Meaner Judicial Watchdog Wanted
One thing is clear from L’affaire Patrick Murphy: The state agency responsible for monitoring California’s 1,500 judges badly needs an overhaul.
Murphy, for the moment still a Los Angeles Superior Court judge, has racked up a stunning record of absences since 1996, including more than 400 sick days. He hasn’t bothered to show up for work at all in more than a year, yet still collects his $133,051 salary. Murphy claimed that chronic fatigue syndrome, fibromyalgia and even phobias kept him from doing his job, although he summoned the strength to secretly enroll in a Caribbean medical school and a chiropractic college, as well as teach at a law school, all the while shamelessly applying for disability payments.
His supervisors first complained about Murphy’s absenteeism two years ago to the Commission on Judicial Performance. For all this time, the agency’s staff has been investigating what looked from the start like a slam-dunk case of malingering and lying. Indeed, that was the conclusion earlier this month of a three-judge panel charged with deciding whether grounds exist for the commission to remove Murphy from the bench. There seems little doubt that this will be the panel’s recommendation when it meets next month. And thank goodness. But why did it take so long?
The watchdog agency was created by voters in 1960 to be independent of both the Legislature and the courts, and it has been. It also takes care to separate true misconduct from the complaints of disgruntled litigants. But Murphy’s case underscores the need for procedural reform.
The commission needs to set reasonable timetables for its inquiries. It should also take more seriously complaints from supervising judges, as in Murphy’s case. Pressure for reform should come from Gov. Gray Davis, the Legislature and Chief Justice Ronald M. George; each makes commission appointments. If that’s not enough, lawmakers shouldn’t hesitate to force the issue with a ballot referendum that mandates these changes. Judge Patrick B. Murphy, long an embarrassment to his colleagues, should now embarrass the commission into reform.
More to Read
Get the L.A. Times Politics newsletter
Deeply reported insights into legislation, politics and policy from Sacramento, Washington and beyond. In your inbox three times per week.
You may occasionally receive promotional content from the Los Angeles Times.