Apr 272012
 

The stories about Judge David Richmond are legend. He rarely shows up, meaning that the County of Amador has to use travelling judges frequently in addition to paying Richmond’s salary.

The damn Casino pays for all kinds of stuff – some consolation considering that 1/3 of Amador’s crime (by some estimates) eminates from that Casino.

Back to Richmond – his “Op-Ed” was posted in the Amador Ledger Dispatch whose editor is reputed to be in the bag for Jeff Seaton. I am going to inject my rebuttals within the text of this op-ed. It says little or nothing of Seaton’s “qualifications” at all. (Perhaps because he doesn’t have many?) I’ve also been told that the Amador Ledger Dispatch is also a beneficiary of the Casino’s largesse.

This is a judgeship I will vacate at the end of my present term, a position held since 1998. Amador County deserves a judge who has the essential characteristics and traits to serve this community in a highly conscientious and professional manner. Jeff Seaton is that person.

Conscientious? I’d like to refer the Judge to the Purdue Case, the Schmitz Complaint or the dearth of “professional” behavior by Jeff Seaton.

I have known Jeff Seaton since 1993. I was a prosecutor in the Sacramento County District Attorney’s office at that time. He was a defense attorney in one of my cases. I soon realized working with Jeff, he was respectful, organized, very competent with high ethical standards. In the nearly twenty years since, he has continuously demonstrated those qualities in court. Jeff Seaton has appeared in my court on a regular basis and has shown tireless professionalism, sensitivity and a true understanding of justice for both sides.

High ethical standards? Like brow-beating a rape victim? His handling of his divorce? Hiding a crime victim from the DA?

Jeff Seaton is one of the most competent attorneys I have worked with in my thirty-six year career as a prosecutor and a judge. He has a broad range of experience — serving in the U.S. Army for twenty-six years and has been a courtroom litigator for more than twenty-one years. He has represented his clients in numerous courts throughout the state of California, including the California Courts of Appeal and the California Supreme Court. During the years I have known him, his character, integrity, attention to detail and ability have been second to none.

Pimp the uniform – what an outrage. I served in the US Navy and I don’t wrap myself in it… nor do I do a campaign fundraiser on Veteran’s Day in such a way that it is unclear what I am doing… I’d suggest that the Judge talk to the Judge in the Purdue case who castigated Jeff Seaton multiple times over his conduct. This is something Richmond wouldn’t know much about – since he is rarely ever in court.

As a judge of the Amador County Superior Court, I know Jeff Seaton will use excellent judicial temperament; be neutral, decisive and respectful to everyone who appears before him. He will continue his high standards and be impartial to all sides. I am confident he has the moral courage to objectively interpret and fairly apply the law above all other considerations.

NEUTRAL!? Seaton’s contempt for Crime Victims is legendary – ask Jennifer Minton!

Jeff Seaton has demonstrated twenty years of commitment to Amador County and has worked hard to serve the public and better the administration of justice. I urge the good citizens of Amador County to carefully evaluate this when they vote for judge and place their confidence in Jeff Seaton.

I agree – carefully evaluate, because if you do – Jeff Seaton doesn’t stand a chance of being elected!

The Honorable David S. Richmond – Assistant Presiding Judge

Editors note: Amador Superior Court Judge David Richmond has lived in Amador County since 1976. He served as Deputy District Attorney for Amador County from 1976-1982; as Amador County District Attorney from 1983-1991; as Deputy District Attorney in Sacramento County from 1991-1995; and was the Chief Assistant District Attorney in El Dorado County from 1995-1998. Judge Richmond was appointed to the bench by Governor Pete Wilson in January 1998. He was elected in 2002 and re-elected in November 2006.

(Richmond was un-opposed, yeesh)

  2 Responses to “Judge Richmond Endorsed Jeff Seaton, too?”

  1. I certainly hope there is someone running against Mr. Seaton. The knock on Judge’s in small rural counties (like Amador) is the bench is populated with either ex-D.A. or ex-Public Defenders. If the only cases a Judge heard was in a specific field of law (Probate, Family Law, Criminal) in a county like Sac, where there are at last count 142 different departments and four different court building each handling a different type of law (Criminal, Family Law, Probate/Conservatorships, etc), having a lawyer who was a D.A. or Public Defender would probably be o.k. O.K., if that were the only type of cases he/she would hear. Amador is a small county, and a Judge (any Judge) is going to have the full spectrum of legal issues in his/her court room. I realize being a Judge means at some point they went to law school and passed the Bar where a prospective lawyer is tested on the five large areas of practice (Criminal, Civil, Business, Torts and Ethics), but a lawyer that has served as either a District Attorney or a Public Defender, has probably never seen a real civil contract trial, let alone litigated such matters.
    As a Public Defender, I am sure he has had little choice in whom he represents. What you lambaste as “Brow Beating” a rape victim could be seen, by some as unconscionable, and others as “his job as a Public Defender to represent his client.” If Seaton were a District Attorney, and he called a criminal defendant a “Scum bag” I am sure some “Liberal” website would call him a “Right Wing Fascist,” or some other sort of name. Rather than name call, a better approach would be to question his qualifications or experience, or lack thereof, regarding the full spectrum of legal issues one would face as a Judge. Seaton, as I see him, is just another attorney that really could not make it if he had to handle any other type of legal issues (Business, Family law, Torts, Civil Litigation) or actually running a law office and produce a service that one would pay for and needs to fall back on a guaranteed paycheck courtesy of the taxpayer.
    I know you will not post this, you probably think I am some criminal lover or a supporter of Mr Seaton. I am not. I just get tired of seeing one dimensional Judges populating the bench in small rural counties, be they ex-D.A’s, Public Defenders or the sitting Governor’s cronies or hacks.

    Blogger’s Note: Mark – you have a choice, a seriously flawed Defense Attorney versus a Deputy D.A. I think it is an easy one – even considering the issues you raised.

  2. I could see the publisher of the Ledger backing Seaton, but not the editor, although it could be that the real editor is the publisher. Lots of us are trying to figure that one out.

    Mark is probably right that Seaton would not make the grade in other settings and probably his limitations will become more obvious to more people in the upcoming forums.

Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.