judicial Just what it does it take to realize how often defendants rights are getting abused by the Santa Barbara Superior Courts. The crimes that the defendants are accused of must be prosecuted to the full extent of the law. I lived just one block from Mi Fiesta Liquor for almost 20 years and was deeply saddened by the senseless murder of there employee. However after recent revelations I have a growing concern over the continued questionable actions by those on our Superior Court bench. It is no wonder that just this past summer there was a Petition to Recall Six California Supreme Court Justices in California. I am currently investigating possible election fraud by no less than 3 current sitting Superior Court Judges and the acceptance of these actions by the entire bench. Now just two years ago during the Ricardo Juarez murder trial the unethical actions by our entire justice system must not go un-investigated any longer. One key issue in the Juarez murder trial dealt with the evidence of what has been labeled the “whisper tape” confession. Apparently at one point in time the F.B.I. had custody of the evidence tape and created some type of enhanced version for our district attorney. Karen Adkins in order to properly defend her framed client had to file a motion ( see attachments ) ) requesting that prosecutor Dozer supply the enhanced version. I can only assume the courts never responded to the defense request since during the trial a local Sheriff was called to take the stand. He was represented as the expert in regards to the “whisper tape”. Why would Karen Adkins not go one step further an subpoena the F.B.I. technician and properly defend her client? More amazing than that has been the total disregard for the law I have been able to expose while reviewing the court documents. The actions of Judge Brian Hill and our District Attorneys office would seem to include both Judicial Misconduct and Malicious Prosecution.
We can question the suspicious court actions further. An look into why it is that I still cannot find an 80 page motion filed 12/07 in the courts by public defender Karen Adkins on behalf of Mr. Juarez. This motion contained allegations of misconduct and asked for both the judge to recuse himself and demanded the court to take some type of administrative action against prosecutor Dozer. I am sure this 80 page motion must be extremely damaging thus the reason it is unavailable for review.
So than why am I so upset today and risk maybe putting myself in harms way again? Because I have already personally experinced Judicial Misconduct and was almost sent to prison to serve 2 life sentences for absolutely nothing. That almost happen because Superior Court Judge Brian Hill an prosecutors Mary Barron and Greg Boller made personal decisions to abuse there positions an tried to ruin my life. An with so little thought, they spend more time deciding what fuel to use in there vehicle than what the ramifications of there abuse will have on those forced to endure it. Please do not take my word for it simply go to the court house and review the charges and contents of Superior court files 1185728, 1189598, 1211869, 1213063,1212944. I was illegally charged with 7 strike-able offenses. After you complete your review in the criminal courts move over to the civil division. Pull and review my divorce 1187442, or civil litigation 1220573. When you finish there you can review the illegal foreclosure and transfer of my home at 1721 Chino street 93101. Not once but 3 separate times and all were illegally done in my name. I am upset here today because even as I write you my choices are not entirely all my own, but what can I do? I am upset today because I read in yesterdays paper it seems Judge Anderson is being forced to partake in actions not of his choice. It seems he is trying to let us know what transpired in his court room were not his actions but rather more behind the door manipulations in our Superior Court. Please take note on how Judge Anderson makes a specific mention it must be a “TRIAL JUDGE” there is a reason for that. “Judge Anderson said that he had been ordered by an assistant presiding judge to assign the case to a trial judge and set the matter for Department 2, where Judge Brian Hill presides. Below is the story I am referencing to.”
http://www.thedailysound.com/111610-GANG-SUSPECTS-APPEAR-IN-COURT By JAMES ZOLTAK — NOV. 16, 2010
Santa Barbara four accused in fatal Eastside beat-down appear in court
Please Note that last year; January 5 2009 assignment Changes in the Superior Court.
Judge Brian Hill is the new Assistant Presiding Judge for 2009 & 2010.
So than is Judge Anderson claiming misconduct by the “assistant presiding Judge” in regards to his assignment of the preliminary hearing to department 2 and Judge Hill?
This is not the first time Judge Brian Hill has participated in calendering abuse. He was involved in the Juarez preliminary hear and also had the case below transferred to himself as well.
