Kids Matter illustrates the difficulties in challenging judicial misconduct in family courts, even in the face of accusations as severe as fraud and bribery.

CARLSBAD, CA, UNITED STATES, January 4, 2024 /EINPresswire.com/ — Kids Matter, a San Diego-based non-profit organization dedicated to advocating for the welfare of children in judicial proceedings, has brought to light the difficulties in challenging alleged judicial misconduct in family courts, even in the face of accusations as severe as fraud and bribery.

Recent investigations into three Federal cases against the California Family Court system have revealed that judicial immunity remains a significant barrier to accountability. In these cases, plaintiffs have brought forth serious allegations, including judicial bribery and conspiracy, only to be met with the doctrine of judicial immunity that shields judges from liability for their judicial actions.

In one notable federal case, Plaintiff Nicholas A. Vena, represented by LiMandri & Jonna LLP, is suing Moore, Schulman & Moore, APC, and attorney Julie Westerman for alleged violations of federal civil rights and other serious claims. The case (22CV0437 BEN BLM) alleges improper influence on a San Diego judge, Jeannie Lowe, resulting in biased rulings and her eventual recusal, thereby voiding all orders including a full child-custody trial. Yet no one has prosecuted Judge Lowe.

Another federal case involving Fidelman and minor C.F. against various defendants, including Judge Jeffrey B. Barton (Case No.: 23-CV-417, has brought the issue of judicial immunity to the forefront. Despite grave accusations against Judge Barton, the court cited judicial immunity, a long-established doctrine protecting judges from suits arising from their judicial functions unless actions were nonjudicial or beyond their jurisdiction.

In a statement, a Christie Black, a spokesperson for Kids Matter expressed concern: “The recent rulings underscore a troubling gap in our justice system where even the prospect of judicial wrongdoing in family courts, including allegations of bribery, may be insulated from thorough examination due to the broad scope of judicial immunity. These cases raise profound questions about the accessibility of redress for families and children when judicial integrity is called into question.”

Additionally, the Mark Andrews v. State of California No. 22-16612 IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT, Andrews Federal case reveals further complexities. Despite presenting significant evidence of transcript tampering misconduct, appellants have faced barriers to having their evidence considered, with the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals refusing to acknowledge Judicial Notices containing this evidence and closing the case, thus precluding the opportunity for an En Banc appeal.

Moreover, that the Attorney General of California, Sonoma County and of course Commissioner Louise Bayles Fightmaster have not informed the District Court or the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals that the evidence used in their respective courts was tainted and should not have been relied on.

A representative for the plaintiffs shared their frustration, “I thought the facts & evidence, framed with an undeniable legal briefing, would have been given more respect in the federal court system. But the 9th Circuit calling us ‘INSIGNIFICANT’ speaks for itself. This is the court system we must now rely on. So I will fight on till they deal with this clear Fraud Upon the Court.”

Kids Matter vows to continue its advocacy work, ensuring that the voices of children and families are heard and that courts uphold the highest standards of justice. The organization calls for increased scrutiny and judicial immunity reforms to ensure that the judicial system remains a place of fairness and rectitude, especially for the most vulnerable.

For further information, please contact:

Kids Matter Media Relations

Rob Emert
Kids Matter
7602624252 ext.
[email protected]
Visit us on social media:
LinkedIn