Fire is city's main concern at Pogonip

May 7, 2009 Read more: Santa Cruz Sentinel 516
Head ranger John Wallace told a group of residents Wednesday that fire danger in the city's open spaces, especially Pogonip, is his biggest concern. Read more
Law Yore

Santa Cruz, CA

#347 May 19, 2009
Xanthippe wrote:
I'll take Ariadne Symons as a judge over any defense attorney or civil attorney any day. She was a top notch prosecutor. I don't worry about criminals getting off with her on the bench.
She did a fabulous job of keeping Don Schmidt locked up for years, after Judge Black's awful mistake.
I will never understand why some people despise all that's good and right in Santa Cruz, and go to great lengths to excuse evil. What makes people like that tick? It baffles.
I met Ms. Symons while she was campaigning, and as far as I can see, she is exemplary. A good judge.

Not all law enforcement, DAs and judges are bad apples. Some are, some may be, yes, becuase they are not immune to the human condition (though they are immune legally to an unecessary degree, interestingly, and it is exceedingly rare that the above mentioned public servants are exposed for corruption, and it's not just Chicago cops chicanery exposed by DNA evidence after the fact, let's admit) elements of deception and treachery.
Becky The Liar

Santa Cruz, CA

#348 May 19, 2009
No, you lie. You intentionally, and repeatedly, post false statements to bolster your case.

And you continue doing so after repeated evidences to disprove your "errors' have been presented.

“Pearls before swine”

Since: Mar 08

Santa Cruz, CA.

#349 May 19, 2009
XANTHIPPE WRITES: "I'll take Ariadne Symons as a judge over any defense attorney or civil attorney any day. She was a top notch prosecutor. I don't worry about criminals getting off with her on the bench. She did a fabulous job of keeping Don Schmidt locked up for years, after Judge Black's awful mistake."

BECKY: True. She never accepted the court's decision in the Schmidt case. In 2005 she told NPR "He should, in fact, have received life in prison." And since she didn't accept the verdict of the court, she has rigged it so he HAS stayed in prison long after his sentence was served.

In a way, Symons has made a career out of subverting the justice system to conform to her own prejudices.
Robert Norse

Oakland, CA

#350 May 19, 2009
On Symons (dis)qualifications:

http://www.indybay.org/newsitems/2009/05/18/1...

“Keep Santa Cruz weird, NOT”

Since: Jul 08

Santa Cruz, California

#351 May 19, 2009
Becky Johnson wrote:
BECKY: They declared her "unqualified". I don't think that's the same as unfit. I noticed nothing was listed on the site and I can't explain that. It was reported in the papers a while back. I remember reading it. And then an attorney friend of mine reminded me of it recently.
THIS is why I laugh when you call yourself a "journalist". I spent 30 seconds doing a search and found the article. Once again you (and Robert) twist the facts to fit an agenda. Instead of doing a search yourself to check your facts, you copy what your gadfly pal said word for word on indybay about Symons.

Here is the link to the article. Oh, and unless I missed it, it was not twice....

http://www.scsextra.com/story.php...

“Pearls before swine”

Since: Mar 08

Santa Cruz, CA.

#352 May 19, 2009
THANKS SANTA CRUZ LOCAL for finding the article. I remembered reading it when it came out. I don't think that this automatically disqualifies me as a journalist when I don't do sufficient research (according to you) for a post in a forum. I mean, what rule have I broken? I call myself a journalist because I produced a TV show for 11 years, a radio show for 10 years, and wrote for a homeless newspaper for 10 years. I am now a free-lance journalist but a journalist none the less.

Are SENTINEL writers journalists? They get paid for writing. But they make mistakes all the time.

“Pearls before swine”

Since: Mar 08

Santa Cruz, CA.

#353 May 19, 2009
It was twice because Symons appealed and was found unqualified on appeal.

“Pearls before swine”

Since: Mar 08

Santa Cruz, CA.

#354 May 19, 2009
BTW The Donald Schmidt trial has ended in a hung jury. see: http://www.mercurynews.com/centralcoast/ci_12...

