As a California lawyer for over 30 years, I am both amazed and incredibly frustrated by our state judicial system. On the one hand, California courts have led the way on many innovations in dealing with human conflict. On the other hand, there are so many things the courts could be doing to protect the public, reduce recidivism, satisfy victims’ rights, and reduce the huge tax load caused by an out-of-control prison system. Yet, many judges seem afraid to take leadership and will only follow the prevailing political winds. On this edition of the Doug Noll Show, I have a different judge—he is one of those rare judges who is not afraid to speak out and knows how to do it politically. Not surprisingly, he sits in the innovation capital of the world, Silicon Valley, as a superior court judge on the Santa Clara Superior Court in San Jose, California. Judge Eugene Hyman is an international expert on preventing juvenile, family, and domestic violence. In 1999 he founded the first court in the United States to holistically address these issues. The United Nations last year recognized Judge Hyman and the court for global leadership in the fight against juvenile crime and domestic violence. You can learn more about Judge Hyman's innovative work at http://www.judgehyman.com;

 

Judge Hyman and I talk about the fundamental truth that kids are taught to be abusive and are taught to be victims. Often times, their parents are ignorant about good parenting skills and this ignorance creates a void that is filled in by others. I asked Judge Hyman why the court system seems so unresponsive to systemic problems. He says that, at least in California, interpretation of the law is very localized. Even in Santa Clara County, which is rural in Gilroy and urban in San Jose, fish and game laws can be interpreted very differently. A fish and game violation in Gilroy might result in a much more stringent penalty than in San Jose. The courts are also very sensitive to the separation of power between the judicial branch and the executive branch. Thus, courts will tend to defer prosecutorial policies and decisions to the district attorney without question. Finally, court personnel and assignments turned over frequently which means that instituting new policies, ideas, systems, and procedures is extremely difficult.;

 

I talk about a zero-based budgeting concept in which the district attorney would be required each year to submit a budget to the County Board of Supervisors demonstrating a cost benefit ratio for every dollar spent in justifying policies and procedures in terms of tax dollars. This would force transparency and open discussion and debate on criminal justice, domestic violence, and Family Court systems.; Judge Hyman tells us that his innovative court was victim - focused. He believes that victims are more important than offenders and took pains to assure that victims were heard in his courtroom. Many of his remedies and decisions were designed to help victims, rather than just punish offenders.;

 

I talk about a 2000 California Judicial Council study that looked at the efficacy of restorative justice programs and found them to be more effective along several axes of measurement than traditional criminal justice processes. The link to the study is http://www.courtinfo.ca.gov/programs/cfcc/pdffiles/vorp.pdf.; Judge Hyman and I talk about how the criminal justice system equates accountability with punishment, thus ignoring the needs of the victim and forgoing opportunities to help the offender. Judge Hyman tells us that he will be retiring from the bench in December 2010, and we wish him well as an advocate of victims’ rights in the future http://www.courtinfo.ca.gov/programs/cfcc/pdffiles/vorp.pdf.