2021-10-29 00:00:00 - Joint Committee on the Judiciary
2021-10-29 00:00:00 - Joint Committee on the Judiciary
SHOW NON-ESSENTIAL DIALOGUE
Mhm.
Well, good morning everyone. Senator Jamie Eldridge, the Senate Chair of the Joint Committee on Judiciary. So thanks everyone for being here, including of course the members of the Joint Committee on Judiciary. I uh today we're hearing legislative proposals pertaining to court administration. I don't think I see any Senate members of the Judiciary Committee. There are some senators here to testify. I'm pleased to be joined by Representative Michael Day, co chair on the House side. And I would ask Chair day if he wants to introduce his House colleagues. Thanks very much. Mr.47 Chairman, happy to be here today, joined as always by our Vice chair Tyler and Representative Brandy Fluker Oakley. We've also got general counsel Diana Williams and research director Jackie Manning here with us from the staff. We will have other members joining l note for the public that the House is expected to be gambled informal session at noon today for continued votes on the opera bill. So members will be coming and going. Don't take uh any umbrage to that. That's a legislative function. So with that back to you, Chairman. Great, thank you so much. Chair Day before we begin, just want to remind participants and viewers of the ground rules for the committee. Um to make sure everyone has a chance to speak, we ask that each person testifying, limit the remarks to three minutes. Um individuals may only speak once per hearing, but obviously may address more than one bill during their testimony and as is custom in the Legislature we will be taking elected officials out of turn uh for those uh they don't have the chance to testify today during the hearing, written testimony may be submitted after the hearing for consideration and take until the committee takes action on the bill. Uh Such testimony may send by mail to the judiciary committee able to research director Jackie manning at Jacqueline dot oh dot manning at um a house dot gov. looks like we have about 17 individuals sign up to speak today and we do take elected officials out of turn. And so we're going to turn to that.
SHOW NON-ESSENTIAL DIALOGUE
And the first person I would like to ask to testify is Senator Mike barrett. Senator Barrett,
[SEN BARRETT:] [SB911] thank you very much. Mr chair and my best to the House Chair and members of the committee and gratitude for taking me out of turn because I know you have many distinguished guests uh and witnesses to hear from today When I was growing up in the 1960s, one of the Great Constitutional accomplishments of the famous war in court was the creation of a right to counsel regardless of incomes or means of payment. I remember Gideon V wainwright, and it's becoming a matter of constitutional law. Unfortunately, in massachusetts. And unfathomably we've burdened The constitutional right to counsel regardless of income for years. We've levied $150 fee on the right to counsel. And we've collected it. In fact, we've gone further212 than that. Judges have levied fines215 for not paying the fine, such that the total amounts owed by people with no money have tended to accrue now in the Criminal Justice Reform act of several years ago, we eliminated the right of the state to levy a fine for not paying a fine if you're poor, but we've still got on the books the necessity of paying $150 ft Even if you're poor.
This is a one page bill I'm talking about S911 and S 911 Over a course of years scales down that $150 fee assessed on your constitutional right to counsel To $100 in year one of the bill's effectiveness, $50 a year to Basically going down266 to zero and finally rendering us constitutional In year three. this is a simple bill. It's unencumbered by secondary issues. It goes to the heart of criminal justice and the availability of it to people regardless of income in Massachusetts. And I hope284 that I know judiciary is very busy and has many competing priorities. But this simple one, this elegant simple solution to make the right294 of council truly a constitutional right is one that I hope the committee can take to heart. Thank you very much. Mr Chair.
[SEN ELDRIDGE:] Great, thank you so much. Senator Barrett and appreciate your filing this legislation. I would note that I believe you you did a report when you serve as the Senate313 chair of the post audit oversight committee on these kind of fees. Is that correct?
[BARRETT:] We did, It was, we, we undertook to find out whether whether fine time as it's called nationwide uh is really a problem here. We had read about it being a problem in certain red states, in certain conservative places where people accrue enormous penalties and assessments owed to the court system and long after they paid their debt to society served whatever term they were assessed for for the original crime, they remain burdened financially an extraordinary thing. We didn't think we would find it in massachusetts and that court officials and others assured us that we would not sadly they were mistaken. Our worst fears were realized. Individual judges are sovereign in their courtrooms and individual judges were taking it upon themselves to assess fines and then to impose fines from the inability to pay fines.
And we documented in Essex county myriad cases where this was taking place and had taken place in recent years. So, this is a real problem. It is an outrage. It's something that, to the credit of the SJC. Uh the SJC has recognized after we issued that report, I want you to know that at currently the judge judges uh have the right to waive the fee. We took a look at a sample of 53 cases where The fee for representation of counsel was assessed. It was waived in402 only seven of 53 instances. So this is not a case where even the Supreme Court can hope to impose its preference on individual District Court and Superior Court Judges. The SJC does not have that authority and individual judges are capable of indulging their instincts in this respect. And occasionally those instincts lead to great unfairness. So we really do need a statutory change and and we have documented just the real life consequences of the statute currently being written and what I believe is an unconstitutional manner.
SHOW NON-ESSENTIAL DIALOGUE
Great well, thanks again Senator Barrett, are there any questions from the committee members? I do not see any. So thanks again for your testimony. Thank you and thanks again for taking me out of turn. Mhm. Mr Chair no question just wanted to recognize represented Hendricks and representative whips who has joined us as well from members of the judiciary committee. Oh great, thank you. Chair460 day. Welcome to the representatives. The next person we have signed up is Representative Antonio Cabral represents. Cabral
can you hear?
Mhm
perhaps have Cabral
Okay maybe I'll come in a little later. Representative Lindsay481 Sabadosa
represent Lindsay Sabadosa
Okay,
representative paul Tucker Representative paul Tucker
The next person and I see her Representative Liz Miranda represent Miranda
[REP MIRANDA:] [HB1796] Finally, good morning everybody, thank you for taking me out of tone and specifically thank you to Chairman Eldridge yourself and Chairman Day and the rest of the committee for holding space and provide this opportunity for me to provide some testimony for518 those of you don't know me, I'm Liz Miranda and I serve the mighty fit Suffolk district in boston which includes neighborhoods of Roxbury and Dorchester. I represent one of the most over policed incarcerated districts in the entire commonwealth. But racial disparities are embedded across all aspects of our criminal legal system and in my district and across the commonwealth. From entry to re entry, an equitable legal542 representation is a racial justice issue. And investing in private bar Associates advocates is a significant tool to ensure that people from the most over police and over incarcerated communities like mine have strong legal representation.
This is why today I'm speaking in559 support of legislation. I filed H 1796 and act relative to reasonable compensation for equitable representation with this bill. We will work to increase the wage within private counsel division of assigned counsel over the course of three years homicide case rates 110 an hour uh in july 2021 to 1 30 an hour By the time it gets to july 2023 Superior Court Non homicide cases included sexually dangerous person cases right now of $80 an hour. In july 2021 to 75 an hour and 2023 District Court and Children in need of services cases rates will also increase Children and family law cases, mental health cases. As you know,605 We are not only been dealing with the COVID-19 global pandemic but also racial reckoning in this country. Um, that I think we haven't seen in the last 50 years. That's incredibly important to note that impacts every sector,619 including the legal system. These modest compensation rates will be evaluated on a recurring basis of public hearings held by the committee at appropriate sites throughout the state.
This periodic evaluation must occur at least once every 23 years every three634 years. Private bar advocates are taking on more cases they can manage In cases are not being closed as a result of the COVID-19 pandemic. But we have also seen a significant decrease in the amount of attorneys who are willing to take on this work, which is a problem. We've seen a mass exodus and there simply aren't enough lawyers to represent those from the most impacted communities right now. There are even 50 to 70 people who are not currently adequately represented in Hampden county, which I do not represent. But I just wanted to highlight, I thank you all for your time today. I wanted to be quick because you know, taking out of term and I want to thank Chairman Day especially for his steadfast leadership on this issue and everything he's done in partnership with CPCS to ensure that we have equitable compensation and representation. And I want thank you both and thank the committee. SHOW NON-ESSENTIAL DIALOGUE
Great, thank you so much for your Miranda appreciate that. Thanks for those kind words appreciate your testimony. And are there any questions from the committee members?
I do not see any. So thank you so much. Thank you. Uh next elected officials we have signed up to testify are represent to me705 Gouveia and Middlesex County District Attorney Marian Ryan
Hey here
perhaps the Gouveia or D. A Ryan
Okay. Um let's see721 I saw her there she is. Uh we're honored to have Chief Justice Kimberly bud along with Trial Court Administrator john Bellow and Judiciary Branch Ceo Stephen Duncan and Chief Justice thank you so much for joining us. Great to see you. Would you like to testify,
grabbing some troubles with the audio madam? Chief Justice.
Mhm. Can you hear his chief justice? Can you hear me? Okay,
[HON. KIMBERLY BUDD (CHIEF JUSTICE762 SJC):] [HB1520] great thank you. Good morning and thank you Chair Eldridge and Chair Day and the members of the judiciary Committee for hearing testimony today.772 On House Bill 15 20 an act to improve and modernize the information technology systems780 and capacities of the judiciary. And thank you Chair Day and Representative Harrington for sponsoring this bill which is so important to our court system and to accessing justice in this commonwealth detailed testimony on this bill will be provided by a796 court administrator john Bell and the courts. Chief Information Officer Stephen Duncan, I simply want to convey the strong support of the justices of the Supreme Judicial Court and all court leaders for805 this legislation. The improvement it would allow will change how the judges and courts do their work for years to come. As you must know this past year and a half has demonstrated the critical importance of equipping the courts with up to date information technology systems.
Our experience during the pandemic showed that if court services were to be maintained, there was no option other than to embrace technology to deliver833 those services. And our experience also showed that some of the changes made in response to the pandemic represent improvements that should continue even when the pandemic is behind us. To maintain these advancements in the delivery of court services, access to courts in both civil and criminal cases will require a major investment in our systems security and infrastructure. House Bill 1520 will transform and modernize our courts and improve the experience for all who use and work in them on behalf of the justices of the Supreme Judicial Court and all court leaders, I urged the legislature to act quickly on this bill to allow the courts to capitalize on the momentum developed during the pandemic. Thank you so much.
[ELDRIDGE:] Thank you so much. Chief Justice But and what I personally think Chair Day and rep Harrington for888 filing this bill and I would just say as someone that shares a number of commissions both with Chair Day and some other commissions out of the police reform law is that I think there's a real recognition there's some real irregularities and gaps in terms of data collection data collection in our court and judicial system. Um so thank you so much for being here and for your testimony, advocate for this bill and just wondering if there are any committee members that wanted have any questions or any comments. SHOW NON-ESSENTIAL DIALOGUE
Okay thank you so much. Chief Justice Budd, great to see you
and try administrator just sorry to interrupt once more I just want to recognize represent Livingstone has joined us as well so house members are joining up as expected. Good to see you madam Chief Justice thank you Chair Day welcome represented Livingstone Um so yeah administrator Biele would you like to testify now?
[JOHN BELLO (MA TRIAL COURT ADMINISTRATOR):] Absolutely thank you Chief Justice Body and thank you Chair Eldridge958 and Chair Day and members of the committee Thank you for the opportunity to appear before you962 to testify in support of House Bill 15-0. The judiciary's IT bond Bill here with me today is our new Chief Information Officer steve Duncan who has certainly hit the ground running. He joins us from Harvard University and brings to the job the wealth of knowledge in digital transformation steve will get into more specifics regarding his approach to preparing for the I. T. Bond bill. Chief Justice Carey could not be here because of a prior out of state speaking engagement but she's here with us in spirit to support in support of this bill and send her thanks as well this bill is a major priority for us and just says but indicated I would like to share thank you chair day and representative representative joe Harrington for your support on this bill and for agreeing to sponsor it and re file the bill this session when we were in the planning stages of these we look not just at the I.1028 T. Needs of the court system but we asked ourselves what do course users need to access justice before coming to court court users need the ability to file forms, pay filing fees, find information and access guidance on the core processes from their home. For many core users1049 coming to the court means taking a day off from work or paying for child care, not being able to miss work or get childcare could mean a default judgment or even a default warrant.
What if a court user1066 does not have access to the technology to put to participate in a virtual hearing, they need a viable alternative that will permit them to have their virtual hearing and not have to be in court all day. When a courthouse visit is necessary for users need to know where they're going once inside a courthouse they need to know they're safe in a secure building and that the confidential information they have provided in their case is secure. If litigants or witnesses speak a language other than english, they need to know their language at niece will be made so they so they can fully participate in the court process. Once someone has had their court hearing whether virtual or imports on. We also know that the need the need to access information as soon as they need to1123 access information as soon as it is available we see the courts I. T. Infrastructure and this bill as an access to justice issue and I look forward to working with you on this important and critical initiative. Thank you for the opportunity to present to you today. I would like to acknowledge that there are other bills related to the judiciary to be heard today but in the interest of time we have submitted with written testimony, I will now hand this over towards C I. O steve Duncan unless there any questions. Thank you. SHOW NON-ESSENTIAL DIALOGUE
Just Yeah sure fella your doctor testified.
Mhm. Mhm
And I'm sorry there is a question from rep Livingstone Absolutely. So
[REP LIVINGSTONE:] yes, thank you. Um thanks for the testimony I think um for those reasons you1185 stated this definitely needed. I appreciate uh Day and represented1190 Harrington for filing it.
SHOW NON-ESSENTIAL DIALOGUE
Yeah, I don't know.
Okay,
absolute Livingstone You're a little unclear that if you could repeat that.
[LIVINGSTONE:] Yeah, as uh also practice uh in the courts of massachusetts in federal courts and there's a huge difference between the filing systems between those two systems. Um when do you think if we pass this? The um Supreme Court SJC and the Court of Appeals would be able to have1224 a new new filing system electronic filing system hopefully comparable to what existing.
