Bigger story than false salary affidavit by Judge Wilson is failure to disclose that the D.A had requested his pay records, will this undo past rulings?

From the http://cjp.ca.gov/ site:

"The Commission on Judicial Performance, established in 1960, is the independent state agency responsible for investigating complaints of judicial misconduct and judicial incapacity and for disciplining judges, pursuant to article VI, section 18 of the California Constitution.

The commission's mandate is to protect the public, enforce rigorous standards of judicial conduct and maintain public confidence in the integrity and independence of the judicial system. While the majority of California's judges are committed to maintaining the high standards expected of the judiciary, an effective method of disciplining judges who engage in misconduct is essential to the functioning of our judicial system.'

As first reported on LOCO this morning, http://lostcoastoutpost.com/2016/jan/24/another-humboldt-judge-regularly-lied-get-paid-sta/ , Humboldt County Superior Court Judge Christopher Wilson was 
publicly admonished on January 22, 2016 for false salary affidavits. 

If you look at my previous posts, back in September 11, 2015, I hinted at a second admonishment.

http://cjp.ca.gov/res/docs/public_admon/Wilson_01-22-16.pdf

In September 2015, Judge Dale Reinholtsen was publicly admonished for the same reason.

http://cjp.ca.gov/res/docs/public_admon/Reinholtsen_Pub_Adm_09-03-15.pdf

If you read the full text of the admonishment on Judge Wilson, you will find this paragraph towards the end:

"In aggravation, Judge Wilson received a private admonishment in 2007 for deciding matters in seven cases between 168 and 277 days after they were taken under submission, signing three false salary affidavits, and failing to disclose in criminal cases his dispute and ongoing negotiations with the district attorney over disclosure of his salary affidavits and pay records."

This paragraph states that Judge Wilson failed to disclose he was in ongoing negotiations with the D.A's office over disclosure of his salary affidavits.

There are questions raised by someone who wishes to remain anonymous that are worth exploring and I will be doing follow-up.

Judge Reinholtsen received his public admonishment, there has been no prosecution by the Humboldt County's D.A's office yet.

 Request of Judge Wilson's salary records raises the possibility that the D.A's office may be considering prosecuting Judge Wilson. By not declaring an  conflict of interest, his ruling on criminal cases that were in favor of the D.A's office could be called into question. Defense attorneys could have asked for Judge Wilson's recusal. Will there be motions forthcoming now? And what will this do to an already back logged local criminal justice system?


My previous posts:

http://johnchiv.blogspot.com/2015/09/and-this-is-why-i-did-not-jump-to.html
johnchiv.blogspot.com/2015/09/details-unconfirmed-but-another-judge.html

Related post:

http://johnchiv.blogspot.com/2015/09/facts-on-court-backlogs-authorization.html?m=1


This comment on the LOCO post raises some good points:

This is really unfair. I've spent a lot of time in this court and in San Francisco Superior Court as well as most of the other Bay Area Courts. In the Bay Area and all big cities the judges have access to far more law clerks, research and writing assistants and interns, interns and interns earning school credit from any one of the dozen or so law schools, including UC Berkeley, Hastings and the University of SF. Every judge in SF has his or her own intern and share several paid

law clerks. There are no law schools here and no interns. I am told there is one mysterious law clerk here for all of the judges and no interns. I am in the court all of the time and have never heard who this person is. Rural judges should not have the same deadlines as city judges.