Grass Root movement to RECALL HAYASHI Santa Clara County Superior Court Judge Roberta Hayashi’s Abuse

Roberta Hayashi

San Jose, September 11, 2019

   Roberta Hayashi currently presides as a Judge in Department 65 at the California Superior Court, County of Santa Clara, San Jose, California.

Hayashi’s judicial misconduct, factual account of some listed below, is now before the California Commission on Judicial Performance.

Abusive Predisposition

   Hayashi abuses and black-lists self-represented parents/parties and patronizes attorneys. For example, at a July 16, 2019, 9:00 a.m. hearing in case # 2009-1-FL-149682, Hayashi abused a disabled, yelling and screaming at a self-represented parent and a Court Call caller [“parent-A”], simply because the court’s polycom/phone instrument was allegedly malfunctioning and the call was too loud for Hayashi’s comfort.

   Instead of fixing the court’s own phone equipment, and despite the Court Call participant expressing helplessness, stating “I don’t know what I can do”, Hayashi continued to be abusive to, and berate the Court Call participant and refused to let the caller speak, almost to the point where the caller begged “May I be heard?”. Hayashi refused, simply for no fault of the call participant.

Patronizing Attorney Class

   Next, on patronizing attorneys at the same hearing Hayashi, instead of going to the source, for facts, Hayashi only listened to a lying and a corrupt attorney Christopher Hirz (whose last known address is 670 El Cerrito Way, Gilroy, CA 85020) despite the latter claiming no direct knowledge of, or not involved with the matter being inquired into. The self-represented “parent-A” questioned Hayashi asking “Would you like to come to the source, so that you can get accurate information, as opposed to ask an attorney who has no nexus with these things?

Christopher Hirz

   Hayashi shows a consistent pattern of treating self-represented parents with disdain while showing favoritism to attorneys. For example at the Sep. 10, 2019 hearing in the same case, despite attorney Hirz being served with paperwork, Hayashi goes out of the way and provides a courtesy copy of a reply to the attorney Hirz, while no such quid pro quo to self-represented parties, let alone deprived of opportunity to be heard by disconnecting the Court Call.

Creating False Record

   Next, Hayashi, repeatedly creates a false record. For example at the above mentioned 

hearing, Hayashi, without being a witness to the fact, and without personal or other knowledge as to the truth, states on record that the child custody and visitation issues had been determined and tried after a lengthy trial, when in reality the self-represented “parent A” was deprived of trying his case, as when the time for the “parent A” to try the “case in chief” arrived, “parent A” was refused due process, and latter’s witness and evidence were never heard.

   

   When that parent tried to appeal, misusing the vexatious litigant statute, the parent was denied his day in court at the appellate level too. A de-facto termination of parental rights without day in court. “Parent A” has not seen his three children for 11 years now, and is a subject of a restraining order, issued without due process, that prohibits “parent A” from contacting his children life-long, for no good reason.  No party, nor minor’s counsel ever requested a restraining order for the children. “Parent A” is simply being punished, retaliated upon, and blacklisted for exposing RICO acts, like the “kids for cash” extortion demand of $10,000 from “parent A” to begin child visitation.

   In addition to “kids for cash” & subsequent life-long punishment, parent A’s home/property has been occupied, rent free, by non-owner ex-wife, for over a decade with no end in sight. Talk about Vth Amendment government unlawful taking, and that too without a just compensation.

   

   Hayashi’s crimes continues to grow stronger as time progresses

Opportunity to be Heard, Only to Attorneys, Not Self-represented Party

   

   On the same case, at the Sep. 10, 2019, 9:00 a.m. hearing, Hayashi would not let the same victimized self-represented “parent A” speak at all during the hearing, but yet forces that “parent A” to be sworn, to which “parent A” complained “Although, with due respect I do want to note that we do all this [sworn oath], but people [Hayashi and attorney, including Hirz] lie all the time on record, so, what good is this?”

  

    Hayashi then reads ruling prepared for her by agents of the California Judicial Council, and permits the opposing party opportunity to be heard, but deprives the self-represented “parent A” the same opportunity, despite being a party to the case. The victimized self-represented parent complains “Could I be heard? Hayashi denies the opportunity. The parent complains “But I am party to the case, and I have a right to be heard, in my own party right. So you are not interested in hearing accurate facts and proper law”.

   

   When Hayashi continues to deny the opportunity to be heard, the parent reluctantly and involuntarily gives-up stating “So just to clarify a party to the case is not allowed to talk?”

   

   Hayashi responds “you cannot talk while I am talking or the hearing will be terminated”

   

   The victimize parent pleads “When can I talk?”

   

   Hayashi says “First of all you may not talk. Second I am going to hear from the moving party and the responding party”

   

   Even though the victimized parent is the responding party, Hayashi only permits the attorney Hirz, the other responding party an opportunity to be heard.

Disconnects Court Call Phone Connection to Deprive Opportunity to Be Heard

   

   When the self-represented victimized “parent A” starts talking at the end, Hayashi pulls the plug on, disconnects the Court Call hearing, and the parent’s argument is abruptly terminated

   

   The victimized self-represented party is left and heard saying “Hello? Hello? Hello?” after the line is disconnected

   

   “Parent A”’s written complaint,  https://drive.google.com/open?id=186xmgMhzS7TUmLmcECF1Qmtz2EokxEIe on being rudely and abruptly disconnected while in the middle of his statement are left unanswered by Hayashi, supporting Hayashi’s guilt, and maliciously motivated act.

   A grass root movement to recall Hayashi is now underway.

   Just last year, in 2018, Santa Clara County voters recalled a similar corrupt, and now ex-Judge Aaron Persky who made politically motivated rulings, and on pre-disposed prejudices. Recently, on Sep. 11, 2019, Persky was even fired from being a tennis coach at a local Palo Alto girl’s school. https://www.washingtonpost.com/sports/2019/09/11/recalled-judge-brock-turner-sexual-assault-trial-hired-girls-jv-tennis-coach/?noredirect=on.

   

   Hayashi seems to be doing the same things Persky did, and is well on her way to the same ash heap of corrupt judges. It is these very acts that lead Persky to be left without a job, or a place to turn to, being shunned and isolated by the society.

  

    Public have repeatedly complained of Hayashi’s corrupt practices, see for e.g. “Payments recorded in leaked documents put Judges Stuart Scott, James Towery, Judge Roberta Hayashi, and  Joshua Weinstein at the center of the corruption” https://www.janeandjohnqpublic.com/blog

   See also 100% negative rating by 12+ posted reviews,   http://www.therobingroom.com/california/Judge.aspx?id=22509

   

   Honesty, fair play, search for truth, unbiased application of enacted law, are among the “must have” qualities of a American Judge when they make binding, life-altering decisions on U.S. citizen’s life, liberty and pursuit of happiness.

Complaints against the California and the Santa Clara County judges, supervised by the corrupt California Judicial Council, have sky-rocketed.

   Please direct your comments to drainjudicialswamp@gmail.com