[BELLO:] So I think the question has to do with us matching the filing system of the federal court system. So right now steve and you feel free to add, we have the filing in a six of the seven court departments and um as we continue to get funding we continue to increase on case types1255 that are added to it. So our goal is to have all case types to be able to be filed electronically. Um However as you indicated as soon as we could get our hands on funding, I think that we could uh easily as um um you know make More case types available so that we are more in line with the federal system and
[STEVEN DUNCAN] we just kicked off a project to really look at digitization of all our case types and to examine the business processes and and to map those out to really go to a true digital case flow.
[LIVINGSTONE:] Mhm. Do you think at the end you're going to continue to have the e file system or you also looking at at new filing systems like the ecf system that some states and the federal government.
[BELLO:] So as part of the process, we are going to be looking at the technology as well as the business process. So um we're not ruling out anything at this moment. We're open to acquiring the best technology for the judiciary.
[LIVINGSTONE:] So. Well thanks for what you're doing and and hopefully we can give you more aid to do more.
SHOW NON-ESSENTIAL DIALOGUE
Thank you. Thank you. Great, thank you represent Livingstone And I see a question from rep said Harrington
Mhm. I represent Harrington Can you can you hear me
[REP HARRINGTON:] a muted but okay. Sorry about that. I didn't realize I was still muted. Um Thank you for coming in today. Um Mr bello Judge Casey. Uh we appreciate that you're here to testify. I unfortunately at an event in one of my communities towns and I missed the first half of this. So I just have a question because the question just came up about the electronic filing. Um What one question I have is that the electronic filing, especially in the probate court um has certain weird restrictions for1385 instance, um if a couple isn't married you can't file anything electronically. Um If it's a matter of a contempt you can't file electronically. And the concern I have about that. Well first of all with the unmarried couples, it sort of seems to add a layer of1403 burden on those cases to getting you know, efficient quick filings.
And and also I don't think anything raises that concern more than a contempt because usually somebody has done something against court orders when there's a contempt. So I appreciate the efforts in in having the electronic filing but are they going to be more streamlined moving forward so that they don't um sort of uh prejudice or whatever certain types of cases and perhaps and I understand the possibility that the decision was made on the unmarried couples because there's obviously protections within the docking for Children of unmarried parents but I just want to just say I don't think it helps them, I think it hurts them that the filings cannot go in that way.
[BELLO:] Uh That's a great question. Um And thank you for that. I think that we are looking at streamlining uh the efiling uh oh case types and uh options relating to a specific case. Uh So we're going to be working very comprehensively with each one of the court departments to make sure that we captured the whole picture, not just a part of it, I think that what you're seeing is the product of a very slow roll out of the filing but with the additional funding I think that we're going to get where I thank you uh asking us to be. So we are looking at that very comprehensively.
SHOW NON-ESSENTIAL DIALOGUE
Okay great thank you. Thank you.
Thank you represent Harrington1509 any other questions from committee members. Mhm. Um Mr Duncan, would you like to speak sure you, can you hear me glass? I've lost my connection here. Uh We can see you and hear you. Hello,
[STEVE DUNCAN (MA SJC):] [HB1520] Good morning, Chair Day Chair Eldridge and members of the committee, I appreciate the opportunity to appear before you today in support of House Bill 15 20 honored to be the ceo of the judiciary As court administrator Biele spoke about House Bill 1520 is not an it project but a fundamental shift in the way the judiciary does its work in order to be more efficient, safer and better needs to meet the needs of the citizens of the commonwealth. This type of digital transformation requires solid management. But even more important is the organizations readiness for change. Prior to the pandemic, the vast majority of the work happened in the courthouse's in person when courthouses needed to close it, forced to every person in the judiciary to rethink how the work gets done and to be innovative and continuing to meet the needs of the community.
Our organization is now ready for a change and embracing uh you know technology as1581 a way to accomplish the work. Leadership within the judiciary also understands that this transformation requires their active engagement to1590 align decisions with strategic priorities, ensure accountability and1594 to support the change. We have implemented an active technology governance group with leaders from the three courts and have implemented the technology advisory group across the departments to provide input on project prioritization, ensure alignment across departments. This oversight will ensure the success of the digital transformation is a shared responsibility between I. T. And the business units within the I. T. Department itself.
We're maturing of project management office implementing best practices around planning and execution of initiatives. This groups played a lead role in the execution of numerous high profile projects over the last two years, including the roll out of a modern email system and uh and zoom as examples. Our director of the courts as john spoke about just a minute ago. Uh 10 plus years of1647 experience working in court1648 systems has led to organizations through the digitization process and has made significant progress on e filing already in order to make the shift in the way that we deliver services, we need to ensure the infrastructure has the capacity and resilience that can be relied on.
The Bond bill would provide the funding to build that platform and nothing that we are proposing today replies depends on undiscovered or1677 unproven technology but the implementation of1680 solid solutions and industry best practices. Most importantly, the Bond Bond funding will provide the means for the judiciary branch to better serve all court users so that we provide justice with dignity and speed. I appreciate the time to be here and and happy to answer any questions anybody might have. SHOW NON-ESSENTIAL DIALOGUE
Great thank you so much. Mr Duncan um c thanks for your testimony and thank the chair Day and raised thanks jim just very briefly, I wanted to say thanks to the courts for working so well with us on this bill to move it forward. We had hoped to get this out the last1719 term. Both Covid that got sidetracked obviously where very optimistic of moving this along. Uh thank you mr cabello Looking forward to working with Ceo steve Duncan and also kudos to Secretary would and his staff over the odds for their cooperation uh a good uh system between the legislature, the courts and the administration, all three branches working together to make sure this gets done. So thanks all for your work.
Thank you. Chair Day. Thank you Mr Duncan. Representative Harrington SHOW NON-ESSENTIAL DIALOGUE
and represent Harrington Meet again. Thank you Mr
[HARRINGTON:] Chair. I also want to echo the sentiments of my colleague Chairman Day Um and I want to say that we as as he said, we really wanted1773 this bill passed last year. It was needed the year before that really, but we were going to try to get done last year and because of covid and other things that did not happen. But I want to emphasize to that You know, we're also conscious of safety um you know, into any buildings we go into. It's kind of a new world that it was1794 20 or 30 years ago. And really1797 the courts have um long needed this type of electronic uh means to protect the people within the building. And that's something that I think in addition to all the other I. T. Elements of the bill, that's something that's really crucial with the court system, you know, especially with judges who may have disgruntled litigants in front of them and whatnot. There can be an opportunity without this, this I. T. Bill in place for a real tragedy. So I can't emphasize enough how much I support this bill and I sponsored this bill along with Chairman Day
[BELLO:] Thank1835 you and I want to thank you both for your advocacy on this bill and you're absolutely right. It is needed and it was needed uh, two years ago. Um, so we are ready and I think that we have set a great foundation to be able to execute on the deliverables of the bond bill. So I think that we have done a lot of foundational work to deal with a steve spoke about the cultural change but also having a project management principles in place in order to execute on time and on budget. So I think that if this bill passes, we're ready to go and ready to deliver in short term.
SHOW NON-ESSENTIAL DIALOGUE
Thank you. I always have to laugh about the fact that the courts were the last users of Wordperfect. You say that to people. They can't believe it. So technology is definitely needed in the court system. Thank thank you again and thanks everyone for your time today. Thank you.1899 Representative Harrington Thank you. Administrator Bello Mr Duncan, Chief Justice but testified earlier. Any other questions from committee members? Okay, thank you so much appreciate the panel
SHOW NON-ESSENTIAL DIALOGUE
the next first we have to testify as Chief Justice Casey from the probate and Family Court Department. Chief Justice Casey here. Yes.
[JOHN CASEY (MA PROBATE COURT):] [HB1927] Good1928 morning. Uh Chairman Day and Chair Eldridge1931 and other committee members. My name is john Casey and I'm the chief justice of the massachusetts Probate and family Court department. Thank you for1939 providing me this opportunity to testify in support of the amended or substituted hB 1927. Although I do also greatly support the1949 I. T. Bill that you have just heard testimony about. So in reference to this bill. If passed, this legislation will be a major step and addressing the needs of my department. Thousands of your constituents each year find themselves in our court for various reasons but all involving their spouses, their Children, grandchildren and other family members. They deserve better service than we have been able to afford them. As Chief Justice, Ralph Durant said in his state of the Judiciary Remarks in October 2017, the probate and Family Court is in crisis.
We need to reimagine how we do justice in our appropriate family court. This was also echoed in the 2017. Access to Justice Commission Report. The family law section also wrote that the probate and family court was in crisis Since becoming Chief Justice in July of 2018. My mission has been to make significant changes in the way we operate2006 With the support of the legislature. We hired additional Sessions clerks and law clerks. We applied for and received the state justice initiative grant administered through the National Center for State Courts to implement a case management process. We call pathways in this initiative. We proactively meet with lawyers and litigants early on in the process. An attempt to resolve these cases early before excessive fees and emotional harm results.
We were in crisis before the pandemic struck and that only magnified the weaknesses in our operations. We have been a court in crisis during a crisis. We have historically been operating without sufficient staffing, including not having enough judges. We have tremendous registers, judges and staff who worked diligently and creatively to service our communities. But they are at the breaking point. We have been the focus of numerous articles and lawyers. Weekly. I'm sure many of you read commenting on the inability of our court to operate as efficiently and effectively as we should. And I would note and virtually every article, our staff are complemented for their efforts, but always comes down to not enough staffing morale is at an all time low, which brings me to this legislation. This is one of the major changes we need registers have woefully too few high level managers to provide supervision training and actual hands on work adding first assistant registers and assistant registers will help ensure that pleadings are complete and accurate.
There are many functions which they will be able to handle so that lawyers and2110 litigants can obtain relief immediately and not have to2114 wait until somebody already overworked on the lobby side tries to2118 get to these matters. We have too many filings and not enough staff to operate this bill will also more equitably distribute statutory age ACM positions. Assistant judicial case manager positions across our divisions. We run into issues with our fiscal department when we seek to fill these positions in court and counties where they're needed and we're told there are not enough statutory positions in that division and its denied. I know that register McDonough will be addressing other aspects of legislation, but I can't state strongly enough how important the passage of this bill is to provide relief to are busy registries and to help us reimagine our court. Thank you. SHOW NON-ESSENTIAL DIALOGUE
Thank you so much. Thank you so much. Chief Justice appreciate your testimony. Um coming for the committee, are there any questions from the committee members?
Uh once again senator chairman, no questions, just welcome to representative Garry has joined us as well. Remember the committee. Great, thank you. Chair day representative welcome represent Garry Um I don't see any questions from the committee members so I represent Harrington
[HARRINGTON:] thank you. I I just want to2200 say um that I I fully support uh Justice Casey just discussed um you know, just by the nature of the type of cord it's in crisis to to an extent but um the registry staff has been woefully understaffed and under managed and um if this is actually you know it's one of those things that sometimes we look at it as we're giving it to the courts, another entity of the three branches, but we're not, we're giving it to the citizens because they deserve to have that type of customer service and they can't because there isn't enough people to do the work and the covid situations has only made that much worse. So I 100% support representative whips bill that was just discussed by Judge Casey. SHOW NON-ESSENTIAL DIALOGUE
Thank you so much. Robertson Harrington Um I don't see any other questions from committee members, so thanks again. Chief Justice Casey, thank you very much. We uh using some elected officials are here to testify. They called earlier um putting representative tammy Gouveia and middlesex2271 District Attorney Marian Ryan Mhm.
[REP GOUVEIA:] [HB1624] Thank you so much. Mr Chair Eldridge and Chair Day and members of the committee for the opportunity to speak out of turn in support of H 1624 an act regarding district court jurisdiction. I am not an attorney by training. Um so I will be deferring to middlesex District Attorney Marian Ryan to fill in the details of what's really important with this particular piece of legislation and addressing some of the needs. But I do have a strong background in public health and mental health and social work and where I see a really strong partnership with the District Attorney's office around this piece of legislation is2313 that currently the ways that some of our laws are designed, they don't allow for prosecutorial flexibility.
Um That's really important with as we're starting to acknowledge more and more mental health, behavioral health and some other factors that contribute to someone perhaps calling in and making a bomb threat. There is no real credibility to them being able to carry out that bomb threat. And so wanting to be able to give some flexibility and prosecutorial decision2342 making, um we know that, you know, some folks and in some of the research that's been coming out of U penn School of Law and the Southern poverty Law Center really has been taking a look at this and seeing this as um an important opportunity to really center justice within the criminal justice system. Um so I'd like to defer the rest of my time over to District Attorney Marian Ryan who's really, truly the expert more in this than than I am and just appreciate her partnership and I appreciate the committee's attention to all the important bills there are being heard today. So thank you. SHOW NON-ESSENTIAL DIALOGUE
Thank you. Representative District Attorney Ryan
I'm sorry, just your country, Ryan are you here? Uh Mr Chair, I believe she is. So I think I got it. There we go.
[MARIAN RYAN (MIDDLESEX CO DA):] Thank you. Good morning and thank you to Representative Gouveia and thank you Chair Eldridge and Chair Day for taking us out of turn this bill is very important for the reasons that Representative Gouveia mentioned many, many of these cases are serious. They involve people who do have access to weapons, who created2416 a legitimate threat in those cases should be treated in the way that this statute is drawn in the Superior Court with the option of a very serious penalty. But there are a large number of these cases that involve either young people in schools or people suffering from a mental health issue. Right now. There is no ability for us to prosecute that case in the district court. It is conduct that should be treated and called what it is, which is a threat because the people who are threatened may not know the age of the perpetrator or their mental health background.
But2451 we should be able to fashion a disposition that adequately addresses those issues and there really is no need2459 to bring those cases to the Superior Court to do that. This bill would give the District Court jurisdiction over this offense as well in those appropriate circumstances so that we might label the conduct appropriately. But fashion and disposition that both will intervene with the person who is having difficulties as well as hold2479 people accountable for that behavior. So this is a simple tweak. I think it's a very common sense response is certainly in line with the practices of our office of using things like restorative justice, alternative sentencing behavior. Access to mental health services to appropriately treat people who are engaged in this behavior. So I'd ask for a favorable vote and I'm happy to take any questions. SHOW NON-ESSENTIAL DIALOGUE
Great, thank you so much. District Attorney Ryan Thanks again. Robertson and Gouveia and I appreciate you coming for the committee. Are there any questions from the committee members?