Since: May 08

Santa Cruz, CA

#355 May 19, 2009
Becky Johnson wrote:
BTW The Donald Schmidt trial has ended in a hung jury. see: http://www.mercurynews.com/centralcoast/ci_12...
Last week's news.

"None of the jurors thought Schmidt was not dangerous, he said. The question was whether the prosecution met the standard of proving that he had a mental disorder that would lead him to be unable to control his behavior, according to jurors. Weigel had contended he did not.

"We felt the DA's case was so muddled.... We were almost disappointed in the assistant district attorney, in the poor case he presented," said juror Mike McDowell, who was in the minority."

==========

NONE of the jurors felt like he is safe to let out. It's only because Judge Black made a mistake in the first place that he's not behind bars permanently.

Why you go to bat for a guy like Donald Schmidt is beyond me. It's sick that you are more concerned with the rights of a brutal rapist murderer than you are for his victim. I don't remember reading a single sympathetic thing you've written about that little 3 year old beyond perhaps a "it was unfortunate."

Your priorities are very confused.

Why do you champion a vicious killer so heartily and yet - nothing for the victim?

I doubt I'll understand even if you try to explain it to me.

Since: May 08

Santa Cruz, CA

#356 May 19, 2009
Becky Johnson wrote:
It was twice because Symons appealed and was found unqualified on appeal.
By the JNY Commission, which I doubt even you want to support.

Educate yourself a little more on this issue before having an opinion on it. You come off like a cop hater and a DA hater.

If you can find anything negative about someone on your list of "bad people who have somehow done someone wrong" you will use it regardless of how serious it is.

Perhaps you should research how many local judges have ever been deemed unqualified by the JNE Commission?

Perhaps you should research just who is on the JNE Commission (good luck on that one!) or how they decide judicial qualification (ditto!).

You call yourself a journalist. This could be the story of the decade were you to find these things out.
Coulrophobia

San Bruno, CA

#357 May 19, 2009
Becky Johnson wrote:
THANKS SANTA CRUZ LOCAL for finding the article. I remembered reading it when it came out. I don't think that this automatically disqualifies me as a journalist when I don't do sufficient research (according to you) for a post in a forum. I mean, what rule have I broken? I call myself a journalist because I produced a TV show for 11 years, a radio show for 10 years, and wrote for a homeless newspaper for 10 years. I am now a free-lance journalist but a journalist none the less.
Are SENTINEL writers journalists? They get paid for writing. But they make mistakes all the time.
Are you really that dense, or are you just trying to shake this off like you do everything else? There is a HUGE difference between posting something simply insinuative, like, "I seem to remember reading that some commission found X unfit for the bench" (which is about the correct level of vagueness for your assertion), and posting that you know for certain that she was deemed unfit, and then digging in your heels and repeating it over and over again ... without bothering to back it up, or LOOK it up. Dropping insinuative asides is bad enough, but you couldn't even be bothered to check whether the commission you named was the right one. It's lazy and destructive behavior, Johnson. Why do you enjoy doing that so much? You really need to take a good look at yourself and ask why you like to cause trouble for others.

The Sentinel reporter was remiss in not reporting how the rating information got out. The evaluation is confidential unless the judge is appointed, not elected, or unless the candidate/judge releases the information. Writing that, "The one thing everyone can agree on is Ariadne Symons was found unqualified to be a Superior Court judge by the state commission that assesses judicial applicants" is a cheesy way to get around attributing the information to any one person. Although she did get Symons to confirm it, it's still bad form to open the story with a rumor. Ultimately, it's the editor who gets blamed for that decision.
Coulrophobia

San Bruno, CA

#358 May 19, 2009
"You have to believe us, all of us felt sorry for him and hoped for the best for him," said jury foreman Chris Goddard, who was in the majority. "He had a sad life and a lot of problems that weren't his fault." (from the Merc article)

So Schmidt played the victim card in court ... again. The only victim in that case was the dead, raped baby.

