How would you like to have this Judge

[Cat118!]

http://www.cojudicialperformance.com/pdf/District01/01%20Judge%20Judy%20L.%20Archuleta.pdf


54% opted to not have her retained in 2004... and she was still retained...
So if you get a traffic volation in Jefferson county...she will most likely be your judge.
Some of you probably already had her

[Matty]

got to love the judicial system in these good ol' united states.

[neh]

This is just a survey taken to evaluate her before being put on the ballot. The only people who decide that she keeps her job are the voters.

[Cat118!]

the survey was done by lawyers and non lawyers... If I brought home a report card with her grades...my parents would have grounded my ass!

but I know she is voted in... How often do they get voted in and how long in their term?

[Husky]

I had a friend that went in front of her for his first DWAI was barely over the limit and she gave him 6 months on a first offense. Her daughter was killed by a drunk driver so she is a very bitter bitch against any traffic violations and hands out the max sentences.

Another documented case by her was a guy got a ticket for taking a whiz on the side of the road. She convicted him on a indecent exposure charge and he now has to register as a sex offender anywhere he moves to.

[Suki]

I had a friend that went in front of her for his first DWAI was barely over the limit and she gave him 6 months on a first offense. Her daughter was killed by a drunk driver so she is a very bitter bitch against any traffic violations and hands out the max sentences.

Another documented case by her was a guy got a ticket for taking a whiz on the side of the road. She convicted him on a indecent exposure charge and he now has to register as a sex offender anywhere he moves to.

holy shit!

given her history, wouldnt that make her bias, thus making her not "Just" in her rulings? people that are bitter for personal reasons and allow it to cloud their judgement shouldn't be allowed to make decisions like that.

[Cat118!]

yeah it was her son that was killed (I'm sure is changes, but her kid) and she takes it out on anyone who comes before her.... she either needs to be removed or put in a different divsion.
The survery shows how extremly biased she is.
Its in black and white for people to see and she still sits up there!

We need to get her voted off.
I found out a guys 4yr old daughter died and he is in for a DUI...She did not let him out. It was 2 weeks ago and he still there

[neh]

the survey was done by lawyers and non lawyers... If I brought home a report card with her grades...my parents would have grounded my ass!

but I know she is voted in... How often do they get voted in and how long in their term?

Judges are appointed, for their intitial 2 yr appointment. When it ends it goes before the voters to either be retained or removed.

http://www.courts.state.co.us/supct/...tnomincomm.htm

Personally I always vote no to retaining any judges.

[Cat118!]

So when do we vote again!

[Suki]

"If retained by voters after serving an initial two-year term, state court judges serve the following terms: county court, four years; district court, six years; Court of Appeals, eight years; and Supreme Court, 10 years. All Colorado state judges must retire by age 72."


sooo, just find out when she was voted in?

[Husky]

You are correct. She rips anyone especially any alcohol charge. I dont know how she still remains there. There are so many guys/gals in Jeffco right now serving 6-12 months on their first offense and peices of shit like that Don Vito (from the Jackass show) that molested the little girl at the Mills Mall in Lakewood got off with "probation" Great message the Jeffco Judges are sending.

[wulf]

I don't have a problem with them putting drunk drivers in jail.

[sprtbkbabe]

Judges are appointed, for their intitial 2 yr appointment. When it ends it goes before the voters to either be retained or removed.

http://www.courts.state.co.us/supct/...tnomincomm.htm

Personally I always vote no to retaining any judges.

Thanks
I've been trying to find out about the judges I was voting for, but never could find much on them when the mail in was sitting in front of me.

Cheers!

[Suki]

I don't have a problem with them putting drunk drivers in jail.

unfortunately, it doesn't seem that it's just drunk driving. i think she works in the traffic court, or only takes traffic offenses. so even if you get a ticket going a few miles over you get stuck with her and you're SOL.

again, just by looking at those numbers is what i'm gathering. I mean if i guy takes a piss and is then labeled as a sex offender, that's pretty fucking harsh!

[Husky]

I don't have a problem with them putting drunk drivers in jail.

Its not just drunk drivers but anyone that she decides to impose her own justice on. This judge and many Jeffco Sheriffs in that county are really corrupt assholes that are self serving and not serving the public.

[Cat118!]

This judge is notorious for being unfair and strict... she handles cases with vengence not justice. Think about it..if they interviewed her to be a juror in a traffic case.. She would be denied..booted from the panel for Conflict of interest... but yet she is your judge and will determine your sentence. Weather its speeding, running a red light, wheelies, anything that all of us have been guilty of if not more than one... and maybe more then once. If she was to retain in office it should not be in traffic... she needs to be in a different divsion if not removed. She is not a fair and reasonable judge

[cu360r6]

There is a reason that our founders intended the judiciary to be exempt from the pressures of popular opinion. It's hard for non lawyers to informatively evaluate the judgment of someone who has years of legal training and expeirence. There could be more to this than one popularity contest conveys, or there couldn't...

[Cat118!]

There is a reason that our founders intended the judiciary to be exempt from the pressures of popular opinion. It's hard for non lawyers to informatively evaluate the judgment of someone who has years of legal training and expeirence. There could be more to this than one popularity contest conveys, or there couldn't...

The survey if you read was done by lawyers, DA's and employees... they scored her worse then the 2nd half which was done by jurors,witnesses and defendants,people like us untrained. So she was graded by people who have the experience and training...and with the professionals she received SEVERAL bad reviews and grades.
I found this survey because I thought she was out of line and wanted to see IF I was being bias b/c her ruling effected me.... but clearly in black and white she is clearly not a judge that see with an open and fair mind.