I do not see any. Thank you so much. Thank you. Thank you about thank you.
So I2525 called earlier um represent Cabral and represents Sabadosa but I don't see them here um represent Tucker will not be testifying. Um So we do now have a panel of registers of probate On House 1927. I'm seeing register McDonough and then uh Sakamaki rarely in Parrino
register McDonough, do you want to begin or?
[MATTHEW MCDONOUGH (PLYMOUTH CO REGISTER OF PROBATE):] Yes, thank you very much. Thank you. Chairman Day Chair Eldridge and members of the Judiciary Committee. My name is Matthew McDonough from the Register of Probate and Plymouth County and I have the honour of being the president of the registers association and a number of my colleagues have joined us today, virtually representative whips. I wanted to start by thanking you for sponsoring our legislation on behalf of the registers of probate for the commonwealth of massachusetts Express2582 our gratitude for the opportunity to be heard today on the bill relating to chapter 2 17. As you know, chapter 2 17 governs many of the essential2591 functions of the probate and family court by way of a very brief history some of the struggles that we have dealt with that chief2598 justice case he has outlined really commenced back in 2000 and six. That was the last time there was considerable change the chapter 2 17.
Our assistant and first assistant registers were renamed as our judicial case managers and AJ CMS. What had remained of these positions working for both the registry and the judicial lobby had been realigned so that they work directly with the lobby. At that time, the statute had created some relief for the registries. Deputy assistant register stipends were created administrative deputy assistant registered positions and some very limited assistant2626 register in first assistant registered positions. Most of those stipends and other positions that were created under chapter 2 17 to assist the registry were not funded in the years that followed many of those discussions unfortunately occurred during periods of very lean fiscal times. In 2012, the emu Pc, the massachusetts uniform probate code was enacted. It's a2649 complex code. It's mostly administered by registry personnel. The added functions of administering the emu Pc on those cases without funding higher level management positions left this work to be performed by limited staff who are also overseeing the bulk of our more routine clerical work.
The challenges we2667 face are significant working with limited staffing, limited management positions. Inequitable stipends and an ever increasing caseload all while taking on the additional points of contact with the public and our attorneys through virtual registry and e filing has left our staff stretched2685 thin with extremely low morale during a global pandemic chief justice Budd spoke to keeping these initiatives alive. Virtual registry and e filing in order to do that we need those managers who are trained and compensated and recognize to handle2699 those functions on behalf of the registry. This bill seeks to create assistant register and first assistant registered positions create equitable D. A. R. Stipends. The deputy assistant register stipends currently vary from one county to another. A. D. A. R. In one county can receive a $6000 stipend and in the neighboring county Can receive a statement that is valued at 15% of the registers.2721 Salary is a consider considerable monetary difference when you talk with the individual staff members that has a very poor impact upon the morale.
This bill will help to make sure that that is equitable and that we will eliminate the A. D. A. R. Functions which I spoke about before. Those functions do not allow for that employee to administer emu pc functions as a magistrate which is critical to2744 our working in the registries. These positions will enable our registries to fulfill our responsibilities to the public dr electronic initiatives such as the virtual registry and the2754 filing and other court services. E court services. And while such new technology is essential to serving many court users, especially those who are represented by counsel in the probate and family court more than are other shared divisions, the majority of our2769 litigants are self represented and they rely upon traditional methods of filing in our front counter. So in summary what we embrace the technology that is coming our way.
We also want to remind our legislators that we need to man our front counters, man our telephones and take care of those who cannot afford counsel and in the probate and family court, many of them are not appointed counsel. Adding more points of contact of the public will require qualified staff to work those functions. Our proposal has been a long collaboration with Chief Justice Casey and I want to thank him for his leadership and his collaboration as well2801 as our Deputy Court Administrator dominica senzo. We're grateful for your consideration of our joint request to make these changes. So the probate and Family court will be best equipped to handle the needs of our families who depend upon us as we move forward in the future2813 and we remain available to answer questions as well. I think some of our fellow registers had registered as witnesses as well. SHOW NON-ESSENTIAL DIALOGUE
Great, thank you so much Register.2823 McDonough appreciate your testimony and I think we'll take questions if there are any if there are any after all the registers speak Minister Perino, did you want to speak now?
[ANASTASIA WALSH PERRINO (BARNSTABLE CO REGISTER OF PROBATE):] [HB1927] Yes. Good morning. Senator Eldridge and Representative Michael Day. Thank you so much for allowing us to speak members of the judiciary committee. My name is Anastasia. Welsh2851 Perino. I am the Register of Probate uh in the Barnstable county probate and Family Court and also the vice president of the registers association was first elected register in 2008 and it continued2863 to serve in that position prior to being elected register, I was an assistant register for five years at the Barnstable Probate and Family court. And prior to my work at the court, I was a practicing attorney in the Probate and family court um primarily practicing in areas that were before the family court. I'm here to request your support of H 1927 an act relative to the efficient management operations of the registries of probate. Uh The registers have negotiated in good faith with Chief Justice john Casey and I certainly appreciate his collaboration and all he has done to work with the registers on this bill and we have come to an agreement. Um we also appreciate the work of our Deputy court administrative Dominic senzo as pointed out by register McDonough.
Um The purpose as we've indicated is the management positions in the registry. Um as Representative Harrington who has also been so supportive and I'd like to thank her and she works in the probate and Family court and knows firsthand um giving these positions to the registries is really giving these positions to the citizens of massachusetts. Um during the pandemic. Certainly families do not, problems do not stop they increase and as Chief justice case, he pointed out the probate and family court was in crisis prior to the pandemic due to staffing issues. Um but we're2951 only providing more as opposed to less. We want to continue with the virtual services that john bello spoke so eloquently about and our chief2962 justice Budd, we want to continue those services with technology and expanded access to the court for the public. So we're doing both now. We're serving the public at the public counter. We offer virtual registry so people don't have to come to court. They can talk to a staff member on the virtual registry and get answers about their case.
We have expanded e filing. We're taking pleadings by email while continuing to offer the so called old fashioned services in person and by mail. So we're giving the public as many services as we can and expanding access to the courts. So we need management positions in our offices to help3004 create and create and make business systems more efficiently. Also as register McDonough alluded to the passage of the emu pc in 2012 expanded the role of the registry offices and the work shifting the work from the judges lobby to the registry offices so that uncontested probate matters could be dealt with by the registry as opposed to having the judges take away from their busy schedule. So all of the services we would like to continue to provide providing for our constituents are public. Are lawyers and needing these managers to help us streamline business processes and make it the most efficient court possible for our public and our lawyers. Um I appreciate the opportunity to speak and I thank you so much for your consideration of these um necessary positions for the probate and family court registry offices. Thank you all
SHOW NON-ESSENTIAL DIALOGUE
great, thank you so much registered Ultrino And are there other registers here to speak? Yes. Rosemary Saccomanni. Please go ahead. High.
[ROSEMARY SACCOMANI (HAMPDEN CO REGISTER OF PROBATE):] [HB1927] Hi, good morning, Chairman Day and Chairman Eldridge, thank you for your time this morning and allowing me to speak on behalf of House Bill 1927. My name is rosemary Saccomanni and I am the register of probate for Hampton County. I was elected in 2020 during the pandemic and I'm new to this position. However, prior to my becoming the register of probate, I worked in the registry of probate office for 30 years, 18 years as a deputy assistant register, the probate and Family court handles the matter such as the state administration guardianships of incapacity, divorce, child support and abuse prevention orders. Just to name a few. The pandemic Magnified families needs to access the family court, especially concerning lost wages as it relates to child support and settling of the estates from the death of loved ones. This is evidenced by over 250,000 documentaries alone in Hampton County.
These are the very issues that impact the residents of this commonwealth, I'm here today to ask for your support of this bill. This bill will afford the necessary management positions in order to meet the demands of the probate court. In addition, the bill3155 would create regional equity and fair compensation to the deputy assistant registers who process the cases and with expertise and knowledge needed to move these cases to conclusion in an efficient and timely manner. The bill will create parody throughout the commonwealth which is long overdue. With your support and passing this bill, you will be3177 ensuring that your goal in passing3179 the equal pay law in 2018 will be adhered to and that the needs of the families we are sworn to serve will be met. I thank you for your time3188 today and again ask for your support of this bill. SHOW NON-ESSENTIAL DIALOGUE
Thank you so much. Mr Saccomanni appreciate your testimony um and you're rarely. Yes. Good morning.
[COLLEEN BRIERLEY (NORFOLK CO REGISTER OF PROBATE] [HB1927] Hello, good morning. Mr Chair and respected members of the judiciary committee and. Good morning. Chief Casey. Um and I thank you for your support of House Bill 1927 by state rep, john Rogers sends his best regards. Chair Chairman. Um thank you very much for this opportunity to testify in support of House Bill 1927 and act relative to the efficient operation and management of the registries. I come here before you as a new register. However, I bring over 30 years of experience as a DSS back then. DSS social worker, a mental health worker, a sister of a brother who suffered from opioid addiction and had a custody case here in Norfolk Um and then as a CPCS. Attorney G. A. L. Court investigator.
Um as an attorney to uh with the law office of private clients as well. And when I tell you people need the probate court um you know, I can't emphasize that enough. Everybody at one point will be in the probate court. When people come to the court, they need help, they need desperate help. We see all kinds of people. We have spoken about the front counter and the great the great tool that Chief Casey has provided us with the virtual registry. Um we're here to help people, people approach us, their suffering from mental illness. Um There often going through a divorce, they either want the divorce, they don't want the divorce, this guardianship of incapacitated person. There's a wide variety. I won't go through it all of subject matter jurisdiction that we have here in the probate court. These are highly complicated, complex legal matters.
We've talked about the emu pc, we talked about probative, informal formal um President of the state's. I am, I can't support this bill and often I would ask for your support of it because this bill is for the people um when somebody is in crisis, they need clear straight direct guidance towards solutions. The probate court should not be causing somebody to have more anxiety when they come seeking help3339 from us and House bill 1927 directly addresses this problem. Um These positions would um provide a managerial aspect, people with the higher skill set, people with some knowledge of the law that can directly help the people. And again, I would ask for your support and thank you very much for your time. SHOW NON-ESSENTIAL DIALOGUE
Thank you so much registered. Really appreciate your testimony. Um and you see a question from Representative Harrington
[REP HARRINGTON:] thank you. Before I ask my question, I just wanted to say um I'm fully in support as as register Wells Perino said I have supported this and I tried to get this in through the budget last year, but I3387 think this is a better forum anyway to get it accepted. But you know, I just want to bring up a couple of things, you know, one of the big things3396 that references the inequity from from county to county and maybe that's starting from county had their own management as far as, you know, county positions and such, but it really isn't fair to have certain people getting more than others doing the same job in the commonwealth of massachusetts. So that's something I think that needs to be fixed. The other thing that you've touched upon, but I don't think people are aware of how much this takes place, but you literally free up the judges if you're able to do your job properly, you free up the judges where that's a whole other issue as we've heard short staffing and such.
So but you also were there for the entire covid um period. So while everybody else was at home and engaging in virtual um use of the registry, you had to be there3446 to do the work. So I thank you for that. The question that I have is with regard to moving forward. Um So you know we've sort of I don't want to say perfected but it seems like the electronic system has supplemented in a way that has a lot of positive results, especially for pro se litigants as far as their ability to talk to someone in a virtual registry is there on your part is their belief that that should continue on after. I know it's not directly related to this but I just wanted to get your opinions on that as far as from the registry side. Do you think that's something that should continue? And do you have the staff to do it?
[PERRINO:] I can address that rep Harrington Oh thanks. I don't know if I'm speaking out of turn Senator Eldridge, please let me know. I'm so sorry please go ahead, yep rep Harrington Thank you for your support of this bill. You've been um and representative whipps, you've been um3510 supporting of us from the very beginning trying to get this through initially and and we've collaborated with Chief Justice Casey so as indicated, thank him and appreciate all his support with this. Um I speak for myself with respect to Barnstable but I believe the other registers can weigh in, I intend to continue the virtual registry and the virtual services that we've been offering throughout the pandemic. Um As as you indicated chief and some of the other registers. Chief justice casey office is helpful in providing us the technology to be able to do these virtual registries I think for some counties um the issuing is staffing because as indicated the the old3553 fashioned, so to speak services are still being provided. So we have this whole new additional level of service to provide access to the courts for people who may not be able to get to the courts, they may have a3565 childcare issue. Um They may be of you know long distance in another state. So the intent I believe I speak for myself but I believe my colleagues will weigh in to provide and increase as much as we can these virtual services for the public because it continues our theme of providing access and dignity with speed and justice for their our constituents the public.
[HARRINGTON:] And do you feel that if you have these um strongly um skilled registered positions, Assistant register and deputy registry type positions, do you feel that will be if everyone had the, you know the proper amount with that enable most counties to do, what do you believe?
[PERRINO:] I personally do reap Harrington um as indicated in in um registered McDonogh's remarks back in 2006 um times were different. There was a complete management shift um which initially positions that were management positions in the registers office shifted to management positions in the judges lobby. And that's not to say the3636 judges didn't need help. They certainly do. There are no juries, as many people know in probate and family court judges have to hear everything. Um So As has indicated our workload has increased, not just because of the pandemic, but in 2012 the Massachusetts uniform probate code and the Massachusetts Uniform Trust code was passed. So that legislation has shifted work from the judges lobby for uncontested matters to the the probate registry offices. So the idea with these management positions would be that some of these high level managers would be able to help us sign off on these uncontested matters expeditiously um to get the lawyers in the public whatever their matter maybe through the court quickly. But we can't do that without management positions because an entry level staff member cannot um does not have the time to be able to be um taking care of these uncontested probate eight matters. Right With other things.
