These laws would definitely make them think twice should they venture off the beaten path and abuse their discretion.
We are so glad to hear this idiot was fired.
LINK: Dirty Phoenix Judge - Phillip Woolbright Gets Fired!!!
Sunday, July 29, 2012
Another Dumbass Judical Officer Gets Suspended – Meet Justice of the Peace Phillip Woolbright Who was Fired for His Abuse of Power
These laws would definitely make them think twice should they venture off the beaten path and abuse their discretion.
We are so glad to hear this idiot was fired.
LINK: Dirty Phoenix Judge - Phillip Woolbright Gets Fired!!!
Monday, June 11, 2012
Chandler Judge Caryl Parker is publicly censured
Another dumb stupid cunt judge! So glad they are starting to censure these assclowns.
Chandler Judge Caryl Parker is publicly censured
Chandler Judge Caryl Parker is publicly censured
Chandler Judge Caryl Parker is publicly censured
Court issued reprimand for misconduct
The Arizona Supreme Court has publicly censured a Chandler Municipal Court pro tem judge for misconduct in office.
The Arizona Commission on Judicial Conduct said Monday that Judge Caryl Parker had conducted improper ex parte communications -- speaking privately about a dispute with one party without the other party present -- and failed to cooperate with the commission, an independent state agency that investigates complaints against state and local judges.
Pro tem judges are called into local courts as needed and earn $50 per hour, said Carla Boatner, court administrator for the Chandler Municipal Court. She estimated Parker worked as a pro tem judge about once a month on average.
The original complaint against Parker stemmed from her participation in a telephone hearing on Jan. 27, 2011, before issuing an injunction against harassment.
About halfway through the hearing, Parker ended the call with the defendant, who was in New Mexico, saying, "That concludes these proceedings." However, Parker continued to speak with the plaintiff in person for about 10 more minutes, asking several questions "for purposes of the record."
After receiving a complaint last October, the judicial commission began an investigation.
In November and December, the commission sent two letters to Parker asking her to review a recording of the hearing and explain her extended discussion with the plaintiff. The commission also asked Parker to provide a legal reference for the Chandler Municipal Court's jurisdiction over someone in New Mexico.
Parker twice wrote back, but failed to address the panel's specific requests or indicate she had listened to the recording, the commission said.
The commission sent a third request in January, alerting Parker that her responses showed a failure to cooperate. Parker denied taking additional testimony from the plaintiff, writing that "any comments made by me after (the result had been announced) were of no consequence whatsoever. ... We were finished with all proceedings and the parties were excused."
The commission found Parker's accounts inconsistent with the audio recording of the hearing.
Parker said she was "devastated" by the decision, and said she initially had responded to the commission without listening to the recording because she thought her memory of the hearing was sufficient.
"I was remembering a completely different hearing," she said.
Parker said she allowed the defendant to hang up first because it had been an emotional hearing.
"Where I fell down was I let the defendant hang up after I told her I was going to be issuing an order," Parker said. "The commission thought that I should have kept the defendant on the line while I filled out the actual worksheet for the order. That's what I didn't do."
Parker has served as a pro tem justice of the peace in Maricopa County since 2003, and as a pro tem judge in the Chandler Municipal Court since 2000. She has a history of discipline with the commission, including a private advisory in 2007, a private warning in 2010 and two public reprimands.
In 2010, the commission issued a private warning to Parker after she stated during a photo-enforcement hearing that "neither substantive nor procedural due process was applicable in these photo-enforcement matters." When the litigant protested, she responded by telling him, "There is a whole bunch of case law I guess you have not been able to find."
Also in 2010, the commission received a complaint alleging Parker made derogatory statements to a litigant. Because of her previous warning -- "combined with failure to acknowledge or accept any responsibility for her misconduct" -- the commission issued a public reprimand.
The Commission on Judicial Conduct investigates complaints and submits recommendations to the Arizona Supreme Court for final decision.
Last year, the commission fielded 313 complaints. Of those, seven resulted in reprimands, and only one -- Parker's case -- resulted in public censure.
It is up to the court a judge is working for to decide whether to take further action after a censure, Riemer said.
Boatner said Tuesday that the court had not reviewed or made a decision about Parker's censure.
The Arizona Commission on Judicial Conduct said Monday that Judge Caryl Parker had conducted improper ex parte communications -- speaking privately about a dispute with one party without the other party present -- and failed to cooperate with the commission, an independent state agency that investigates complaints against state and local judges.
Pro tem judges are called into local courts as needed and earn $50 per hour, said Carla Boatner, court administrator for the Chandler Municipal Court. She estimated Parker worked as a pro tem judge about once a month on average.
About halfway through the hearing, Parker ended the call with the defendant, who was in New Mexico, saying, "That concludes these proceedings." However, Parker continued to speak with the plaintiff in person for about 10 more minutes, asking several questions "for purposes of the record."
After receiving a complaint last October, the judicial commission began an investigation.
In November and December, the commission sent two letters to Parker asking her to review a recording of the hearing and explain her extended discussion with the plaintiff. The commission also asked Parker to provide a legal reference for the Chandler Municipal Court's jurisdiction over someone in New Mexico.
Parker twice wrote back, but failed to address the panel's specific requests or indicate she had listened to the recording, the commission said.
The commission sent a third request in January, alerting Parker that her responses showed a failure to cooperate. Parker denied taking additional testimony from the plaintiff, writing that "any comments made by me after (the result had been announced) were of no consequence whatsoever. ... We were finished with all proceedings and the parties were excused."
The commission found Parker's accounts inconsistent with the audio recording of the hearing.
Parker said she was "devastated" by the decision, and said she initially had responded to the commission without listening to the recording because she thought her memory of the hearing was sufficient.
"I was remembering a completely different hearing," she said.
Parker said she allowed the defendant to hang up first because it had been an emotional hearing.
"Where I fell down was I let the defendant hang up after I told her I was going to be issuing an order," Parker said. "The commission thought that I should have kept the defendant on the line while I filled out the actual worksheet for the order. That's what I didn't do."
Parker has served as a pro tem justice of the peace in Maricopa County since 2003, and as a pro tem judge in the Chandler Municipal Court since 2000. She has a history of discipline with the commission, including a private advisory in 2007, a private warning in 2010 and two public reprimands.
In 2010, the commission issued a private warning to Parker after she stated during a photo-enforcement hearing that "neither substantive nor procedural due process was applicable in these photo-enforcement matters." When the litigant protested, she responded by telling him, "There is a whole bunch of case law I guess you have not been able to find."
Also in 2010, the commission received a complaint alleging Parker made derogatory statements to a litigant. Because of her previous warning -- "combined with failure to acknowledge or accept any responsibility for her misconduct" -- the commission issued a public reprimand.
The Commission on Judicial Conduct investigates complaints and submits recommendations to the Arizona Supreme Court for final decision.
Last year, the commission fielded 313 complaints. Of those, seven resulted in reprimands, and only one -- Parker's case -- resulted in public censure.
It is up to the court a judge is working for to decide whether to take further action after a censure, Riemer said.
Boatner said Tuesday that the court had not reviewed or made a decision about Parker's censure.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)