[Husky]

There is a reason that our founders intended the judiciary to be exempt from the pressures of popular opinion. It's hard for non lawyers to informatively evaluate the judgment of someone who has years of legal training and expeirence. There could be more to this than one popularity contest conveys, or there couldn't...

You need to look at the facts and the actual citizens that have went before her and were sentenced simply on her personal vendeta and self serving cause. It does not take a rocket scientist to see she is not a impartial judge.

[clustermagnet]

no different than most monkeys with hammers out there... I get horror stories from my fiancé ( attorney )

[clustermagnet]

I don't have a problem with them putting drunk drivers in jail.

Neidermeyer

[Vehicle 1]

Her daughter was killed by a drunk driver so she is a very bitter bitch against any traffic violations and hands out the max sentences.

Does anyone know when her child died... I was at the courts a couple years ago getting ready to face her about a speeding ticket, when she had to leave abruptly to take care of "personal issues". I wonder if that was it... very sad. Nevertheless she should keep her impariality and be proud of it, but, I guess not.

[clustermagnet]

Does anyone know when her child died... I was at the courts a couple years ago getting ready to face her about a speeding ticket, when she had to leave abruptly to take care of "personal issues". I wonder if that was it... very sad. Nevertheless she should keep her impariality and be proud of it, but, I guess not.

Her personal life's problems is no excuse for taking out her frustrations on traffic offenders. If she lost faith in Christ, maybe she finally sees the light...

same goes for everyone involved with the US Gestapo Office

[fook]

hmmm. interesting stuff, never had her but have had a few runins with Jeffco judges, one good one bad... one of my bad experiences was with another Judge Archuleta, male.. think he's retired now though.

a few points, if you read about that report, it was taken in her first 2 years on the bench and the commission deemed this report a "first offense" and gave her a second chance based on:

Many of the Commission members have been in Judge Archuleta's court for observation.
The consensus is that she made many adjustments in the last year in demeanor and
judicial skills. First time offenders are offered every opportunity to change, including
intervention and rehabilitation. Repeat offenders are dealt with according to the sentencing
guidelines as set forth by law. The commission believes that with additional experience on
the bench and her commitment to continuous improvement of demeanor, Judge Archuleta
should be retained.



also, this whole thing about pissing on the road = registered sex offender, you sure about this story? I thought, and from what I read I think its true that you wouldnt fall into the catagory of registered sex offender for just that.. and if she had catagorized him as a felony exposure etc would he have still even had her for his trial? surely he didn't just take a guilty plea for a sexual predator crime in traffic court? if so, wow.. he needs to go petition that.

rules for who has to register:
The following persons (adults and juveniles) are required to register as sex offenders if they were:

• Convicted on or after July 1, 1991 in Colorado or any other state or jurisdiction of an unlawful sexual offense, as defined in 18-3-411 (1), C.R.S., or enticement of a child, as described in 18-3-305, (generally considered to be any sex offense against children).
• Released on or after July 1, 1991 from the department of corrections (DOC) having served a sentence for an unlawful sexual offense, as defined in 18-3-411(1) C.R.S., or enticement of a child, as described in 18-3-305,
• On or after July 1, 1994, convicted of or received a deferred sentence in Colorado or any other state of an offense involving unlawful sexual behavior, and including criminal attempts, conspiracy, or solicitation, (generally considered to by ANY sex offense or other offense where the underlying factual basis includes sexual behavior.)
• Required to register in another state or jurisdiction for a sex offense, or another state or jurisdiction of an offense which requires registration on CO.

CRS 18-3-411(1):
18-3-411 As used in this section, "unlawful sexual offense" means enticement of a child, as described in section 18-3-305, sexual assault, as described in section 18-3-402, when the victim at the time of the commission of the act is a child less than fifteen years of age, sexual assault in the first degree, as described in section 18-3-402, as it existed prior to July 1, 2000, when the victim at the time of the commission of the act is a child less than fifteen years of age; sexual assault in the second degree, as described in section 18-3-403 (1) (a), (1) (b), (1) (c), (1) (d), (1) (g), or (1) (h), as it existed prior to July 1, 2000, when the victim at the time of the commission of the act is a child less than fifteen years of age, or as described in section 18-3-403 (1) (e), as it existed prior to July 1, 2000, when the victim is less than fifteen years of age and the actor is at least four years older than the victim; unlawful sexual contact, as described in section 18-3-404 (1) (a), (1) (b), (1) (c), (1) (d), (1) (f), or (1) (g), when the victim at the time of the commission of the act is a child less than fifteen years of age; sexual assault in the third degree, as described in section 18-3-404 (1) (a), (1) (b), (1) (c), (1) (d), (1) (f), or (1) (g), as it existed prior to July 1, 2000, when the victim at the time of the commission of the act is a child less than fifteen years of age; sexual assault on a child, as described in section 18-3-405; sexual assault on a child by one in a position of trust, as described in section 18-3-405.3; aggravated incest, as described in section 18-6-302; trafficking in children, as described in section 18-6-402; sexual exploitation of a child, as described in section 18-6-403; procurement of a child for sexual exploitation, as described in section 18-6-404; indecent exposure, as described in section 18-7-302, soliciting for child prostitution, as described in section 18-7-402; pandering of a child, as described in section 18-7-403; procurement of a child, as described in section 18-7-403.5; keeping a place of child prostitution, as described in section 18-7-404; pimping of a child, as described in section 18-7-405; inducement of child prostitution, as described in section 18-7-405.5; patronizing a prostituted child, as described in section 18-7-406; or criminal attempt, conspiracy, or solicitation to commit any of the acts specified in this subsection (1).