I have known people who lived through unspeakable abuse and neglect as children, and went on to live law abiding and productive lives. This monster needs to remain locked up for as long as our legal system will allow. He is evil.
Coulrophobia

San Bruno, CA

#359 May 19, 2009
Blonde wrote:
<quoted text>
Very interesting posts and informative research - thanks. The only comment I have is that Art Danner was a judge for several years (or am I missing a point you were trying to make?)
Why is no one surprised that hearing "information" from Becky is like that childhood game of telephone? Some journalist!
No, no ... nothing implied about Danner. The rumor was mentioned in an article that also spoke about Symons. I speculated that LaJohnson might have conflated those two bits of information.
Coulrophobia

San Bruno, CA

#360 May 19, 2009
Becky Johnson wrote:
CRAIG WRITES: "And let's face it BECKY you have never admitted to a lie"
BECKY: A "lie" by definition is an intentional falsehood said with the purpose to deceive.
I make errors or mistakes, but I don't lie.
What you do is worse than lying. You regularly float pejorative ideas about people you want to hurt, and then you back away and claim that you: meant no harm ... have a right to your "opinion"... are a journalist and therefore immune to repercussions ... are sure you read it somewhere, sometime, but you're just toooo busy to find the source.
Coulrophobia

San Bruno, CA

#361 May 19, 2009
Xanthippe wrote:
<quoted text>

Perhaps you should research just who is on the JNE Commission (good luck on that one!) or how they decide judicial qualification (ditto!).
You call yourself a journalist. This could be the story of the decade were you to find these things out.
"How many members serve on the JNE Commission? How are they appointed?

Pursuant to Government Code section 12011.5(b), the commission consists of attorney and public (i.e., nonattorney) members. The commission consists of 34 attorney and public members. The ratio of nonattorney members to attorney members is determined, to the extent practical, by the ratio established in sections 6013.4 and 6013.5 of the Business and Professions Code.

It is the stated intent of the Legislature that the JNE membership "shall be broadly representative of the ethnic, gender, and racial diversity of the population of California and composed in accordance with sections 11140 and 11141 of the Government Code."

Practice areas of the members are representative of the various types of practice in California, and include the public sector as well as private practice, large and small firms and sole practitioners. The actual composition of the commission has tended to reflect the diversity of the legal profession in California.

What are the qualities and attributes considered by the JNE Commission in the evaluation process?

The Government Code sets forth certain evaluation criteria. Thus, in determining the qualifications of a candidate, the JNE Commission considers his or her professional ability and experience, industry, judicial temperament, intellectual capacity, judgment, honesty, objectivity, community respect, integrity, commitment to equal justice, moral turpitude, communication skills, work-related health (physical or mental condition), and freedom from bias.

What does the JNE Commission do to gather information about a proposed candidate?

The commission investigates all statements made in the Personal Data Questionnaire that the candidate submits to the Governor's office. In addition, confidential comment forms are sent to the following:

a. 50 to 75 names of persons provided by the candidate, who are reasonably likely to have knowledge of the candidate's qualifications (personal list);

b. a broad cross-section of the names of attorneys in the counties and the areas of law in which the candidate practices (random list, approximately 300-400);

c. all members of the bench in the county in which the candidate practices (except Los Angeles where a reasonable number is sent, about 75);

d. all names listed in the candidate's personal data questionnaire; and

e. if the candidate is in criminal practice, all district attorneys and public defenders in the county in which the candidate practices; at least 50 in each category in large counties.

A minimum of 50 responses indicating knowledge of the candidate is required to continue an investigation.

What percent of candidates have been found not qualified?

The annual range has varied from nine percent to 29 percent."
Anon

San Francisco, CA

#362 May 19, 2009
Xanthippe wrote:
<quoted text>
By the JNY Commission, which I doubt even you want to support.
Educate yourself a little more on this issue before having an opinion on it. You come off like a cop hater and a DA hater.
If you can find anything negative about someone on your list of "bad people who have somehow done someone wrong" you will use it regardless of how serious it is.
Perhaps you should research how many local judges have ever been deemed unqualified by the JNE Commission?
Perhaps you should research just who is on the JNE Commission (good luck on that one!) or how they decide judicial qualification (ditto!).
You call yourself a journalist. This could be the story of the decade were you to find these things out.
Those in the know equate the JNE commission with forums just like this. Anyone with a grudge is allowed to anonymously make claims against a candidate for the bench. The commission is supposed to investigate, but they do not have disclose what they do or do not find. Applicants can appeal, but they aren't told what or who's assertions they are appealing.

