That Judge Thing …
As much as we pride ourselves for having our ear(s) to the ground, we’ve been unforgivably slack in picking up the escalating kerfuffle over Charleston, S.C. Family Court Judge F.P. “Charlie” Segars-Andrews – which has blown up like the crack man’s pager in the S.C. Lowcountry (and beyond).
A sixteen-year judge, Segars-Andrews was deemed unqualified to serve last month by South Carolina’s notoriously corrupt Judicial Merit Selection Commission, which is chaired by notoriously corrupt Senate President Glenn F. McConnell.
First of all, let’s start with a very fundamental premise that has nothing to do with the qualifications of this particular judge … and that’s the fact that South Carolina lawmakers have absolutely no business whatsoever electing judges, let alone attempting to determine their fitness for office.
South Carolina has one of the most corrupt systems of selecting (and electing) judges in the entire nation, which you can read more about in this article.
Not surprisingly, that leads to our state also having one of the most corrupt judicial branches in the nation.
Go figure, right? We let lawmakers screen, pick and reappoint our judges while at the same time giving them control over the judiciary’s budget … and we honestly expect some semblance of justice to “come out the other end” of that?
Anyway, back to Segars-Andrews, who now finds herself locked in the jaws of this diabolical system.
In fairness, we’ve heard two accounts of this judge.
In the first version, she’s corrupt herself – acting as a prejudiced, partial dispenser of justice, one who has deliberately hidden grievances against herself and other judges. Her detractors also allege that she has improperly intervened on behalf of her husband’s law firm, prompting him to use her position as leverage.
“He’s made threats against people for years,” one source says of Segars-Andrew’s husband.
In the second scenario, Segars-Andrews is one of the most principled judges in the state, a fair and honest arbiter whose willingness to ignore political considerations has earned her some powerful political enemies, including two self-serving state lawmakers who are now twisting the knife in her back.
In one case, the backstabbing is said to be revenge for a ruling that Segars-Andrews issued against a friend of a lawmaker’s wife … in the other it’s an attempt by a State Senator to replace Segars-Andrews with one of his former law partners.
After getting multiple calls advancing both theories, we called our “conscience” on these matters – a judicial source in Charleston whose opinion we value above all others.
“She’s a good judge, do what you can to help her,” we were told.
Stay tuned to FITS next week as we reveal more specifics about the various allegations on both side of this emotionally-charged debate.
UPDATE: Oh, we almost forgot. Here’s the Newsless Courier’s account of things, in case you want to read a story that tells you absolutely nothing …
Comments
By Tank McNamara on December 4th, 2009 at 3:37 pm
“South Carolina lawmakers have absolutely no business whatsoever electing judges. . ” And in a previous article, you state that the governor should appoint judges. Have you lost your mind? The past 7 years should be enough ammo to prevent giving the governor any more appointee power. What makes you think a governor (especially the current one given his track record with appointing state agency directors) has the knowledge and expertise to appoint judges? Damn! That’s just plain scary!
By justme on December 4th, 2009 at 4:02 pm
She is an outstanding judge. We are trying to figure out the “back story.” There is something “fishy” down here and it’s not the Atlantic Ocean. Judge Segars-Andrews has ruled on thousands of cases and the Commission is supposedly taking her out over ONE case in which her actions were upheld, as they should have been, by both the Court of Appeals and the Commission on Judicial Conduct. Who wants this seat so badly? That’s the real question. Or is it, who wants revenge so badly?
By columbia insider on December 4th, 2009 at 4:04 pm
This travesty involving Judge Segars-Andrews should be the straw that breaks the camel’s back and exposes our state’s politically polluted way of selecting judges for what it is.
The judge’s alleged sin, in a nutshell: Midway through trying a divorce case, she learned that the lawyer for the wife had at some point in the past worked on a separate case with an attorney employed at the law firm that also employed her (the judge’s) husband. After reviewing the attorney’s code of professional conduct, she interpreted the rules as requiring her, in the interest of “judicial economy,” to continue trying the case, and so she did (after fully disclosing the matter on the record).
The SC Bar’s ethics commission issued an opinion that said the judge made the right decision. The SC Court of Appeals (which considered the matter after the husband took issue with the ethic commission’s opinion) agreed, saying that the judge as a matter of law acted correctly.