Robles Pleads Not Guilty to Murder Charge
Court Assigns Attorney for Man Accused of Hendry’s Beach Killing
Robles’s case was transferred to Superior Court Judge Brian Hill for a preliminary hearing on May 25.
Now I have questioned many times before what is the motive behind such actions in our Superior Court. When you take into consideration that until you are bound over for Trail after the conclusion of a preliminary hearing there is no need for participation from a trial Judge. A Trial Judges time is far better spent on cases ready for trial. Judge Brian Hill has already had to push back his calendering of two long waiting murder trials into early next year this move makes no sense.
Within some criminal justice systems, a Preliminary Hearing (evidentiary hearing) is a proceeding. The primary purpose of the preliminary hearing is to weed out charges that cannot be supported by competent evidence. At a preliminary hearing, the district attorney may use police officers to present the statements of victims and witnesses to convince the judge that there is enough evidence to justify the felony allegations and a jury trial. If that requirement is met than one is “bound over for Trial”. This procedure must be completed before one will appear before a Trial Judge. A preliminary hearing is held in the lowest local court such as our criminal division, an in the department within that has been assigned the responsibility to over see and calendar these proceedings.
When you consider the lack of actions against Peter Jeschke you have to wonder is there a double standard in who is prosecuted and how? I have include just a few more examples for you to consider, and answer does a double standard exist in Santa Barbara?
Byline: Marianne McCarthy Special to the Daily News
SANTA BARBARA Santa Barbara (săn’tə bär`brə, –bərə), city (1990 pop. 85,571), seat of Santa Barbara co., S Calif., on the Pacific Ocean; inc. 1850. – Even though he was convicted of second-degree murder as an adult, Graham Pressley, 19, was sentenced as a juvenile Tuesday for his part in the 2000 slaying of 15-year-old Nick Markowitz of West Hills.
Finding a middle ground between the defense’s request for probation and the prosecution’s call for a sentence of 18 years to life in state prison, Superior Court Judge William Gordon William Gordon may refer to: sentenced Pressley to the California Youth Authority’s Ventura facility until his 25th birthday.
Pressley had been free on bail since last November, when a jury found him guilty of murder. During a previous trial, a jury acquitted him of a charge of kidnapping Nick, but deadlocked on the murder charge.
CALIFORNIA | LOCAL
February 12, 2003 | By Jean Guccione, Times Staff Writer
In an unusual action, former Santa Barbara County Sheriff James Thomas intervened on behalf of a convicted killer and helped persuade a judge Tuesday to send him to a juvenile facility rather than state prison. Thomas, in a letter to Santa Barbara County Superior Court Judge William L. Gordon, said he was a close friend of the father of the defendant, Graham Pressley, 19, who was 17 when he dug the grave for a boy slain in a bid to collect on a drug debt.
Hit-and-run defendant gets five years
By ERIC LINDBERG — Feb. 10, 2010
A 46-year-old man will spend five years in prison after a judge sentenced him yesterday for his role in a hit-and-run collision on Las Positas Road last month that left two local residents dead. Jon Steffan Peters pleaded guilty to felony hit-and-run and acknowledged he reoffended within five years of serving prison time, leading to the maximum five-year sentence handed down by Judge Rick Brown.
Hit-and-Run Kills Two
Registered Sex Offender with Troubled Past Aprehended with Help from GPS
Thursday, January 21, 2010
The driver of the van, 46-year-old John Steffan Peters, is being held at the Santa Barbara County Jail, facing charges of parole violation, vehicular manslaughter, and felony hit-and-run.
More recently, however, Peters has had various run-ins with the law. He was charged with forging a prescription in 2001 and a year later plead guilty and was placed on probation. That same year he was arrested for the sale of a controlled substance and violated his probation, pleading guilty to that charge as well. He then violated probation on the new charge twice, and the original probation three times, leading to him being sentenced in September 2004 to three years in state prison, according to Senior Deputy District Attorney Lee Carter, who was the prosecutor in that case. In 1998, Peters also pleaded guilty to forgery of a check, for which he received probation and, in 1999, was charged with furnishing marijuana.
What happen to all the suspended sentences for this sex offender, Santa Barbara soft on sex offenders!