this
is: _______________________________________
Carl Baum, MD, FAAP, FACMT | Associate
Professor of Pediatrics | T 203.641.TOXI
(8694) | http://toxikid.org
Yale University School of Medicine | Center for
Children’s Environmental Toxicology | Yale-New
Haven Children’s Hospital

Begin forwarded message:
From: sarah tyrrell
Date: January 16, 2012
7:10:27 EST To: Subject:
XXXXXXXXXXXXX
Hi Carl,
In relation to your medical opinion of XXXXXXXXXX
Where you said the worrying levels of meth
in her system should be investigated. That you found
a”lethal dose” of meth . Did you mean street meth as
is being implied on Lori Handrahan’s ever growing
website.? You are quite famous on that site! I don’t
know if you are aware of this.
I am confused as to why another toxicologist stated
that that the meth present was not that of street meth
as it only had the L component?
Could you clear up this confusion for me please?I am
a child advocate working on XXXXXXX’s behalf.
Thank you
Sarah Tyrrell.
__________________________________________

Riverside Superior Court announces Judicial Assignments, Riverside County Bar Association announces Presiding Judge and Assistant Presiding Judge.

The new judicial assignments for the 2013 calender year have been announced on the court website. So far the Court has not officially  announced  the new Presiding or Assistant Presiding Judge.  The  judicial assignment roster can be accessed here .

The Riverside County Bar Association announced the new Presiding Judge and Assistant Presiding Judge in their December 2012 newsletter.  Judge Sherill Ellsworth has been the Presiding Judge of the Riverside Superior Court for the last two years.  Judge Mark Cope will assume the role of Presiding Judge after being the Assistant Presiding Judge for two years.  Judge Harold Hopp will serve as the new Assistant Presiding Judge.

Statement of Economic Interests Judge Dale Wells

The Fair Political Practices Commission (FPPC) was created by the Political Reform Act of 1974 (Act), a ballot initiative passed by California voters in 1974 as Proposition 9. The FDPPC has entered a new era of public transparency where the Statement of economic interests, (reporting forms), of certain judicial officers are publicly viewable.
 In the case of Judge Dale Wells it reveals that during the 2012 fiscal year he also collected a salary as a preacher at the Church of Christ in Palm Desert.

Judge Dale Wells has preached the following in his sermon:

Romans 7:21-25 So I find this law at work: When I want to do good, evil is right there with me. For in my in…ner being I delight in Gods law; but I see another law at work in the   my body, waging war against the law of my mind and making me a prisoner of the law of sin at work within my members. What a wretched man I am! Who will rescue me from this body of death? Thanks be to God—through Jesus Christ our Lord!
http://www.slideshare.net/pdcoc92255/111023-the-big-ten-12-making-the-big-ten-personal

Judge Wells in his sermons reminds his congregation that God is with them:

ACTS 18: 9-10  “Do not be afraid …….. for I am with you and no one is going to attack and harm you ……..” http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7H1s5ug4MPg&feature=relmfu

In 2011, while Judge Dale Wells has collected a salary preaching the word of the Lord,  Judge Dale Wells has managed to create fear, attacked and harmed litigants and their children by:

Issuing children as never-ending sanctions:

https://viewsandnewsriversidesuperiourcourts.wordpress.com/2012/06/10/judge-dale-wells-issues-children-as-sanctions-against-a-parent/

Ruling that Alcohol is not a Drug:

https://viewsandnewsriversidesuperiourcourts.wordpress.com/2012/11/23/judge-dale-wells-rules-alcohol-is-not-a-drug-in-contrast-to-the-national-institue-on-alcohol-abuse-and-alcoholism/

Issuing contradictory rulings when he has simply lost it:

https://viewsandnewsriversidesuperiourcourts.wordpress.com/2012/12/17/judge-wells-snaps/

