While Crystal Harris's horror story at the hands of San Diego Family Court Judge Gregory Pollack was making local news from San Diego to Los Angeles, it appears Judge Pollack wasn't sitting by, the picture of fairness and impartiality. Nor does it appear Judge Pollack was quiet, (which is different than "silent"). What seems obvious is Judge Pollack was busy.
On December 2, 2011, Crystal Harris arrived at the Vista courthouse to review her family court custody file. Although an active case, a court employee informed Crystal the file had been sent out for "scanning."
The clerk apologized, stating Crystal should have been informed first. Crystal asked who ordered the file "scanned."
The clerk claimed not to know.
Aren't clerks supposed to be working for the public?
Crystal was stunned. Needing both file information and papers controlled by clerks signifying who reviewed her case, the clerk quickly added Crystal couldn't have those papers, either.
The clerk then offered Crystal also couldn't review the paperwork identifying who requested a review of her very current file, as those records are destroyed after 30 days. Crystal responded she only wanted identifying information for the past 14 days.
The clerk said those were gone too.
Clerks who forget their job is to serve the public
Crystal's plight reflects a common problem. Anyone spending time in just about any family court soon gets the feeling clerks across the board seem to feel they are employees of judges, rather than hired to serve the public. There is a sort of "us against them" vibe in the records department, which travels down corridors and rings true for bailiffs in the courtroom.
However, unbiased clerks and bailiffs are the mainstay guardians of the truth. Clerks and court reporters who are or the paper trail, guard the truth. Unbiased clerks are mandatory. The public need for an unbiased clerk is necessary to protect litigants especially when a judge becomes embroiled in a case.
A reasonable person recognizes when a judge has crossed the line. A reasonable person recognizes when - in the interests of justice, a judge should recuse themselves from a case. That is the mark of reasonableness.
Unfortunately, a biased judge can't or won't see the mark. Thus, a refusal to step down from a case often becomes instead, the very hallmark of a biased judge.
The history of Crystal Harris's case has long been odd. Directly after the media got involved, an 885 word press release from Bill Hargreaves who is not associated with the case, but who apparently felt a spontaneous need to address the "integrity of the bench" magically began making the rounds of local media outlets.
Fortunately the release was ignored. However, not mentioned in Hargreaves 885 word "release" on judicial integrity, was the number of Family Court judges who like Judge Pollack, ordered felons be bussed in from prison for their family court hearings.
That would zero.
This makes sense as the mystery press release included the lines:
"Family Courts have provided resources and support for many years to the victims of domestic violence. Domestic violence is a serious national problem, which threatens the safety and well-being of thousands of men, women and children every year."
Yes, in a line about crime, "threatens the safety and well-being of thousands of men" men had top billing. So it should be a surprise to no one Judge Gregory Pollack is and has been bussing in Shawn Harris from prison.
Also missing from the press release is Judge Pollack plans to order immediate reunification with the children for Shawn as soon as he's released. Wholly discounting who Shawn Harris will become in prison, Judge Pollack is future tripping; which is miles away from the mark of an impartial jurist.
Likewise unaddressed in the mystery press release from left field, was the family home. Crystal Harris brought in a real estate expert to determine market value of the former couple's home in relation to the time purchased and when they separated. Unless the ruling went in Crystal's favor she was at risk to lose her home.
In response to Crystal's expert the other side presented an old Zillow listing. However, Judge Pollack questioned the real estate expert at length - as if on behalf of Shawn Harris, and then ruled against the expert and in a way assured Shawn Harris double-digit thousands more.
Judge Pollack's reaction when later informed in another hearing he was placing Crystal's home at risk, was that was too bad.
Judge Pollack said these things "happen" in a divorce.
Well yes, that's true. In Judge Pollack's courtroom, these things certainly do "happen."
Comments