The political yahoos sitting on the Judicial Merit Selection Commission, however, decided that they knew better and, after listening to the husband, found Judge Segars-Andrews to be “unqualified” to serve as a judge. This, despite her having served as a judge for 16 exemplary years and having received the highest rankings that the SC Bar can bestow, and despite having been told by the ethics commission and the state court of appeals that she had acted properly as to the one thing the selection commission hung its hat on.
Yet another example of how and why our state government’s structure is an absolute disgrace.
By Good grief on December 4th, 2009 at 5:12 pm
The travesty is that this woman wasn’t kicked off before now. The official reason for her removal is the one case but it’s her extra-judicial “activities,” in concert with and on behalf of her husband (a family law attorney), that really brought her down.
By Jupiter58 on December 4th, 2009 at 5:24 pm
Below is an excellent summary of what actually happened in the Simpson divorce written by someone who participated in the litigation — these facts were before Glenn McConnell — but he chose to ignore them.
It is unfortunate that the Judicial Merit Selection Commission has chosen to ignore and disregard the decisions of the South Carolina Court of Appeals and the Commission on Judicial Conduct, which approved her handling of the recusal issue and the monetary and other awards she made.
This process undermines the independence of the judiciary at all levels, including the trial and appellate courts.
In effect, the Judicial Merit Selection Commission, a legislative body politic consisting of only 10 individuals, has effectively overridden and disregarded the considered decisions of the judicial branch of our government; violated the time honored principles of Separation of Powers established in Article I, Section 8 of the South Carolina Constitution; and prevented our duly elected representatives in the General Assembly from even considering Judge Segars-Andrews for further service.
The Judicial Merit Selection Commission has effectively allowed Mr. Simpson to re-try his divorce case before the Commission. He now complains about the amount of fees, but he chose not to put up any reply testimony or otherwise contradict what his wife had placed in evidence.
The Family Court found, and the Court of Appeals affirmed that Mr. Simpson had obfuscated the facts in the case. It found that his Financial Declaration did not paint an accurate picture of his assets nor his income. He did not change his Financial Declaration as to his income until Ms. Simpson’s counsel and expert had completed their work. He never provided the Court with a completed asset addendum until after the Court demanded that he do so after the trial. He initially complicated the case by having his wife sign an unconscionable agreement which had to be subsequently set aside. He further complicated the case by insisting that his interest in Simpson Farm, LLC was not a marital asset. The Court found that all of those assertions by Mr. Simpson caused his wife’s attorneys considerably more work.
The Court also found that Mr. Simpson caused the hours to run up substantially by filing so many motions, attempting to appeal a temporary order, failing to obey the Court Orders and because of his and his father’s lack of customary accounting methods in their farming business.
The Court also found that the Agreement that Mr. Simpson and his lawyers initially had Ms. Simpson sign was unconscionable, giving her virtually nothing. As a result of the work done by Ms. Simpson’s attorneys and expert, she will now have an equitable share of the marital properties.
The Court also complimented Ms. Simpson’s attorneys for taking on a very complicated case at a time when she did not have the funds to hire competent counsel or a CPA, all without a retainer.
When he had a chance to appeal the reasonableness of the attorney fees and costs in the Court of Appeals, Mr. Simpson did not do so. Rather, he only appealed the fact that he was ordered to pay one-half of the fees and costs. The Court of Appeals found that Mr. Simpson’s lack of candor with the Family Court and failure to fully cooperate throughout the litigation supported an award of attorney fees. The Court of Appeals pointed out that Mr. Simpson’s first Financial Declaration disclosed an income of $1,730.76 per month, when his last disclosure to the Court said his income was $8,350.00 per month. The Court of Appeals also mentioned the fact that Mr. Simpson’s inconsistent Financial Declarations created difficulty in ascertaining Mr. Simpson’s actual income. After fully considering the matter, the Court of Appeals held that Judge Segars-Andrews did not abuse her discretion in ordering Mr. Simpson to pay the fees and costs in that matter.
All of this information was in the record before the Judicial Merit Selection Commission. It is unfortunate that they chose to ignore this overwhelming evidence of Judge Segars-Andrews fitness as a judge.