SHOW NON-ESSENTIAL DIALOGUE
Okay great. Thank you. Okay my colleagues. See you back Mr Mcdonald. Did you want to comment?
[MCDONOUGH:] Thank you mr Chairman. Um anesthesia said it so eloquently I just wanted to add in the fact that training is also required. Um It does take time to on board people not only to handle our basic functions of understanding mass courts which is a system that wasn't created specifically for probate and family that, but we have adapted to it working our front counters working our phones but also learning how to use e filing on our side of the system. I know our attorneys are familiar with it from their side of the system and how they see the ideal of the federal system and some other neighbouring states is something we should aspire to. We also have to recognize that our staff has to train with it on our side um in addition to monitoring those who are going to be working with people virtually to make sure that they're providing the correct information, I think that is crucially important to make sure that you just don't just have somebody come into the registry who can just follow somebody at the front counter, have somebody right next to them at the front counter to bounce a question off of once they are engaging in virtual registry, they may not have that safety net as close to them physically. So we want to make sure that the training component is there as well for all of these staff were going to help us run virtual and e filing and E courts in the future. Thank you.
SHOW NON-ESSENTIAL DIALOGUE
Thank you. Great, thank you Mr McDonough,3780 thanks for the question of some Harrington and thanks to3783 the whole3784 panel, are there any more questions from committee members. Okay, thank you again to the registers. Thank you to Chief Justice. Carey and
[ELDRIDGE:] we're now going to move on to the next bill That has a panel house 1796 filed by represent Miranda an act relative to reasonable compensation for equitable representation.
SHOW NON-ESSENTIAL DIALOGUE
And we have a panel uh from the Mass Association of Criminal Defense lawyers including victoria Kelleher and john Mobley.
They here
victoria Kelleher and john a Mobley. My apologies if I'm mispronouncing that.3839
Okay. Um3840 also have another person3842 in support Anthony Benedetti. Chief counsel. CPCS.
[ANTHONY BENEDETTI (CPCS):] [HB1796] Hi good morning. Can you can't tell if I'm on screen? I am yes. Yes. Morning. Good morning. Chairman Eldridge and Chairman Day and members of the judiciary Committee. My name is Anthony Benedetti and I'm the Chief Counsel for the Committee for Public counsel services. The state agency responsible for for providing legal services to the poor.3870 And I'm here to testify on House bill 17 96 which is legislation that would increase compensation paid To the 2800 private attorneys who represent our clients and I really appreciate the opportunity to speak to this committee today. I want to first thank Representative Liz Miranda for filing this legislation and for her continued support of our agency in our mission. And I want to thank this committee and the entire legislature for raising the hourly rates for our private attorneys last year. This was a welcome first step in ensuring that the many attorneys who take our cases are fairly compensated.
Additionally, a recent change in the law allowed for a discretionary extension of the annual hourly billing cap to 2000 hours. Both of these have definitely helped. But there is still work that we need to do with an aging bar. A shortage of attorneys in a massive backlog of cases caused by the ongoing pandemic. We are facing a critical moment in the history of indigent events in massachusetts. Private attorneys who contract with CPCS are paid hourly rates. They handle 80% of our cases every year. We're losing advocates due to retirements, attorneys changing their3942 practice and quite a few simply stopping because they can no longer afford to take the cases. This issue has been exacerbated over the last two years with the covid pandemic. We are seeing knowledge and expertise walk out the door and while we have success recruiting full time staff attorneys, it is so much more difficult to fully3960 replace bar advocates who leave much of this has to do with the crippling debt incurred by law students with new law grads facing massive school loan debt.
It is difficult to entice them to join our panel and take cases. Quite simply, the economic model does not work for them. We have asked the biden3977 administration to extend public service loan forgiveness to bar advocates but are unsure if that is going to happen nowhere is this overall reduction in the number of attorneys who are willing and able to take cases than in parts of the state that are currently struggling with an attorney shortage. We've had numerous clients show up to court only to have to wait to be assigned an attorney. In some instances, individuals have been held on bail for days waiting for an attorney. Children have been removed from Holmes as part of a care and protection proceeding only to have all the parties4009 in the case have to wait for attorneys to take the case. Most of our staff are at maximum caseloads as as much of the private bar and in certain parts of the state.
In certain practice areas, the private bar is unable to find enough lawyers to cover court duty days. This has been an ongoing issue in Karen4029 protections in criminal cases in western mass, Springfield in particular. And we are currently engaged in litigation in Hampton County, but we're also seeing significant changes elsewhere. Even in Suffolk County where we have a hub of law schools, it's never seen an attorney shortage in Suffolk County, like the one we are currently facing CPcs proposed a three stage rate structure after hearing testimony from numerous private attorneys across the state who explained the many4057 different reasons. The previous rates needed to be increased. We also examined inflation. We reviewed the rates paid to attorneys who practice in federal court and we looked at rates that are paid by other programs and other states. The goal of4071 this proposal and this legislation is to incentivize attorneys who already participate in the program to take more cases and to encourage new attorneys to sign up, we need to be able to recruit new attorneys to become the next generation of lawyers over responsible for maintaining the integrity of the legal system here for the poor and the commonwealth with our attorneys aging and many beginning to get ready to retire.
The success of our recruitment effort is essential. As rep Miranda said it is also an issue of racial justice and it's critical for us to have a talented, committed, experienced panel of attorneys representing our clients who are disproportionately black and brown. Our inability to entice new attorneys to join our panels not only affects the overall experience level, but also our ability to have a diverse panel as our fund is you have time and time again help CPCS and our extension by extension our clients, I want you to know how much, I appreciate that in. And everyone at CPCS appreciates that we believe our proposal is a forward looking one that will maintain and strengthen the public defense system in massachusetts for years to come. And it is a system that is a model throughout this country and one which we should all be proud of. Thank you again for the opportunity to testify and I'm happy to answer any questions and provide any additional information. You have SHOW NON-ESSENTIAL DIALOGUE
great, thank you so much. Mr Benedetti appreciate the kind words as well. Um, any questions from the committee members? SHOW NON-ESSENTIAL DIALOGUE
Okay, thank you very much. Thank you, yep. Um, and I do see victoria Kelleher is here to4175 testify in the bill.
[VICTORIA KELLEHER:] Yes. Good morning. Thank you all very much for the opportunity to speak before you this morning. I want to, first of all, thank everyone who's uh efforts made a difference in the lives of our advocates and our clients last july on the vote. Specifically Representatives nickel. It's Day Miranda and senators. Rodrigues Boncore and Eldridge Uh, your, your work on this bill last year in july made4203 a big difference in the lives of our advocates who fight for the constitutional rights of the vast majority of indigent defendants in this case as well as our clients among the lowest paid in the country after years with no rate increases. Uh, our advocates are still hurting even after the increase. Uh, I have been contacted by new Hampshire specifically, I will say Um, asking if our advocates would be willing to do work there4230 and I can tell you that they are making $100 an hour on their felony appointments.
Um, so it's, we're still, we're still have a long way to go as much as we4241 do appreciate all that was done for us. As I say in july Um, murder panel of lawyers as I'm4248 sure everyone knows uh, received their first increase since 2005 Almost more than 20 years ago When they received a $10 rate increase this year. A lot of the murder panel lawyers are also on the federal list. So they have the opportunity to make more money on the federal list. They4267 also have a very thriving private practice. But these are people that really, really love what they do. They love this work. They love their clients. They want to be here for indigent clients, but it's extremely hard for them to continue doing this work. And that's true. Also for people in the other panels, I can tell you, I'm in touch with lawyers every single day who really care about their clients and their work, but they're really unable to continue to make ends meet with their obligations, both for their practices, their health insurance and their family obligations.
Um, and sorry, I just got distracted. Um, and so and so people are going unrepresented. We have every day we have people are looking for lawyers to fill positions within the list on duty days in the district court's asking you know, how, how can we get people over there to represent the clients that need it the most we know that the people that are getting hurt by all of this are not just the lawyers, but also our clients. And um, as we all know too, that our clients in the criminal system are vastly overrepresented by people of color. So, and I know that people care very much about issues of criminal justice about racial justice. And I would ask that these all be considerations as you think about increases for bar advocates at this time. I have actually looked at that. I went into the a lot of the local law schools looking at the numbers because we also see completely underrepresented people of color who are lawyers.
And you know, I I so I looked at the at the law school rates of graduation and I was astonished. There are there are a very large percentage of people of color are graduating from our area law schools, but they are not represented among the indigent defense bar. And I'm certain that it's not because they don't care about this work. They don't care about indigent clients. People just cannot afford to do this kind of work, especially when they made themselves being coming from areas of economic, you know, struggling and that sort of things. So um so for all these reasons I do4398 ask for your uh continued support and help as we move forward in the second tier of the rate increases, which would mean an additional $5 for Superior Court murder panel lawyers also an additional $2. I believe it was for the district court attorneys4416 for the second year. Thank you very much for the opportunity to speak before you.
SHOW NON-ESSENTIAL DIALOGUE
Yeah, great, thank you so much. Miss Kalahari. Thanks for your testimony. There any questions from the committee members? I do not see any. So thank you very much. Um the next bill before us is Senate 918 filed by former Senator Boncore. E enact addressing racial disparity in jury selection and uh we have O'Connor brush from CpCS. Mr Bush.
[CONNOR BARUSCH (CPCS:] [SB918]4453 Good afternoon, Good morning. Uh thank you. Sorry go ahead. Uh thank you very much, Chair Day and chair Eldridge and to the rest of the committee for hearing testimony on this bill. Um My name is khan are Bruce I use here they pronounce and I'm here to talk about bill for 24. I'm a trial at CPCS and I also work in the training department here. One of my training focuses is on jury selection and on ending racism in jury selection. And I know that when trial were select juries, both implicit and explicit racial bias can become major forces in jury selection. In the mid 19 eighties, the U. S. Supreme Court gave us a case called Batson versus Kentucky that I'm sure many folks have heard of. That was designed to be a tool in helping to mitigate racism in peremptory challenges, which is one of the stages of jury selection and this case happened because Mr Batson himself, not his lawyer um insisted4509 on objecting to black jurors being removed from his trial. Massachusetts had actually made a similar rule a little bit earlier than Batson in a case called Suarez.
Um Within the last year,4519 massachusetts took the historic step of announcing that this pattern. Suarez rule in massachusetts being one of the leading states applies to sexual orientation as well as race in the antoine carter case. Um, and shortly before that, we updated our jury questionnaires to allow transit non binary people as well as other people to report their genders on things other than to gender checkboxes in the jury questionnaire. So there is some progress being made, but we know that Batson and Suarez rules are not enough to stop racism in jury selection, um, requiring a judge to make a finding that race is part of a peremptory strike before we even asked the striking party to give a reason is never going to remove racism from jury selection either implicit or explicit. And so we need to adopt rules. The rules indicated in this bill.
Um, and also require the jury commissioner to keep track of not just what she already attracts, which is demographic information of who enters the room for jury selection, but also the demographic information of who actually is removed from the room who has removed for cause and has removed for a peremptory challenge because we know that diverse groups of people like yourselves on this committee makes better decisions than groups of only one race, one sexual orientation or one ethnicity or gender. Um, in my first jury trial after the pandemic, I tried the case against a member of the Suffolk county District Attorney's office who agreed to alter the rules to jury selection, We asked the judge to alter the rules for our case similar to what this bill is calling for and that's the first time that ever happened to me in one of my cases where she had to explain the reason for every juror she struck um as a peremptory challenge which is very similar to what this rule would require.
Um And uh and so it's a sort of improvement over the Batson role. Um As a result there was a black woman juror who otherwise would have been removed by peremptory challenge who was seated and who sat um in the jury, making that jury more diverse. Um but we can't rely on just some good assistant district attorneys agreeing to change the rules. Um We need to have legislation that changes these rules. Our trials should be conducted by diverse juries and not just selected from a4647 diverse pool. All of our freedom depends on it. Thank you for your time and I asked for a favorable favorable vote out of the committee. I'm happy to take any questions. SHOW NON-ESSENTIAL DIALOGUE
Great thank you so much for your testimony. Are there any questions from the committee members? I do not see so thank you so much for testifying, appreciate it. Thank you. Mhm.
[ELDRIDGE:] The next bill on our agenda is house 1518 by chair day and act relative to clarity and consistency for the justice reinvestment oversight board.
SHOW NON-ESSENTIAL DIALOGUE
And we have recent Hall from the A. C. L. U. Testified.
[ROXANNE HALL (ACLU):] [HB1518] Good morning, good morning. Um uh to uh chair Eldridge chair day members of this committee. Thank you. My name is Roxanne Hall and I'm the director of the racial justice program for the A. C. L. U. Of massachusetts. And I also have the privilege of serving on the justice reinvestment policy oversight board. I'm here to testify in support of H 1518. Thank you to chair day and rep Rogers filing this bill. The goal of the board is to oversee the development and implementation of across agency data tracking system for all so called criminal justice agencies and the system will utilize a fingerprint based identification system to consistently track individuals through the various criminal system agencies including the trial court, the various houses of correction department of correction, probation and parole. This bill not only makes the language of section 18 and three quarters4744 of chapter six a much clearer as it is admittedly very clunky now.
It also specifically includes District Attorney's offices as a criminal justice agency which the current law fails to do back in 2018 when the A. C. L. U. And other organizations advocated for provisions in the law that would increase the commonwealth data collection ability. We did this because at every turn in our efforts to reform the system. We were often met with the resistance cloaked in the terminology of uncertainty, uncertainty about whether or not we actually had a problem with racial disparities and over incarceration or uncertainty about whether the reforms that we were pushing for would actually work. Fortunately, the Council of State Government conducted a top to bottom review of our system and one of their key findings is that we had substandard data collection systems and so over the last three years, the board has assessed the state of our data systems throughout the criminal system. Despite some criticisms that we're not moving quickly enough, we've made some significant progress in determining the status of most of the systems actors and data collection ability and IAPA has recently promulgated regulations on data collection. However, information about District Attorney's is scant. Although the board has treated D. A. S. Office is as being covered by the language and the D. A. S.4821 Have been represented at board meetings.