Sounds like Topix!
another_voice

Foster City, CA

#363 May 19, 2009
Becky Johnson wrote:
THANKS SANTA CRUZ LOCAL for finding the article. I remembered reading it when it came out. I don't think that this automatically disqualifies me as a journalist when I don't do sufficient research (according to you) for a post in a forum. I mean, what rule have I broken? I call myself a journalist because I produced a TV show for 11 years, a radio show for 10 years, and wrote for a homeless newspaper for 10 years. I am now a free-lance journalist but a journalist none the less.
Are SENTINEL writers journalists? They get paid for writing. But they make mistakes all the time.
Wikipedia defines a journalist thusly:
A journalist (also called a newspaperman) is a person who practices journalism, the gathering and dissemination of information about current events, trends, issues, and people while striving for viewpoints that aren't biased.

Reporters are one type of journalist. They create reports as a profession for broadcast or publication in mass media such as newspapers, television, radio, magazines, documentary film, and the Internet. Reporters find sources for their work, their reports can be either spoken or written, and they are often expected to report in the most objective and unbiased way to serve the public good. A columnist is a journalist who writes pieces that appear regularly in newspapers or magazines.

Pay particular attention to phrases like "striving for viewpoints that aren't biased" and "report in the most objective and unbiased way to serve the public good".

Can you honestly declare that your "journalism" meets this criteria? Please provide me with links to articles you have written that do not reflect your bias.
another_voice

Foster City, CA

#364 May 19, 2009
I apologize; I failed to accurately denote the quoted passage from Wikipedia. The quoted passage is:

"A journalist (also called a newspaperman) is a person who practices journalism, the gathering and dissemination of information about current events, trends, issues, and people while striving for viewpoints that aren't biased.

Reporters are one type of journalist. They create reports as a profession for broadcast or publication in mass media such as newspapers, television, radio, magazines, documentary film, and the Internet. Reporters find sources for their work, their reports can be either spoken or written, and they are often expected to report in the most objective and unbiased way to serve the public good. A columnist is a journalist who writes pieces that appear regularly in newspapers or magazines."

Since: Apr 09

United States of America

#365 May 19, 2009
Robert Norse wrote:
On Symons (dis)qualifications:
http://www.indybay.org/newsitems/2009/05/18/1...
So you write your own personal opinions and then cite them as sources in this forum?

Ridiculous.

Since: Apr 09

United States of America

#366 May 19, 2009
Becky Johnson wrote:
THANKS SANTA CRUZ LOCAL for finding the article. I remembered reading it when it came out. I don't think that this automatically disqualifies me as a journalist when I don't do sufficient research (according to you) for a post in a forum. I mean, what rule have I broken? I call myself a journalist because I produced a TV show for 11 years, a radio show for 10 years, and wrote for a homeless newspaper for 10 years. I am now a free-lance journalist but a journalist none the less.
Are SENTINEL writers journalists? They get paid for writing. But they make mistakes all the time.
Apparently you call yourself a lot of things that are a stretch for everyone else to believe.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Morgan Hill Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News Justices Reject Appeal by US Flag-Wearing Students Mar 30 Rojo Blanco Azul 1
News Watsonville police nab 37 suspected taggers (Apr '09) Mar 16 yungbueno 146
News More than 300 jam Santa Cruz job fair Feb '15 Buzz 14
franklin armoury selling junk Feb '15 sbrl 1
News Morgan Hill to test lane changes through downto... Feb '15 MDG78 2
Anyone selling puppies ? Jan '15 guest 1
News Where did the rain go?: Decembera s promise tur... Jan '15 Annnnning 2
More from around the web

Morgan Hill People Search

Addresses and phone numbers for FREE

Personal Finance

Mortgages [ See current mortgage rates ]