By Todd on December 4th, 2009 at 5:46 pm
Columbia Insider: There is no such thing as the “South Carolina Bar’s ethics commission.” As has been reported in two main stream media sources in the past 3 months in two civil cases causing additional loss of confidence in the SC judiciary, Queen Jean Toal will give her opinion and interject herself as absolute ruler and monarch on ethical questions or any other issues during a trial or any other time for those judges who have shown their loyalty and allegiance to her in blood. The South Carolina Bar is nothing but a line item and subsidiary of the South Carolna Supreme Court. That’s it. Rule 410. If you are referring to the South Carolina Commission on Judicial Conduct, it also is but a wholly owned subsidiary of the South Carolina Supreme Court whose supreme ruler – who has absolute authority and there are no rights of appeal – you guessed it – Jean Toal. Toal has obviously protected Segars Andrews in the past and now the low country folks have had to go to the legislature to correct the situation. You will see more of this happening so long as the Queen’s 4 do-boys quietly sit behind her like Gladys Knights’ Pips, just oohin’ and ahhin’ while she does all the singin’ – and decidin’. I don’t think they let her drive, however.
By columbia insider on December 4th, 2009 at 5:53 pm
“Good grief,” let’s see if I have this right: we aren’t supposed to look at the “official” reason given by the selection committee’s for its finding, but instead to undisclosed “activities” to which you are somehow specially privy. And we’re supposed to take comfort in that? Jesus. Climb back into your senate judiciary hole and be thankful that you aren’t in the private sector competing for a real job.
By just me on December 4th, 2009 at 5:56 pm
People should also look at the unpublished opinion in the older Mr. Simpson’s case – which showed both father and son’s attempts to hide money and generally give their ex-wives a raw deal. The unethical people here are the Simpson family. As for “Good grief”, give examples. We are citing facts based on court opinions and ethics opinions. Where are yours?
By jmamibmw on December 4th, 2009 at 7:41 pm
FIRST AND FOREMOST,,,I WILL SAY THAT THIS IS MY OPINION, BUT BASED ON MY BELIEFS AND OBSERVATIONS. (I AM SPEED TYPING, SO PLEASE ACCEPT MY APOLOGIES FOR ANY TYPOS OR GRAMATTICAL ERRORS.)
I am a paralegal and have been so for over 16 years. Judge Segars-Andrews is the most qualified Judge on the bench,,,,period. Every single time we have been before her, she has acted appropriately and her NUMBER ONE CONCERN HAS ALWAYS BEEN TO SAFEGUARD CHILDREN. Yes, we have won some, but we have also lost at hearings. But what we do NOT do is cry like babies and stomp our feet. We LEARN, improve our case and speak with our clients on how to “properly behave” if need be, and move on. It is so ironic to me how clients can get so angry at Judges. To make matters worse, these are the clients who use drugs, beat up their spouses, abuse their children, alienate the other against the children and turn into alcoholics. They then turn on the Judge instead of looking in a mirror to find out what the problem is and resolve their deep rooted issues—if for anything else, for the sake of their children.
These types of clients increase the fees in the case by their own actions and behavior. They do not listen to the advice of their lawyer, they do not listen or adhere to the advice of the mediator (most of them who are lawyers) and make matters for themselves ten times harder when they act up in the presence of the Guardian and refuse to even attempt to do the right thing. They then wonder why their diagnosis from the expert witness is that they are bipolar, and have a narcissistic and/or histrionic personality disorder. At the end of the case when they lose, and the other spouse is granted fees because of their own actions and behavior—they blame “the system.”
In my opinion, these people then go on the rest of their lives being bitter and angry and their children suffer. They are their own worst enemy.
If they have any friends in the Senate, they try to get them to sit at the hearings, or file affidavits in an attempt to intimidate a Judge. When the Judge is fair and impartial and not intimidated by the political appearance, the political figure becomes outraged at such “disrespect.”
In my opinion, and I have many, Mr. McConnell thinks he is God…no, I’m sorry, he thinks he is better and has more power or legal knowledge than the Court of Appeals, and the Commission on Judicial Conduct. They think they have more power than God. Well, I blame the voters, then the legislative office for allowing him so much power. Everyone seems afraid of him—afraid of his power–and because he says “jump” everyone says “how high.”
In my opinion, McConnell is a bully and is a man who wears many “hats” along with a “white sheet.” In my opinion, McConnell has two main goals in trying to kick out the best Judge in South Carolina. They are as follows:
#1. Judge Segars-Andrews has implemented several programs that assist the “real people” of South Carolina, not the rich and famous, but your every-day person—and mainly, minorities. She has implemented a drug court program to assist the youth in our community by providing them with a second chance. All of our children, no matter what race deserve a second chance. We all have given our children second, third and fourth chances. These children come from broken families, mainly in the African-American community. Most of them truly do not know any better because of the circumstances of their upbringing. This program has been very instrumental in the African-American community. Some of these children have attended my church, Mt. Moriah Baptist Church, through the assistance of the Youth Minister, Mr. Lionel Hartwell, Jr. I have watched these children grow in a matter of months, and change their lives dramatically. They have testimonials that are heart-wrenching. Judge Segars-Andrews program WORKS! This is ABSOLUTELY NOT a “opinion” since I have personally dealt with these children, but a direct statement based on my knowledge and observation.