The law is not definitive uh that they be included or that they must be included and cooperate in4829 the development or participation of the system. The cross agency tracking system. As a member of the4835 board, I have consistently advocated for the system to not only be used to track individuals through the system, but to develop data that can be used to reveal disparities disparities, find inefficiencies and hold the agencies accountable for the services they allegedly provide. It's one thing to know that there are disparities in the system. It's another to know why they exist. And the absence of information from district attorneys who is outdated. Damian case management system doesn't allow statewide analysis of the disparities prevents the board from developing a system that accurately captures vital information about the system's most powerful players. And so I respectfully request that you report this bill favorably out of committee to help us move forward towards having a more transparent and accountable system. Thank you. And I'm open to uh fielding any questions anyone might have.
SHOW NON-ESSENTIAL DIALOGUE
Great, thank you appreciate it son, Are there any questions from committee members? Do not see any. So thank you very much for your testimony.
[ELDRIDGE:] The next bill we have is house 1474 filed by Representative Cabral an act relative to transparency and clerk magistrate hearings
SHOW NON-ESSENTIAL DIALOGUE
and they have a thomas, fatigue in support the bill. Mr boutique
sir, thomas Batik. Okay uh
4925 [ELDRIDGE:] Next is house 1716 Bill filed by represent Miranda4930 and Act relative to reasonable compensations for equitable representation
SHOW NON-ESSENTIAL DIALOGUE
, peter L. A. Khan Peter L. Khan
See you there if you want to just take yourself off mute
and mr Alarcon if you want to take yourself off you. Yes, you4952 can hear me now, can you? Yes. Hello. Great. Um uh first of all I greatly appreciate the you hold on for 10 seconds. Um
Yeah uh
[PETER ELIKANN:] [HB1716] I'm sorry4971 about that. I greatly appreciate the opportunity to speak. Um and I want to just4976 jump right in and say there's a reason why in many parts of the commonwealth, the constitutional right to counsel is not being met genuinely dedicated attorneys who answered to this very highest calling Find that trying as hard as they can, making Herculean efforts, they just can't feasibly swing the financial sacrifices of being a bar advocate, compensation for appointed attorneys. Bar advocates in Massachusetts is so inadequate among the very lowest of the 50 states that they just can't meet the financial obligations that are part of everyday living. And a dedicated bar advocate finds him or herself and actually in the ranks of the working poor making way less than court officers, court reporters, probation officers, court session clerks, people don't realize that a lot of bar advocate attorneys often qualifier getting their health care through mass health.
The very best way that I5033 could put this into perspective is to note that, um, for example, the average hourly worker on the floor at Costco makes $24 an hour. And one can say, well, bar advocates over $50 an hour make, you know, certainly make more than that. But, but not really. Um, A bar advocates over headed 50% paying for, have to pay for your own office, health insurance, liability insurance, office supplies, continuing legal education requirements. Uh, no benefits whatsoever. That really brings you down below the average Costco hourly worker and please don't misunderstand me. Their, their work hard work is valuable as, as any, as anyone else's, but it's just uh, to put it into perspective. Um, well, this isn't even to mention the average cost co worker gets5084 health benefits contributions5085 by their own company to the 41 K paid vacations. Bar advocates get none of that, nothing for pension and retirement. If a bar advocate could afford to go on vacation, obviously they go pay less for the time they are away and, and they're not um might not be met with the crushing debts brought on by four years of college and three years of law school, that's seven years, hundreds of thousands of dollars, that soul crushing debt that probably can never be paid.
Um There are many, there are also many limits to what a bar advocate can even charges their uh, there's a cap on, on, for example, waiting time in court, even if one has to wait much longer preparation for a complicated case takes much longer. So there Is so5132 much free work being done without pay and work has done evenings and weekends and yes, we all know, no one is deluded into thinking they are entering public service work as a bar advocate to get rich. In contrast, regular attorneys here in Massachusetts often make on average maybe $350-$500 an hour. There's actually law firms that will charge as high as $1700 an hour. Um, so in comparison to the A little over $50 an hour that barber could get, so to be a bar advocate, the workhorse of the criminal justice system as they handle 80% of the cases of those who5171 can't afford an attorney, there clearly has to be a certain dedication to this highest of callings of public service, but if one literally cannot meet, make ends meet, then the remaining bar advocates are so overburdened, it's the client, it's the citizens of massachusetts who needs your services, who really bear the burden of this systemic lapse minister Ehrlich And I apologize, but you are over your three minutes. So if you could just give your closing remarks, I those were my closing remarks. I just hit the right note, I think. Thank you.
SHOW NON-ESSENTIAL DIALOGUE
Perfect. Thank you so much sir, appreciate5206 testifying on the bill. Are there any questions from the committee members?
Let's see. Don't thank you. So represent Harrington Did you have a question?
[HARRINGTON:] Yes, thank you. I just had a question for mr elegant. Do you know if there had been any kind of studies um uh for how massachusetts rates as far as how they pay their public defenders in comparison to other states. Um I know when um the judge judicial raises happened several years ago, they ranked second to lowest based upon the demographics and the economy and in the state and such. Do you know how the CPCS attorneys pay compares to other states.
[ELIKANN:] Um I don't have the most recent statistics, I know that uh they were dead last out of 50 states, um a handful of years ago. And I would believe that we uh so I I do not know as of 2021 where um the bar advocates stand here from anecdotally and from what I've seen, if we're not still dead last, it would be pretty much down there at the5285 at the bottom.
[HARRINGTON:] Uh You mentioned that new Hampshire was calling upon them and saying you know would you consider doing cases in new Hampshire?
[ELIKANN:] Uh do you know what they were going to pay them? Uh no I don't I think um the person who testified before me Victoria had mentioned that they were over $100 an hour. Uh So it's it's dramatically different um in uh in so many states.
SHOW NON-ESSENTIAL DIALOGUE
Okay thank you. Thanks
thank you. Robertson and Harrington and thank you Mr Khan for your testimony. And there are no more questions from committee members. So thank you very much. Thank you.
[ELDRIDGE:] The next bill before us House 15 11 Senate5334 1078 filed by Representative Decker and Senator Lewis An Act providing for the training, continuing training and education of judges and other legal hearing officers.
SHOW NON-ESSENTIAL DIALOGUE
And we believe we have Vincent Dixon. Mr Dixon. Yes.
[VINCENT DIXON:] [HB1511]5348 [SB1078] [SB1079] [SB1081] Can you hear me okay now? Yes. Hello sir. Good. Hello Senator. Uh And my state rep Michael Day co chair. This is joint testimony covering four distinct bills uh the H 1511 and act for training, continuation continuing education of judges and legal hearing officers. S 1078 an act providing for the improvement of required standards of clerk Magistrates. S 1079, it resolved to establish a grand jury commission And S 10815381 and Act for the Development of a Graduate Judicial Training School. My name is Vincent Lawrence Dickson, 60 Lake Street unit in Winchester Maso and eight, I know these words are an umbrella covering these four bills, distinct in their provisions, but part of a broader range of reforms Our legal systems are facing many different challenges and the5403 COVID-19 pandemic has surely created even more ranging from the electronic communications formats to various public health considerations.
Is in this context that long felt needs for significant and effective reform have gradually developed and may just have the needed opportunity to further the traditional leadership of massachusetts in reforming and improving our legal system and showing the way for other legal jurisdictions across the United States to improve. Just as the introduction of professional law schools, improve the quality of lawyers and that of the case study method, improve the quality of legal instruction. There, other comparable developments that we might consider. The four bills of mine addressed in this particular hearing, provide opportunities to improve our legal process, is the quality of our legal personnel and ultimately the quality of those who are at the most qualified elite. Our judges, there are a variety of legal hearing officers, including clerk Magistrates and judges and their continuing education needs are important. Some have even questioned the need for clerk Magistrates, but if we are to have them, we should improve their required standards.
Grand juries are an important part of a system, but surely they should be required to be reformed and a commission5482 to look at. The reform of5484 these important mechanisms is long overdue. We must assess the extent to which grand juries have integrity and actual efficiency. Finally, ultimately, I think that there is a wisdom and developing a graduate judicial training school which would train already highly qualified individuals to be judges. It may be wise to reduce our reliance on the appointment of career prosecutors and career defense attorneys as a pool of potential judges by relying on these surely often quite talented attorneys. We lose both their leadership in their respective areas of practice and introduce potential bias into the roles of judges. There are other countries that train judges more specifically, if we can train lawyers, we can surely train judges Age 15, 11. The training and continuing education of judges5531 and legal hearing officers in our present system across a wide area of judicial operations. Legal hearing officers and boards and commissions. There is a need for quality and higher quality of legal understanding.
This particular bill sets broader requirements require regarding these standards. S 1078. Improvement of required standards of clerk Magistrates. This bill5554 sets, improvement of required standards, including full establishment requirements to have an earned legal degree and improves the quality by providing useful incentive. S 1079 Grand Jury Commission. The effectiveness and integrity of the grand jury system has been questioned And a range of solutions enacted across the 50 states of the United States and accompanying law. Journal article looks at these different solutions and provide suggested thinking that can assist the establishment of a useful5582 commission. And finally, as 1081, development of graduate judicial training school to Pioneer, a graduate judicial training school would be to move our entire legal system forward in numerous ways. Further improving the quality of our entire legal system. I also was to be joined to supporting S911 which was referenced earlier, eliminating fees on right to counsel. Thank you for your attention to these matters and hope to work to further educate and advocate for these matters. SHOW NON-ESSENTIAL DIALOGUE
Great, thank you so much Mr Dixon appreciate your testimony. See if there's any questions from the committee members. I do not see any so thank you very much for your testimony. Thank you. Mhm. Uh
[SB1017] Next bill we have before us is Senate 1017 filed by senator. Does og leo and act to strengthen rules governing attorney conduct penalties for misconduct
SHOW NON-ESSENTIAL DIALOGUE
and we have a panel with Joyce thomas Celi and grace Marie thomas L. E.
The thomas L. Is here.
Okay, once they're on mute. Oh ok
yes. Hi mrs carter sell your on the huge well, hello,
Hi, would you like to testify?
Can you hear us? Yeah, please go ahead. I think you're on mute again.
Can you hear us? I think you're still on mute. You're going5691 to have to a mute yourself
on his muted. Can you hear us now? Yes. Hello? Hello? Good morning. Good morning.
[GRACEMARIE TOMACELLI:] Please go ahead. Go 1st. All right. You want me to go for us? Okay? Good morning. Uh Chair day and and uh Chair Eldridge and the panel. Um this is quite nerve racking but I do have some notes and I just want to stay on target because I time three minutes. Um The reason we need to have this very important Senate bill passed is because we need integrity in the judicial system for this generation and for future generations we want to stop and prevent the nightmare. We have lived For the past 25 years since 1995 and not let this happen. What happened to us two other people, um the immunity granted to attorneys who commit fraud on the court must be stopped. And I'm hoping that this panel and this, the Senate and the House will just stop this from happening to other people as well. The justice can never be achieved when one party is protected for lying and misrepresenting the true facts to the judge and and misrepresenting the true facts to the judge in order for5790 them to win. We learned this in absolutely the worst way possible because we're in the eviction process.
Now we're losing our property that we paid off our mortgage, our home and we paid thousands of dollars to the town of Salisbury in taxes. So this is a horrible way to learn this lesson that we can hopefully share with others to stop it from other people happening to them. We learned in this absolutely worst way that the town of Salisbury, with the aid of their attorneys misrepresented the facts to the courts in order to win and ultimately take our home property over sewer bills that we never owed in the first place. The time this represented to us and the courts That the assessment was March 165835 of 1990 to pursue a project. uh they claimed it was 7.8 million for the town share for the local share and that it was being charged. We believe them, why wouldn't I believe the municipality that I bought property and I believe them. This was a lie which was exposed by letters that we, it took us years to get from the United States E. P. A. And government records, It took us almost 20 years to uncover what the town had cleverly withheld by withholding public records. They altered public records. They made it impossible for us to pay for these public records. And then when we finally got them, they redacted the records.
Thank God for the Secretary of State Galvin They ordered the title manager to give it5883 to us without the selective wording removed. The worst path is this was all presented to the courts and the court5892 believed them. We lost our restaurant manager cafe restaurant in Salisbury Beach, Mass. We lost our livelihood. Our staff lost their livelihood. Now we're in the process. We've lost our5904 home, the property. All because the attorneys lied to the judges and this is what happened the attorneys for5911 the town then my apologies if you're trying to stick to three minutes, you just went over three minutes. Would you mind making closing remarks and all right. Can I just? All right. I'll really try my best. I'll be real quick. Um We found out that this actually was May 17, The vote we found out that we were not liable and in order for the town to cover up what they did. They just continued saying this fabricated information to men lost their lives here by removing because they had to remove the floor of their their5950 motel because they will be in charge for bills we never owed. I really hope that we stop attorneys from being5958 granted this privilege. I appreciate your time. Thank you so much.
SHOW NON-ESSENTIAL DIALOGUE
Thank you so much and would5966 you like to testify? Also Joyce this is her wrong. Andres Yes.
[JOYCE TOMACELLI:] [SB1017] Hello. Thank you. Good morning Chair Day and Chair Eldridge. I want to thank Senator dezoglio of sponsoring uh Bill the Senate 1017 and act to strengthen rules governing attorney conduct penalties for misconduct. I respectfully request that this extremely important act passed unanimously by the judiciary. We initiated this act because we have been irreparably harmed by the town of Salisbury's town council attorneys and the attorneys for the town. We learned a very hard way that attorneys who are officers of the court in massachusetts who commit fraud on the court are granted by judges automatic absolute immunity litigation privilege in civil cases, it must be known that we do know and have great respect for being honest attorneys6029 in our state who6031 take their oath of ethics seriously. He's honest attorneys. We have spoken with our out ways to know that we lost in every court so far because of this dishonest attorneys who chose to conceal material documents, present irrelevant documents.