Ruling that an illegal gun is not an issue:

https://viewsandnewsriversidesuperiourcourts.wordpress.com/2012/12/20/judge-dale-wells-and-guns-riverside-superior-court/

Developing a new standard for the fit parent:

https://viewsandnewsriversidesuperiourcourts.wordpress.com/2012/12/10/riverside-superior-court-develops-a-new-standard-for-the-fit-parent/

Discriminating against a parent based on national and legal residence status:

https://viewsandnewsriversidesuperiourcourts.wordpress.com/2012/10/19/judge-dale-wells-discriminates-against-a-parent-based-on-national-and-legal-resident-status/

Obsessively attempting to sanction a litigant numerous times in violation of any due process guaranteed under the 14th amendment.

https://viewsandnewsriversidesuperiourcourts.wordpress.com/2012/09/14/obsessive-compulsive-sanctioning-disorder-judge-dale-wells/

Denying divorce because of belief:

https://viewsandnewsriversidesuperiourcourts.wordpress.com/2012/11/06/judge-dale-wells-denies-divorce-because-of-belief/

Why is Sara Kruzan not freed?

A deal arranged by Riverside County District Attorney’s office and her defense attorney reduces Sara Kruzan’s charges to second degree murder.

Sara Kruzan has been serving a life sentence, without any possibilty of parole, after a 1995 murder case, where it came to light that she killed her pimp at the age of 16.

A crucial witness who could have testified to the statutory rape of Sara at the age of 11 by her pimp was not allowed to testify at the murder trial, nor was evidence presented that would have presented the amount of documented sexual abuse she was forced to deal with by her pimp, who forced her into prostitution by the age of 13.

The settlement was approved by Judge Gary Tranberger, of the Riverside Superior Court.  District Attorney Paul Zellerbach took issue with the sympathy that Kruzan has solicted, perhaps in repsonse to a petition that has garnered over twenty thousand signatures, http://www.change.org/petitions/grant-human-trafficking-victim-sara-kruzan-freedom-by-the-end-of-2012. ” I don’t think it’s a human trafficking case,” Zellerbach said. “It was a cold blooded murder. She had a difficult childhood with the issues she was raised with.”

Source

http://www.kpbs.org/news/2013/jan/18/new-deal-allows-sara-kruzan-seek-parole-1995-murde/

The Dirty Politics of the Riverside Superior Court

The public received an enlightening view into the politics of the Riverside Superior Court with the most recent 2012 judicial elections. The reports and the accusations leveled at different judges quite clearly reveal that the public does not believe in the integrity and impartiality of the Riverside Superior Court.

It was also disclosed that Rod Pacheco’s office, as former Riverside County District attorney, regularly encouraged the papering of certain judicial officers who they felt were biased and prejudiced to the prosecution. Papering involves filing a CCP 170.6 peremptory challenge against a certain judicial officer. However, the Court willingly does not do anything to remove judicial officers that maliciously abuse their power in family court proceedings, despite numerous calls for a forensic audit.

The race revealed that there are certain issues with sentences handed down by the Riverside Superior Court judges that did not encourage the concept of justice and integrity in the judicial process in the public mind. The Press Enterprises referred to these judges as rogue judges and they included claims that Judge Riemer “sided” with child molesters, chose not to give a 25-years-to-life three-strikes sentence to a career criminal who went on to victimize more people, and declared a mistrial in one case because it was going to run one day into his scheduled vacation.

Judge Tranberger, (the Judge who was effectively papered by the DA’s office and moved from hearing criminal cases to civil cases only), was accused of giving a lesser sentence to a convicted child molester, engaging in “illegal” plea-bargaining in an attempted-murder case, and making rulings to get the trial results he wants.

The public would regain some of the confidence in the judicial impartiality and the integrity of the Riverside Superior Court if the court pro-actively removed malicious judges and agreed to a forensic audit of all its cases, in the interest of public transparency and justice.

Source

Press Enterprises Blog
Press Enterprises