#2. Judge Segars-Andrews has also implemented a program to assist parents who, for one reason or another, were unable to pay their child support timely and therefore, were in contempt of court. Judge Segars-Andrews allowed the parent to do something similar to what most of us have had to do with our mortgages, refinance. However, through her program, the obligated parent is required to pay their child support along with 20% of the amount in arrears until their arrears are paid in full. In my opinion, any other Judge would have thrown the person in jail, and then what? The person would have ended up losing their job and their child would receive $0.00. Well, I am an African American female and I can say that it doesn’t take a rocket scientist to figure out that this program has assisted minorities as much as whites.
Do you seriously believe that McConnell APPRECIATES the fair treatment and implementation of these programs that assist African American’s? My vote is a “NO, OF COURSE NOT, AND ARE YOU SERIOUS?”
In my opinion, I truly believe that his other “agenda” is a personal, political favor for he and/or his friend, the attorney for the Committee. You see, (in my opinion) if he can throw out Judge Segars Andrews, threaten other committee members to vote as “he” seems fit, well, then, he and Jane’s friend, Ms. Angela Moholland, will be a shoe in—as, from what I understand and believe, he has already received commitments for …..months and or years prior to his alleged issue with Judge Segars-Andrews. Pay attention—McConnell is only using his so called issue/allegation against Judge Segars-Andrews as a smoke screen.
IS THIS THE PERSON YOU TRULY WANT RUNNING —OH, IM SORRY, I MEANT TO SAY — OWNING A COMMITTEE?!?!?!?! IN MY OPINION, AND I THINK IT IS OBVIOUS–THIS IS NOT A COMMITTEE OF TEN OFFICIALS,,,THIS IS A COMMITTEE OF “ONE” GLEN MCCONNELL.
Now,,,I assume of course Mr. McConnell will say that all I am saying is untrue. Well, if Judge Segars Andrews is removed from the bench and Angela Moholland (who I do not know and have no comments about–good or bad) is all of a sudden a Judge–have I not proved my point???
I also assume that Mr. McConnell will then say that some of his best friends are black. NOW, MY MINORITY FRIENDS, HOW MANY TIMES HAVE WE ALL HEARD THAT STATEMENT??? I believe Mr. McConnell has black friends — black POLITICAL friends. But before politics, I am very, very curious if some of his “brotherhood” “best black friends” were his friends years prior to. Hummm…
OH–I’m sorry,,I almost forgot the most important part. I attended this so called hearing this past Wednesday and was ASTOUNDED that all present (full house of supporters for Judge Segars Andrews) along with “the three Amigos” from the other side–were all instructed by Mr. McConnell NOT TO CONTACT OUR SENATORS WITH OUR CONCERNS. WHO DOES HE THINK HE IS?????
It’s ok to have power, and to use it. However, there comes a time when one can be a bit too big for his britches — this is where McConnell is and it is definitely time that someone put a bunch in his britches.
DEAR MR. MCCONNELL –I AM NOT AFRAID OF YOU AND I WILL NOT STAND DOWN WITH THE UNCLE TOMS YOU HAVE FOLLOWING YOU BECAUSE THEY ARE TOO AFRAID OF LOOSING THEIR TITLES INSTEAD OF LOOSING THEIR RESPECT. YOU HAVE TRULY MET YOUR MATCH! NICE TO MEET YOU.
(Trust me when i say that i will continue this blog later, but right now i am late for dinner…..(YES, BELIEVE I OR NOT, I TRULY HAVE MORE TO SAY!!)
By Ridiculous! on December 4th, 2009 at 7:42 pm
Nearly 1,000 South Carolinians signed a petition supporting Judge Segars-Andrews. She is known to be an impartial judge. The fact that the Court of Appeals and two ethics experts found no error in her conduct appears to have been disregarded by the Selection Commission–whose decision smacks of cronyism–in favor of one biased account by a disgruntled litigant with problems of his own. The hearing should be reopened so that the truth can come to light.