Misrepresent state law and misrepresent case like the judges so that they would win it worked. They did win as grace when we said we've lost our home, our business with and so much more. Even though all attorneys are bound to be honest to the judiciary, we have learned that in our case it has been extremely lucrative for these attorneys were Salisbury to be dishonest. They've received almost 200,000 and legal fees to cover up wrongdoings committed by the town of Salisbury real whistle blowers blowers and who have been retaliated against by the town of Salisbury because we accidentally6091 unearthed through ePA state and USDA government documents that the town voted to construct a sewer in 1982 and this project was 100% recommended the town.6103 In 1990 we bought the property in 91 clear title. No leads reported the registry of deeds. The town in 1992 committed stated they committed a 7.8 million assessment. It's really 7.8 million tax fraud. We are just two of almost 1000 people were impacted by the 7.8 million. The town charged two for 100% grant funded super project.
It is time for massachusetts citizens to have the same protection and remedies as several other states and enact this legislation specifically permitting civil actions that alleged attorneys act of fraud, intentional misrepresentation to see the collusion meant to deceive the court or any opposing party. These states Arkansas California indiana Iowa Minnesota new Mexico new york north Carolina, not Dakota Oklahoma. And Wyoming Reach your three minutes. You can just close, okay, absolutely, no legitimate purpose is served by granting attorneys litigation immunity. Either absolute or qualified. It is unjust protection for the unworthy. It undermines the legitimacy of this country's legal process and constitutional protected and but6186 you get the result is the judiciary, traditional machinery itself is being tainted. We have lost everything we ever worked for and the6197 town's attorneys seemed to gloat that they prevailed by blind judges. So I want to thank you. And I will just well I would just say thank you and6211 officers of the court should never lie to judges and have immunity. Thank you so much for your time.
SHOW NON-ESSENTIAL DIALOGUE
Great thank you to Joyce and grace Marie for their testimony. Are there any questions from the committee members? Okay, thank you both appreciate the time6228 you've taken.6229 Thank you. Thank you. Mhm.
[ELDRIDGE:] The next bill we have is house 3840 filed by Representative Ramos Proposal for a legislative amendment to the constitution to require re appointment of judges every five years
SHOW NON-ESSENTIAL DIALOGUE
and the first person we have to testify is Nicole maroon, Nicole maroon.
The cold Moran here.
The second person we have to testify on this bill is Stephanie. Pianos, Stephanie Fernandes I'm here. Hello. Hi
yes hi. Please go ahead and testify.
[STEPHANIE PIANDES:] On January 17, 2020 I lost all of my parental rights including contact with my daughter before I even left the courthouse. Judge Catherine bailey in Worcester county believed that this was an appropriate punishment for allegedly violating a line in the divorce modification. Judge bailey did not just punish me. She punished the child as well. On January 31, 2020 there was a status hearing at the time. My daughter 11 years old Was in an inpatient psychiatric facility suffering from the separation trauma the Judge Bailey caused her on January 17 to 2020 with the power of the judge bailey bestowed upon her father. He put a passcode6310 on the hospital phones, no calls6312 in or out. My daughter's father punished her by isolating her in the hospital6316 to remind her how alone she was. The hospital notes were in front of Judge Bailey on January 31, 2020. According to the hearing transcript, Judge Bailey said that she won't look at anything from the hospital that she has no interest in. It.
Included in the documentation that judge bailey refused to read was how my daughter was screaming, crying and cutting my daughter's suffering was a direct result of the trauma that judge bailey forced on her at this hearing. My daughter's father told judge bailey that the child was doing great and to keep the mother out. That was all barely listened to. On that day I was denied my right to be heard and so was6355 the child. Over the remainder of 2020. The documentation that accumulated in front of Judge Bailey included Psych Evaluations, citing no diagnosis for me, but significant concern of aggression and the characteristics of narcissism from my daughter's father to favourable supervised visitation reports, Statement from my therapist 6518 filed6376 by mandated reporters on my daughter's father for abuse and neglect. 151 B as the 51 a has demonstrated concern two police reports written by officers concerned with my ex's behavior three motions for an attorney to represent the child Medical Records from my daughter's 2020 hospitalizations.
Despite all of this data. Judge bailey failed to promote confidence in the judiciary. My daughter spent 30% of 2020 hospitalized. The average day for a child is three days. The diagnoses that she developed. We're all a result from the trauma the judge bailey foster to endure October 28, 2021. The only things that have changed since Bailey's6418 Judge Bailey's January 172,020 temporary order is that my daughter now suffers from chronic depression that goes untreated as her father does not believe in intervention. Also our mother, daughter bond has deteriorated. I have spent $7,000 on psychiatric evaluations, $50,000 on supervised visitation. I am still unsupervised visitation and haven't seen my daughter since July 22, 2021. I never received a trial. I was never6446 found to be unfit. There has never been any documentation produced to support any of the statements made by my daughter's father in court.
Still6453 Judge bailey wrote in order that has resulted in two going on plus years of supervised visitation, depleting my entire savings mentally breaking a child robbing a child of a meaningful relationship with her mother, giving a child abuser, full controller for6468 being the suffering of the maternal family and destroying a mother and daughters relationship. My highest level of6475 education is a master's degree. I'm a pediatric occupational therapist. I go to work every day and help Children and I'm unable to see my own. My daughter's father is an attorney. Judge Keeley's actions show demonstrable bias and absence of competence and a disregard for the right to be heard. If judges like Catherine Bailey of Worcester County Courtroom 12 were reevaluated every five years. My family would be almost done with this nightmare and we can begin healing and rehabilitation SHOW NON-ESSENTIAL DIALOGUE
ESPN is if you could close then. Thank you. Yeah, thank you very much appreciate you coming for the committee to testify um in support of legislation. Are there any questions from the committee members?
Okay, thank you so much for telling your story and advocating, appreciate that. Um is the coal maroon here or were also signed up to testify? Nicole maroon. Okay.
[ELDRIDGE:] Um we're gonna move on to the next bill uh House 1625 filed by Representative Hasty resolutions requesting the governor with the consent of the council to remove Susan L. Jacobs from the office of Associate Justice of the Bristol probate and6553 Family Court of Bristol county.
SHOW NON-ESSENTIAL DIALOGUE
And I have scott Ellis
Ellis Hello, good morning. Good morning Chair Eldridge Chair day. Um and I do ask that she's just as uh
[SCOTT ELLIS:] Apologizes a lot going on in the last 24 hours to myself. Chief Justice Casey. If he's here please lend you here. Um I'm here asking for what you have read. I've listened quite intently to everything that's been brought to your attention today to improvement in our judicial system, the lack of staff and the probate and family court being broken. And another term that was used today that really rings my bell is accountability. Yes, I am asking for a judge from the family probate court to being removed from the bench. She has clearly shown to me and to several people that I've6615 had confident conferences with regarding being in front of this particular judge. She has violated judicial code of conduct, constitutional rights, courtroom procedures.
I was ordered to give closing arguments while they were still witnesses for6639 the plaintiff side. Every attorney that I've mentioned that to tell me I'm making it up, but it's very easy to find out that it's the truth just by pulling the records and listening. That is just one of several. Another thing I want to bring to your attention. There was a member from the Attorney General's6657 office who has stated and this is also on the records noting several procedural issues and that there is only one person in that courtroom that can cause a procedural issue. That is the judge. This has been a burden6675 for me since her final hearing me, It was in 2017.
I have been trying desperately to salvage my life and have a normal livelihood with my family and everything else. And with this matter still sitting there wide open with all these actions that she's taken that are proven wrong. Judge Jacobs does need to go if this state wants to see improvement in their judicial system and that the probate court and family court get brought back to where the people feel safe and comfortable walking into. Then you need to take these actions seriously. It needs to be done. I know it's going to make a lack of staff, but would you rather a lack of staff than the people not wanting anything from any of you? I mean you're here to represent us and the constitution is here to protect us. Let's get this done. I thank you for your time to you. Mr Eldridge to you. Mr Day and the committee, If there is any questions, I will take them. SHOW NON-ESSENTIAL DIALOGUE
Thank you so much. Mr Ellis appreciate coming for the committee to tell your story and advocate for this legislation. Are there any questions from the committee members I do not see. Thank you very much. Thank you.
[ELDRIDGE:] Uh The next bill is house 37 23, filed by Representative Mirra resolutions requesting the governor to remove Judge Abbey ross from the essex County family inappropriate court.
SHOW NON-ESSENTIAL DIALOGUE
And the first person you have to buy is walter F Sorenson Jr SHOW NON-ESSENTIAL DIALOGUE
Mr sort of low Hello, how are you? Good, thank you. Please go ahead.
[JAMES SORENSON:] [HB3723] Bill is still morning. Good morning and uh Chairman Eldridge and Chairman Day and members of the judiciary committee and excuse my voice. Um I have picked6802 up my youngest daughter is cold.6804 I'm sure those your parents know how that goes. So6807 I will I will try to get this out. Um I'd like you to support bill age 37 23 uh to remove judge Abbie L. Ross from the bench. Uh There might be a typo on the actual one of the many bills that came through. So my testimony this morning is accompanied by probably and I'm sure that Tony Williams can back that up. Quite a few documents and hundreds that have been submitted not only by me, but other people that support this bill. And I6844 know there are length Lee Um So I hope the committee does have an6849 opportunity to take a look at this. So the origin of this bill came about by, unfortunately I'm not a simple modification I filed way back in 2017 when my oldest had turned 18 years of age. Um It because of judge ross in herb bias decisions.
She appears not only in my case, but Dozens of other case which takes one side. Several complaints were filed with the C. J. C. On her bad behavior violations of the four Canons of judicial conduct as J. C. And and I would like to point out to the committee complaints were also filed into the BBO. Unfortunately both of those committees and you have a lot of those complaints before you. Both of those committees are made up of judges and lawyers that oversee judges and lawyers which just on its face has an appearance of a conflict. May I recommend to the committee and I have submitted that here and also in op EDS and other major newspapers around the not only the commonwealth now, but are picking up some of this stuff that the BBO and the CJ C is in its current form be scrapped completely and a civilian board be put in place to review these complaints, just like the police reform lab last year. I think it's time.
And because of that when the hundreds of complaints I believe were sent into the C. J. C. There is no transparency. The other problem is, and I've asked the committee to subpoena all C. J. C. Complaints uh on Judge ross. I myself have a subpoena that is still sitting into lower court um to get my own complaints that I have filed and C. J. C has stonewalled me on my own complaints so I could present them to the committee. The same with the BBO. Judge losses, decisions in her abusive behaviour towards litigants in in her courtroom are just outrageous. She has harmed my three Children deliberately, which made them ran away two of them for over seven months and6994 couch surf elsewhere To this day, a May 29 2019 modification to correct her abusive order which was done illegally in 2018 of October is still pending. It was missing7008 for several months in the court and this is just just you know, are over your three minutes. I want to conclude if you okay So I would encourage the committee to read the testimony because judge abby ross has been harming Children, particularly my own.
But also you will see that hundreds of Children through the commonwealth and that she should be removed from the bench before she harms anyone else for the decisions that she had made and harm my Children. They're still not corrected in the court. May I support other bills to just throw some numbers out for the committee that I have heard so far this morning. Sure. Um I believe that I think it was Chief Justice john Casey that was pointing out the problems in the probate court. Well mrs just list the bill numbers. I believe it's It might be 1907 Certainly 38 40 with term limits because it will force a review process for every single judge that just came up. I believe it's 10 77 78 10 17. And just the latest one that went through for bill 38 for and I'm open for any questions from the committee now or later. I will submit any documents to the committee any time equation. Thank you and I hope for a favorable bill vote on H 37 23.
SHOW NON-ESSENTIAL DIALOGUE
Great thank you very much. Mr sorensen appreciate your testimony. Any questions
I do not see any thank you very much. The next person signed up to testify on this resolution is Maria pilar martin.
Maria pilar martin. Good morning, can you hear me? Yes.
[PILAR MATE:] Good morning. First and foremost. Thank you to everyone for inviting me to this session. Please know that english7124 is not my first language and this is four minutes. So I have a paper here. I will try to be as fast as I can. My name is Maria Pilar Mateo. On August 2017 my daughter and me were chased by her father on a parking lot while being videotaped without our consent. I was struck on the face with the phone. My daughter was crying hysterically as a result of the altercation. His phone fell and broke the glass. He then proceeded to self inflicted scratches. I was arrested as they saw the police, a batter man and a phone broken. I was arrested on a dui charges, assault7163 and battery. Father use this event to temporarily obtained full custody of Sofia Burges on october 3rd with judge randy Kaplan who wanted to see us again on november 9th 2017 to make sure that the child was doing ok.
Unfortunately the case was transferred to just a Barrows who decided to keep the status quo until trial and left me on supervised visits for up to two hours a week until trial. The four day trial was in february 2000 and 19. My witnesses were Sophia's former pediatrician. So for Sophia's former therapist. The G. A. L who conducted two investigations and three visits, supervisors. Sophia's pediatrician was no longer caring for her as she had to terminate her care due to the multiple verbal threats from the father. The female therapist was also replaced by father on October 18 with a male therapist, Mitchell also lost contact with the piano. Female piano teacher who was very aware of the emotional abuse. The Sofia was suffering from father on a continuous places. My child was isolated, isolated 100% from her network of support.
Additionally, on June 2018 during my criminal trial for 80 charges, father asserted the 5th amendment right hence all my charges were dismissed during the custody trial. Judge Alvin Ross was very aware of these7248 On main 2019. The custody judgment came out our line in 218 clauses against me and zero zero against father. Judge Ross had overstated manipulated witness testimony and did not include my testimony, my witnesses testimony nor the testimony of my daughter who was eight years old when she was taken from me through DCF. Father committed Perjury on his financial statement and still Judge Ross awarded him $421 a week in child support and $30,000 on attorney fees. Judge Ross left me and my challenge supervised visits for the rest of my life with no path for reunification. No third parties were allowed on the visits. This means that Sophia's little sister Was no longer able to see Sophia until you reach the age of 18. The grounds of supervised visits were that I coach, Sofia, I am not a prostitute. I do not consume or sell drugs. I don't physically or emotionally abuse my daughters.
