The SF Public Defender's office hates Judge Thomas Mellon. I mean really hates him. Which, in my book, is a good reason to support him.
Mellon's slogan is "Keep Politics Out of the Courtroom." Clearly, that is not acceptable to the idiot progressives of San Francisco, who want very much to politicize the bench, further cementing San Francisco as a one-party town. Mellon is a Pete Wilson appointee - which right there is enough to give your average God-hatin' progressive hives!
The Bar Association of San Francisco lists Mellon as the only one of the three candidates to be "qualified" for the job.
Mellon has managed to piss off the PD's office on a number of occasions, but judicial reviews of him have never substantiated any claims of bias (SFGate story).
I don't know too much about Mary Mallen. However, I know all too well the politics of Gerardo Sandoval - a termed out member of SF's Board of Marxists - a race-baiting idiot whose gaffes and stupidity are legendary. Sandoval being given a judicial seat would guarantee a highly politicized courtroom doing what progressives love - letting criminals off the hook, punishing those who are successful, and basically standing as a road block to any idea which wouldn't validate the prog's view of the world as a racist, classist, uncaring place.
This dangerous asshole must not win.
The BASF said of Sandoval: "Following the Judiciary Committee's investigation, interview of the candidate, and deliberations, the Committee finds this candidate to be “Not Qualified.”" 'Nuff Said.
I don't know too much about Mary Mallen, other than that in the words of the BASF: "Following the Judiciary Committee's investigation, interview of the candidate, and deliberations, the Committee finds this candidate to be “Not Qualified.”"
I will give her this, though... at least she has Sandoval's number:
MALLEN: With respect to one of my opponents, I believe we have a totally different perspective on what the role of a judge is. One of my opponents gave an interview with, I believe it was the Bay Guardian, and he said he was going to be an activist judge, and that he was going to be a troublemaker on the bench. And I believe that he either has a fundamental misunderstanding about the role of a judge, or he intends to make a fundamental assault on the role of a judge.
RECORDER: Are you talking about Supervisor Sandoval?
MALLEN: I'm talking about Sandoval, that's correct. And it's also on his Web page, he says other things with respect to sunshine laws being applied to this branch of the government. And I think you go back to the Federalist Papers, Marbury v. Madison, and you understand that that's just simply not the role of a judge.
(from Mary Mallen: In her own words - CAL LAW)
Keep Judge Mellon.com
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
2 comments:
I APPROACHED MR.SANDOVAL.AND EXPLAINED TO HIM THAT I HAD DISCOVERED THE FEDERAL GOVT.PROSECUTED 97 DEFENDANTS IN 1988 IN SF.UNDER A LAW THAT WAS NOT IN LAW,HE RAN THE OTHER WAY AND REFUSED MY CALLS AND CHRIS DALY ALSO REFUSED MY CALLS.HE BEING A MEMBER OF THE BAR IS REQUIRED TO REPORT THE FACT THAT THE COURTS HAVE DISENFRANCHISED APP.97 DEFENDANTS,AND ARE GETTING AWAY WITH IT,UNLESS YOU HAVE A SPANISH SUR NAME YOU HAVE NOTHING COMMING.
Unfortunately, Mr. Mellon seems to have lost his Marbury v. Madison "vision": he's become an ego-centric relic, unbecomingly belicose with people "lesser than him" and, arrogant with no substantive reason; thus: I will work to turn him out, since he no longer resprents any of the original founders (Federal Papers) views.
Good bye, Mellon!
Post a Comment