By Zeke on December 4th, 2009 at 10:08 pm
jmamibmw: I was with you until you mentioned the Commission on Judicial Conduct thing. As already mentioned, that is nothing, but solely Jean Toal and what political fare she had for breakfast on a particular day. Ask anyone on the statehouse grounds. The love-hate relationship between McConnell and Toal is in flux right now and a lot of folks up here are trying to figure it out. Most people believe there is a truce: She won’t sink his sub if he won’t make her have an honest review system of lawyers and judges through his judiciary committee. Honey, it’s all politics. Judge Segars-Andrews is a mere pawn now. By the way, my dealings with this judge have been nothing but pleasant and honorable.
By witness on December 5th, 2009 at 9:21 am
I have personally observed Segars-Andrews conduct in the court room for many years. I have personally observed her favoring certain attorneys. I have personally observed her inventing law instead of honoring and enforcing existing law. I have personally read the transcripts of many litigants’ hearings before her wherein she has acted with bias and without discretion (See Callen v. Callen). If you believe that this is a fair judge with the best interests of children at heart, I invite you to read Charleston County Dep’t of Soc. Servs. v. King, Op. No. 2005-UP-155 (S.C. Ct. App. filed March 4, 2005). [Note: this opinion was reversed on Cert by Jean Toal]. I have personally read findings of fact in her orders that were never presented in evidence or on the record, as demonstrated by the transcript, and are extremely prejudicial to one of the parties.
She is not a good judge, she is not an ethical judge, and the JMSC has acted responsibly.
By John Grisham on December 5th, 2009 at 9:38 am
The Post & Courier in Charleston has deleted some comments on it’s news stories and not opened the forum for new comments on the subject at hand, so you have to look under old stories like this one: http://www.postandcourier.com/news/2009/nov/22/judges-ruling-under-scrutiny/
Here’s the latest from the P&C (with no comments allowed): http://www.postandcourier.com/news/2009/dec/04/decision-on-judge-expected-quickly/
And here are some comments on another site: http://www.topix.com/forum/city/charleston-sc/TNUPM4RPQSBPIM4IO/p3#lastPost
Thank you Glenn McConnell and outside press for bringing this story to light!
By outraged on December 5th, 2009 at 12:39 pm
This is a travesty, an outrage and one MORE embarassment to SC (as if we need more of those).
Judge Andrews is a very fair and reasonable judge. She is smart and competent and hard working. She has started many community programs which are supported with the courts, not the least of which is Drug Court. When your house is NOT broken into by a druggie, thank her.
She is not perfect — who is (certainly not glenn mcconnell!) Judges make mistakes — hello! But, that is what the appellate courts are for so a judge can freely make a decision and it will be overseen in the cooler light of a later day by judges who weren’t involved in what happened. Naturally, a trial judge’s decisions are entitled to much deference, but that is far from unlimited and our Court of Appeals supported her decision in this ONE case. I am glad someone set out the facts in that case above.
First to find such a fine judge “unqualified” and then for that kangaroo court decision be able to BAR her from even being considered by the General Assembly highlights even further how wrong our current system is.
Something has to give. All judges in SC are VERY nervous, and as it turns out, many are far from as qualified as Judge Andrews and have much to fear. That is wrong.
By JustAnotherUpsetinSC on December 6th, 2009 at 12:19 pm
i agree with jmamibmw
The Judge issues is a big smoke screen to the issue of Glen McConnell and his political favors, influence, and threats. This is what the issue should truly be about.
Yes Judges make mistakes at times, but the main people who truly have a problem with Judges are those who have lost
i do think that Glen McConnell is intelligent and for the most part does a good job,,until he starts trying to treaten people, senators and judges if they dont rule as he says.
There have been some major political embarassments and upsets in SC this year….The Govenor, the man who had sex with the horse, and Glen McConnell. With Glenns reputation, sexual preference, threats and influence,,,it wouldnt at all surprise me if it wasnt Glen M. who was having sex with the horse,,,and if it were Glen M who was just another of Sanford’s mistress…lol
By JustAnotherUpsetinSC on December 6th, 2009 at 12:24 pm
ps..jmamibmw – i didnt know the issue surrounding Angela Moholland….,but if your analysis is true,, we will all find out really soon. it would be a shock to all if this happened –expecially since i dont think she ever came out and actually announced her candidacy…why cant the Attorney General’s office start an investigation into G. McConnell…or are they afraid of him as well?!?!