As of today, four years after I continue unsupervised visits, father has the nightly contact with my daughter since January 2021 and during four years, I have not received one single email informing me of Sofia's medical issues, school-related matters or any other email that will allow me to be part of her life three minutes. So if you can close one more minute, me and my other child who is now six have been erased from Sophia's life. Nobody will7351 be able to return that time lost. No money can repay the emotional damage inflicted upon Sofia and us supervised visits are not intended to be imposed for life. And a path for the reunification must be established by the courts as every child needs the involvement of both parents in his or her life. A Barrows fails to understand this fundamental principle of7372 law. One of the exhibits that I have provided to mrs Diana Williams is an analysis that took me three months to finish, where you can clearly and unequivocally see how Jet Rush7384 lied manipulated facts enacted bias through the entire course of the trial. I want to lastly apologise to Mr john Casey for the multiple times that I have copied him on emails. I want to let him know that when you are coping um with something like this, when you lose a child in this manner you go absolutely insane. So my apologies to Mr Casey and I hope that you support this bill. Thank you so much.
SHOW NON-ESSENTIAL DIALOGUE
Great, thank you very much. Mr appreciate your testimony. Are there any questions from the committee members I do not see. Thank you very much for your time, appreciate it. Next person testify is lisa Cohn, lisa Cohn.
[LISA KOEHN] [HB3723] So lisa Cohen here. Good morning. Good morning. Hi, my name is lisa. It's actually looks like Cohen but it's it's pronounced pain but I'm here to have your support of no no Brana um of bill three age 3723. The extreme bias and corruption that I have experienced with judge ross has torn my family apart On 2019. I lost custody over a neglect allegation by DCF at the time. I was confident that it would be found unsupported. I appealed this decision after it was supported but we still went to trial in December of 2019. I filed a motion for it to be continued because we hadn't had the results of the appeal and yet this was denied by judge Abby ross. She said I could come back for a modification and went forward the trial less than two months later. I'm filing for a modification. Um It was after this that my ex husband cut off all communication with my daughter. I had supervised visits at the time for7491 over a year. Judge Ross ignored all of my favourable supervised visitation records and When I filed multiple contempt that were finally heard costing me over $10,000, she did not allow my attorneys into the virtual hearing and instead rescheduled it to October of 23,
At that time I regained legal custody weekend overnights. This was not heard before ross and my attorneys advised me that Judge ross hated me. There was no way I would get more than that. So I took it and dropped my contempt as I thought it was the best chance come january of that year. I received a text message from a relative of my ex husband saying that he had taken custody of my daughter and in that family's own affidavit, it stated that the father of my childhood had full custody had been abusing drugs. To the point where he could not safely take care of himself. I begged for a G. A. L. Attorney. Judge Ross stated who's going to pay for that. Um She has shown a blatant disregard for all judicial conduct. I was never served with the guardianship that took my daughter, my custody from me. Um We filed an emergency motion for full custody to be regained. It was denied.
Even after the guardian, the guardian who was appointed to have my daughter does not reside with my daughter did not have anything to do with my daughter. I continued to fight this when finally, a guardian ad litem had been was appointed. That Guardian ad litem7585 stated that I should have full physical custody, full legal custody and guardianship be terminated. Judge Ross stated that we should come back. It was the Guardian ad litem was extremely concerning stating that my ex husband had psychosis and they terminated therapy with my daughter that she really needed. Despite this,7607 judge Abby ross stated that she would let me be a co guardian, which essentially defeats the purpose of a guardian when a biological parent is capable. It doesn't make any sense. At this time, she told us to return to court in two weeks and that at that time she would7624 likely give mother full custody and I should have known better. Um instead of my statement stating that I had left the courtroom too early and all my rights had been terminated from my daughter. So I had been crossed out as um as co guardian due to leaving the courtroom too soon.
Despite me being the only person with an attorney and her absolutely dismissing us in further stated that I needed7651 a bond, which is my understanding is a fiduciary responsibility to a child for a guardian who does not normally have one. I'm a biological parent. I pay child support to these people. I don't understand. None of this has made any sense. And furthermore, my ex husband who had the drug problem, not one minute of supervised visitation, not one. My parents who my daughter had an incredibly close relationship with were not allowed at my visits either. Meanwhile, I had to pay for them have a court ordered supervisor. Meanwhile, mine had nothing to do with drugs or alcohol. So I just apologize. But you are over your three minutes. Just conclude. Ultimately the extreme bias and blatant disregard for judicial conduct has left me and my family emotionally and financially distressed in so many ways. I ask that you support Bill H 3723 and I've sent off documentation to support this as well that I hope that you will consider. Thank you.
Great, thank you so much. Miss Kane any questions from the committee members. Okay. Um, before we go on to the rest of people signed and testify, I am noting that there is a Mohammad Harun are who wanted to testify on Senate 1017.
Mr Hara Hard. Did you want to testify before us?
Did you want to testify before us? We can't hear you.
Lohan Hara are
okay. I don't thank you want to testify. Okay. Um, So we're going to go back to excuse the House 3723. The resolution. Um we do have a large number of people testifying. I just respectfully asked the individuals who I know are giving very emotional testimony. If you could try to keep to three minutes because we do want to hear from each person and rather not interrupt you and ask you to close so if you can really focus on speaking to three minutes, the next person we do have signed up is Christina Day vo cristina rubio. Hello, how are you? My name is Cristina Day vol, can you hear me? Yes. Okay
wow. Judge Rogers rulings have caused irreversible damage to me. My Children as well as my entire family. Judge Ross based her rulings on lives of testimony of a man convicted of over 25 counts of fraud who was prosecuted by the attorney general of Massachusetts. In 2011. Ross made the decision that it was in the best interest of the Children to live with. A man who at the time of our custody trial was on trial for crimes including fraud and larceny. A man at the time who at the time of our trial had tax leans hadn't paid taxes in over seven years. Was convicted of a hit and run. And don't forget the cases of fraud and larceny His crimes caused. It doesn't dissolution of his father's business which he has had for over 40 years.
I have no criminal history, worked legally. My entire life went to college and have a fantastic career. My ex still works illegally and the Children. The Children can't tell you what their dad does for a living. The case should have been based on the illegal activities and multiple court cases. My ex was involved in at the time of entry at the trial. His more moral and ethical decisions. Ultimately the reason why he left his family's home. Judge Ross ignored the extenuating circumstances which forced me to move until this day. Judge judge Ross decisions negatively affect my Children. Recently I brought to the court's attention a very serious matter in front of a new judge because Ross was moved to another court which is what is known as the catholic church rotation program for judges. I was told by my new judge, she was not going to change any of Rogers decisions and my daughter was forced to suffer because of this. Judge Ross has moved from court to court. I believe it to be three times in a seven year period and in each court she has caused more damage to the families than ever can be described. Why has Abbey Rossman moved so many times. This requires investigation and accountability region numerous T. J. C and SJC complaints against7929 her and that may educate you as to the person she is. She is both vengeful bias qualities that make horrific, horrific judge in a horrifying experience within the court. My Children live in a horrible situation which causes causes them mental anguish According to the multiple attorneys, eye contact contacted an appeal would cost over7951 $10,000 and be useless because of the way she wrote her rulings. As shocking as all these things are. It is more shocking that important evidence is being ignored, not allowed and not considered in her decisions. Judge ross causes fear7965 anxiety and completely shatters any belief that the court systems are there to help protect. She causes fear in her court and within the families that have to face her and nobody should ever have to feel that way to feel that their judge is against them, especially when they are only trying to protect their Children. This is a pattern patterns can be seen in every single one of her complaints against her. These are not isolated incidences and these are patterns and she needs to be accountable for her actions. This type of injustice can happen to you, Your sister, your brother, your aunt, your uncle's. She needs to be removed. Thank you.
Great, thank you very much Miss Dave you any questions from committee members? I do not see. Thank you so much. Next person testify is Jacqueline Santiago Meriel Jacqueline Santiago Maria.
What's more Jacqueline Sava gall Maria.
Okay, next person signed up to testify is Tatiana Rodriguez. Tatiana Rodrigues
once more. Tatiana Rodrigues
Okay, next person signed up to testify is Sarah moulton. Sarah moulton.
Once more Sarah moulton.
Okay. Uh next person to testify is Dennis bain Dennis Kane
Tennis bean.
Yeah, next person sign of testifies Amy Whitten Amy Whitten.
Mhm. What's for Amy Whitten. Yes sir, yes. Hello, please please testify. I'm not certain my camera is working. Let's see if I can get you here.
I can hear you. Hi. For some reason it is not, we can hear you so you can testify. Well um what I can tell you is I support bill H 3723.
Um I have not had the pleasure of dealing with abby ross. What I can tell you is um This is a systemic problem with the system. Um I am in Essex family and probate court myself and I am having very similar issues. I am fortunate enough to still have my child, although I continually get the threats of having him taken away for no reason at all. Um My ex husband is an abuser, I could read8148 my statement um it's about five minutes long. I know I'm going to get cut off, so I did send it8153 over to miss manning um via email. Um
Like I said, this is this is a systemic problem in8163 the system. I'm sorry, I'm very nervous to be doing this. Um one person should not be in charge of making a decision that could change someone's life. These judges need education.
A lot of education is it's very necessary. Um The system is broken, I can tell you that right now. Um
And that's not just in Essex county that is that is family and probate8199 court throughout massachusetts restraining orders. I've been denied restraining orders multiple times, but I had a judge in Bristol county family and probate who asked me to stick around and she had a court officer and I quote, walk me8218 out for my safety kind of defeats the purpose doesn't, doesn't it? It's a little bit of an oxymoron, but it was denied and the courtroom was up in arms when they heard that and a woman actually made her husband get up and walk out with myself and the court officer. This is, this is a problem domestic violence in the courtroom, it needs to be readdressed. Um these judges making decisions on your Children, it needs to be readdressed, it's generally the abuser that is abusing8257 the system and the judges are8260 allowing it because Moore education is necessary.
This is a big problem and it's so much bigger than you see today and that's pretty much what my affidavit will say my testimony when you read it and I appreciate this time to8282 speak. I'm sorry, I'm extremely nervous to be here. Um, but I feel for all these people I really do and I fear that one day I could be walking in their shoes because the system is the way it is. Thank you very much Miss wooden and really appreciate you telling your story and coming for the committee. So thanks for your time. Um, are there any questions from the committee members? I do not see any, I did see some individuals who had signed up to testify that are here. The first person on the list that I do see is Tatiana Rodriguez, Miss Rodrigues If you want to testify,
go ahead. Hello. Hi. Yes, I'm so sorry. Um, I was having technical difficulties, but my name8333 is Tatiana Rodrigues and I decided to, so um, I believe the bill number is, yeah, I'm sorry.
H 38 40. Um, I stand in solidarity with everybody that is um, testifying against judge.8354 Um, ross. Um, because I personally am facing um, very similar injustices and biases that I'm starting to realize that are across the commonwealth, especially primarily when it comes to domestic violence and um, how these judges will just choose one side and ride with that side. Um, right now. Um, I'm personally, I've been the primary8382 caretaker of my child for eight years of his life. Um, two years he's been separated from me and put in the care of my abuser. Um, Although my accusations of abuse and I the same judge has given me three restraining orders. Um, I didn't have the knowledge. Um, as far as what what courts were.8407 Um, the courts had so much time to do interventions and make him go to like batteries classes. The same judge that has given me three restraining orders failed to intervene. So I had no choice but to flee for my safety. Um, I received bad legal counsel. Um, and I was told because of the domestic violence and my safety was first, which it was I was in a fight or flight mode. Not to mention I also am was a ward of the state. I was in D. C. S care. Um And I've been fighting all my life. So the moment that I found freedom was I still was cooperating with the courts and coming back, but the judge was more upset that I fled, but she still seems to ignore um the dad being in contempt, not allowing me to see my child interrupting phone calls, continuing his abusive pattern just in a different way. So I'm supporting this bill because um judges need to be held accountable. Judges are just as human as us. They make mistakes and they're getting their feelings. And I said a comment. I remember when she took my child for me, I said, do you know what it's like to carry a baby for nine months and raise them for eight years and be a8481 single mother and try to um fight a system and and and just fight the traumas that were created from your childhood and not, you know, not like let that happen to your child and try to save your child from that. And she just, ever since I said that to her, she said to me two times that she would not ever be given custody back to me. I've never been heard at trial. All of my evidence hasn't been um allowed to be submitted yet because I haven't even gotten pretrial. I'm still in supervised visits. So like all these stories are just very similar. So um I don't want to get past my time but8520 I did want to um read a few things. So um court court orders are a weapon, weapon eyes by dysfunctional and toxic parents and judges do not Enforce. Yes. three minutes. Yeah. OK. So I just wanted to say that I just8539 think that um these judges, you know, um they should be held accountable um and parents should never deal with the judge that violates the judicial oath and judicial canon. So I I would ask that you guys um really listen to what these people are testifying about judge ap abroad so that we can continue to hold more judges accountable and people would trust to go to the courts because right now I would never ever involve the courts or give the courts any more of my business. Thank you. Great, thank you very much for your testimony. Any questions from committee members? I do not see any. Thank you so much for your time. I believe Sarah moulton is also down here Sarah moulton.
Good morning. I'm here but I don't think my audio cameras working. That's okay. We can we can hear you please go ahead. Okay, thank you and good afternoon, my name is Sarah8597 moulton and I reside at 69 Autumn Street in agawam massachusetts. I'm testifying in support of House bills 3723 14 76 15 2016, 25 18 43 and 38 40 and Senate bills 10 17, 10 40 10 69 1078 and 1081. I have the unwanted distinction of apparently being the only appellant In8624 the history of the Commonwealth who has been ordered by the Massachusetts Appeals Court to file a brief and an appendix without having ever been provided access to a single official record in the case without having been provided more than 50% of unofficial records in the case, including transcripts and three of the 11 audiophiles. Despite making multiple requests of the Middlesex County Superior Court Appeals clerk Andrew, johnson, the staff of the Hampden and Middlesex County Superior Court Clerk's offices, Hampden clerk, laura, Gentile Middlesex clerk, Michael, Sullivan and even Superior Court Chief Justice Judith fabricant. In addition, my requests asking the Middlesex County Superior Court and massachusetts Appeals Court to please compel production of the notice of assembly of the record and grant me access to the official records which were made in an opposition to a motion to dismiss My appeal that I filed on September 18, 2020 and in a motion to compel production That I filed in the Massachusetts Appeals Court in June of 2021 were both inexplicably denied by those courts. In other words, some of the problems discussed in today's hearings are alleged to extend as high up as the Massachusetts Appeals Court and outside oversight by the legislature seems desperately needed to protect the citizenry of the commonwealth. For the last 10 years of my life, my life and my livelihood have been destroyed By the numerous alleged crimes that were allegedly perpetrated against my late parents and they're now insolvent estates and yet every bit of suffering that my parents endured until their deaths and that I have endured for the last 10 years was entirely preventable.8726 I had reported my credible and substantiated allegations of elder abuse by massachusetts attorneys and others to the BBO and obese E in january and february 2012, only one month after it began, but I was apparently falsely told by BBO attorney Kenneth luke in alleged violation of SJC Rule 401, Section seven. Subsection one that I lacked standing to file a report to the BBO and RBC and that no investigation would commence. I was unaware at the time that one of the alleged perpetrators of the elder abuse scheme to which my parents were allegedly subjected was massachusetts attorney john Merrick, who is a former member, former chair and current or former hearing officer for the B B. O. And D O B C. Importantly, 25 years ago, Mass lawyers weekly published a front page article entitled is the BBO out of control. They police the profession, but who watches over them on june 3rd, 1996. The answer that question apparently is nobody. Instead the massachusetts legal system is a self policing one governed by SJC. Rule 307. Rule 8.3. Which states that lawyers who know that other lawyers or judges have committed misconduct must not maybe, but must report those allegations. Rather those attorneys and judges to the bar council's office of the board of Bar overseers or the commission on judicial conduct. The Bbo referred to rule 8.3 as the snitch rule in its November 2016 article posted on its website. However, too many members of the public And to me, this seems to imply that lawyers should not follow rule 8.3 under the maxim, just reach your three minutes. So if you could just please Sure, under the maxim that snitches get stitches or at a minimum they would face dire professional consequences for complying with the rule. So, my testimony is simply to support the listed bills and to let this honourable committee know how gravely important it is for oversight and accountability to be added into the equation because the self policing apparently is not working. Thank you so much. Great, thank you so much. Mr bolton. Any questions from the committee members do not see any. Thank you so much. The next person we have signed up to testify is Darlene Orvieto Darlene? Orvieto,
Darlene Orvieto.
Okay, next person is Tiffany scott. Tiffany scott.
Tiffany scott.
Okay. Um Oh hello Miss scott. Yes. Hi um so I am actually speaking8903 and of these
with these. If you can speak a little louder, can you hear me? Yes. Yeah. Okay. So um I have several issues I would like to speak about on what I like to call criminal judges because Miss scott. Just you do you have three minutes to speak? Okay. Yeah, yeah,
20 years ago. Celebrity Judge Judith Sheindlin said the family courts are a dumping pit for morons
and I have never heard force truer words. Um it seems to a lot of people that
the family courts are filled with
for lack of better words, treasonous criminals. And I'll explain why a simple definition of treason is
someone who has sworn allegiance to a country and then turns around and commits an act of war against that country. These judges have taken oaths to uphold our laws and our constitutions and for judges such as Abbie ross or Tracy Souza, my judge out of taught in courts, she put in her report, her only reasoning for terminating my rights because she doesn't like that is a direct violation of our constitution.
That is blatant disrespect
and by tearing families apart needlessly that is an act of war. These judges are committing treason and we, the people want to know what will be done because jail time doesn't seem fair enough
being impeached from the bench doesn't seem fair enough. When hundreds and thousands of american families and Children are being tortured by the family court system. They don't care. They don't care about the Children. My Children have been alienated against me by the Department of Children and Families simply because I was one of their wards myself and I don't like them because they have ruined my life and lives of countless others that I grew up with and now we're all having to fight for our own Children again for no reasons.
This is criminal and we, the people really do want to know what's going to be done because
percussions for committing treason.
That's one of the worst crimes there is what's done.
We're sick of it and we're fighting back. I know I myself am in school to become9079 a paralegal. I worked with several other parents that are putting themselves through some form of law school or school to become social workers because they want to be a social worker. That's not actually worried about the money. They want to be a worker that's caring about the Children and the families like9099 it should be.
So Miss scott, thank you very much for your testimony, appreciate coming for the committee. Anything just want to check anything else or um one. I have a few different things just to close anything to do with like the DCF, the adoptions and the family courts needs to be investigated with a very fine tooth comb and anyone that has been found with violating the american ways needs to pay. They need to be punished for it. I don't care if they have immunity or anything, immunity is just a get free, get out of jail free card for committing crimes that they are already planning on committing before they happen short. And I just mean on the bill. Any anything else?
Okay, thank you very much. Any questions from the committee? Okay, I don't see any questions. Thank you very much to scott. Um, I don't think there's anyone else who's here to sign up9169 to testify9170 who is here on this. I'm sorry. Sure. Day Chair Eldridge. I'm sorry. Can the committee hear me? Oh, excuse me. Mr Maher Arar. Yes sir. Yes, if please go ahead and if you could just stick to three minutes. Absolutely. And I apologize, I was having computer issues earlier with community. I was able to do so, so I appreciate the opportunity. Um, Good afternoon Chair Eldridge and chair day and and the rest of the committee. My name is mo Honan harry har. I'm an american born citizen raised here in the commonwealth currently residing enacted mass Since 2011. I've been an active and ongoing litigation stemming from home Homestead protection errors and an illegal foreclosure as identified by the United States Department of Justice, federal bank regulators. The massachusetts, Office of the Attorney general. I'm writing to you in support of Senate Bill, House, Senate Bill # 1017. Uh and I believe this would also be applicable to uh bill number 1040 and I believe it's 1069 to provide an ongoing decade long case9239 example of why stricter legislation is necessary for holding attorneys and separately, uh the judiciary accountable. This testimony is also given to provide the committee with case examples of will lock continues to be brushed aside by massive by the massachusetts state judiciary and separately the federal judiciary in order to reach a corrupt and predetermined outcome these evidence, judicial failures of record or evidence, particularly cases involving pro se litigants who lack legal experience, financial resources and are faced with financial hardship and have no other alternative but to represent themselves even with multiple pro bono and other legal assistance resources listed here in the commonwealth, many and in most cases, all are unwilling to get involved with a case that evidence is judicial attorney misconduct, out of fear of negative repercussion. The pro se litigant9291 has no other alternative but to represent himself and even with a9294 fully supported complaint gets brushed aside as if due process and civil rights are meaningless. Similarly opposing attorneys often exemplify a lack of professionalism and complete disdain for the pro se litigants. Even existing laws which are already very strict, such as fraud on the court, on the mass civil rules procedure, 60 B3 are being completely ignored. To brush aside Litigants are not even allowed to an evidentiary hearing is required under rule 60 as a matter of record, I have personally evidence these judicial attorney failures in the following massachusetts State courts. The Northeast Housing Court, the massachusetts Land Court, the Middlesex Superior Court, The massachusetts Appeals Court and the massachusetts Supreme Court. The most egregious example of judicial abuse of power and attorney misconduct is ongoing in the Middlesex Superior Court. Reference Harry Hard vs. Wells Fargo at9342 all. Dark at number 1981.9343 CB 00050. The following provides a partial summary of evidence failures, undisclosed conflicts of interest with the presiding judge Janice how and bank defendants, Wells Fargo, US bank and Citigroup On September 28, 2021. The Wall Street Journal released an investigative report that evidence 131 federal judges broke the law by failing to disclose conflicts of interests over cases they presided over. Clearly these judicial failures exist here in massachusetts state courts as well, uh to unopposed fraud on the court claims against named defendants and their attorneys of record are brushed aside three. All other supporting evidence, including government case references, sworn testimony from fraud experts are all brushed aside. I've been denial to trial by jury. I've been denied discovery. Uh Judges, judge multiple judges refusing to recuse after judicial misconduct is evidenced ruling without you have reached your three minutes. So if you could conclude I will. Alright. Um Mhm This is a fraction of the judicial fails that have personally evidence for the record in massachusetts State courts. It's for this reason that the commonwealth remains a named defendant in the ongoing federal lawsuit. Harry how vs. Us bank Collectively, there's been an unprecedented 11 judicial recusals associated with my federal and state litigation. nine federal judges and to state judges have recused over the past decade. Um The systemic judicial failures have steadily gained nationwide attention over the past decade and what is now being recognized as the most egregious abuse of judicial power ever recorded in U. S. History. All this is relative when you have much leading legislation for strict, for stricter accountability for attorneys who grossly abused the litigation privilege. However, it makes no difference for Mr Mahar. You before the law, are you concluded? Um I'm just just just about if if you can be just 20 more seconds please. Legislative leaders here in the commonwealth as well as the Attorney General's office continued to be regularly updated but have done nothing that includes governor baker's office. Senator warren, senator Markey congressman trey hand, congressman lynch, congressman, congressman Presley, Congressman jake, arjun clause. Secretary Galvin and Attorney general Healy. I hope that this legislation passes and I hope that there is greater accountability, both within the judiciary and with attorneys. Thank you for your time. Any questions from the committee members? Thank you very much. Um And then we have a Jacqueline Maria who has signed up earlier Jacqueline Maria.
Hello. Yes. Hi Jacqueline, Do you want to testify? Yes, I was sorry, a daycare teacher. I just needed someone to cover my class. Sure. Just you just you have three minutes to testify. Okay. Perfect. Thank you so much. First up I want to thank you all for giving myself and everyone else who testified the opportunity to speak. Um I know for myself personally and I'm sure many of the9528 other victims on this zoom is that we don't often get the chance to speak at court. Um so this is really our chance. Um I am um a person that has judge abby ross as the current judge. Um and she came in the middle of my case. Um and there have been multiple restraining orders9549 against my ex. Um and now he after 3.5 years has custody of my daughter. Um and I can only speak about my judges Frost but it seems that for me after reading up on some things that she has acted very unethically um and has got9568 against her both of the judge to protect Children, um mainly Children, but also to protect families as well. She has refused police reports and medical records particularly from my case. Um and has allowed hearsay and one of the biggest things in my case personally is that she allowed hearsay where there9589 was evidence that I did have um to support my side that my daughter was medically neglected and refused to have that put into evidence but allowed hearsay um condemning me saying that I was withholding medication for my daughter um what you know I'm9605 addicted to and I would never have reached out to a child. Um but things such as putting a gatekeeper on and using that as a power move to not allow one party to file things, I filed things and had them put sitting on her desk for more than eight months. Um but then the opposing party would file and have them heard immediately. She has taken restraining orders where um civil court judges that were called after hours after our judges were called and asked to have my child picked up um from the opposing parties house because they felt the child is in danger. And then she would take away the restraining order the next day thinking that um I have lied those false claims and not doing her due diligence as a judge to make9651 sure that that child is protected. And as you know, mother and I know, I think her name is Tatiana. She um spoke earlier had said, you know, I needed very similar come to address that. Have you ever had a child that you've carried for nine months? You felt the heartbeat for the first time and haven't taken away from you. Um I'm a doctoral candidate. I have my master's in education and to have DCF show up at my job saying that I would put a child in harm one. My job was so confused. Um but it was those false allegations that compromise my job and just the constant um allowance of one party to power over another. It seems that judge Rausch has forgotten her oath as a judge and has put power in front of it rather than protecting Children and has become about a power play of who is Maria, you have you for three minutes. So if you just want to conclude um so I do want to conclude that I do support the bill to remove judge ross. I am hoping you know, that my testimony does not work against me and I'm italian january want to go in front of judge ross. Um but just I hope you guys can see that the judge's job is to protect Children and that that has judges so sacred. Um and that you do consider removing two draws as she has been unethical and has harmed so many Children and their families and thank you so much for your time for listening to me. I'm sorry about the Olaf costume. No worries, thank you so much. Any questions from the committee members? I do not see any. That was the last person we have signed up to testify. Last call on anyone that signed up or thought they'd signed up to testify. Yeah, last call. Okay. Hello. Mr Chairman. Yes. Mr Chairman. Yes, I'm sorry. It's it's walter Soerensen. I just wanted9777 to point out for the committee that my two adult Children have submitted testimony and do their college class schedule. They could not be here to testify. But James D Soerensen did submit support of the bill. Uh and Emma vi Sorenson also submitted support in testimony to the committee. They are both registered voters in massachusetts and direct victims of the abuse of judge rows. And I think it's important that you hear the chief the Children what what their experience was and thank you for listening. Thank you very much. Thank you. Sorry. Before I disconnect can I ask two questions. The first one We heard you're testifying. Okay. So I wanted to ask a question. The committee but it's9827 a bottle. Yeah the committee just hears testimony so we're not answering questions today. Okay. Okay.9834 Okay so thanks everyone for coming. I want to thank all the Judiciary Committee committee members to be here um honored to as9843 always co chair this with representative Mike day and for those that want to submit written testimony and they can submit that to the Judiciary Committee Research director. Jackie manning at Jacqueline dot oh dot manning at um a house dot gov. So thanks everyone again. Thanks to all the judiciary committee members and we will now adjourn the meeting. Thank you so much appreciate it.
Yeah. Mhm
© InstaTrac 2025