By John Grisham on December 6th, 2009 at 4:53 pm
“JustAnother” writes, “Yes Judges make mistakes at times, but the main people who truly have a problem with Judges are those who have lost.”
This understates the problem of bad judges. Many people dissatisfied with the judge win, but at great cost. When you are preparing to go to court, you must consider the judges that you could be in front of. If there is a chance that you could be in front of a biased judge or one who is known to show favoritism, that plays into your decision of whether to go to court at all. It also affects the decision of how well you must be prepared … and how expensive of an attorney you must get. So there are many that prevail in court when there is a biased judge, particularly if they have the great good luck of not getting that judge, but at great expense of time, money, and energy in preparation.
And then there are those that do not go to court and live with bad situations for fear of being on the unfavored side and getting an unfavorable ruling from a biased judge.
By JMAMIBMW on December 24th, 2009 at 11:38 am
John G. I agree in part.
The bottom line to all of you is this. If people would grow the hell up, stop acting like 2yr olds, honor their marriage oaths, spend quality time with one another and respect one another,,,,then guess what? We wouldnt need so many judges, the judges wouldnt have so many cases to work on a daily basis,,,,and we would more than likely not be having this conversation.
By JMAMIBMW on December 24th, 2009 at 11:39 am
BTW— Judge Segars Andrews filed an action against this so called commission. So now what?! I respect her for taking a stand and not sucking up to McConnell and his team of “yes sirs.”
By WOW on December 24th, 2009 at 11:43 am
I didnt know about the filing!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! I guess it’s now Glen McConnell’s time to bend over…,but,,then,,he’s use to that..isn’t he?
By WOW on December 24th, 2009 at 11:52 am
TODD— you refer to Jean Toal as “Queen Jean Toal”? Well, I think the majority knows that McConnell is “behind” (no pun intended) all of this…he threatens anyone who doesnt do what he says..he is the Adam Lambert-Hitler of SC.
Oh, by the way, as previously stated, and I think even he will agree..the title of Queen goes to McConnell. Check out his “open lifestyle” and you will see what I mean.
By Lilly Collette on January 4th, 2010 at 7:47 am
The family court industry across the board has nothing to offer our society but coast to coast fraud and misery.
http://dist03.casen.govoffice.com/index.asp?Type=B_PR&SEC={4FB00BFE-0C03-481F-BF0F-A1BCB8A3580B}&DE={B6970775-5EE4-4AF9-BAE4-66F4A13B1C0F}
State orders audit of Marin family court
Wednesday, July 01, 2009
By Gary Klien.
Published July 1, 2009. Marin Independent-Journal.
Prodded by Sen. Mark Leno and other lawmakers, the state Joint Legislative Audit Committee voted Wednesday to investigate the family courts in Marin and Sacramento counties.
The audit will focus on the use, and potential misuse, of court-appointed specialists in family-law disputes, such as mediators, investigators and therapists.
Critics say such appointees can form incestuous and incompetent networks more concerned with generating fees than helping children through painful custody fights.
“It becomes a service mill, a cottage industry of sorts,” Leno said in an interview Wednesday. “Maybe state law needs to be changed.”
Marin and Sacramento counties were chosen for the audit because of the number of litigants reporting problems and filing complaints, said Ali Bay, a spokeswoman for Leno. But any changes recommended by the auditors could inspire new statewide legislation. [...]
Leno, a Democrat representing Marin and parts of San Francisco and Sonoma County, said the committee voted unanimously for the family court audit, demonstrating the widespread doubts about the system.
“People are concerned the health and well-being of children might be at risk,” Leno said. “I’ve had mothers and fathers in tears in my office, telling me their sad stories. Minimally, we have to look into this and see what the truth is.”
The audit was approved two months after Marin Superior Court issued a report extolling its efforts to increase public confidence in its family-law division. The changes followed a turbulent decade for the family court, whose critics launched a fierce but unsuccessful recall campaign against several judges and a former district attorney. [..]
But the report still didn’t address the core issue of the mediators and other specialists appointed to advise the courts, said Kathleen Russell of the Center for Judicial Excellence, a Marin watchdog organization.
“Needless to say, we’re thrilled that we had such unanimous support from the committee for the audit request,” Russell said. “We spent 17 months working with legislators to educate them about the problems. It’s really the end of a long journey, but we’ll be working with the auditors as well.”
The state auditors are expected to investigate how court appointees are selected, how they are trained and evaluated, how their fees are established, and how complaints against them are resolved, among other issues. [...]