Quote Quoting twindle
View Post
I'm actually very tech savvy. I think I made that obvious already. Anyway, not only do I know what her client is, and that her client is capable of it, I also know that it had a bug that I told Microsoft about. I also informed the DA of an alternative way of going about it due to such a bug. :_) So I guess I can be a little forgiving. Perhaps she tried it the buggy way and then gave up, and made a giant mess of society instead. Her normal thing to do as far as I can tell.
You might be tech savvy, but that doesn't mean that the judge is. It also doesn't mean that the court's software or admin will permit blocking email. Public agencies tend to also have policies that prohibit their restricting public access to them absent extraordinary circumstances.

I had a local paper that published all the department issued cell phone numbers in the paper, and the private numbers subsidized by public funds. As a result we dumped the phones and the city stopped paying for them because the devices became useless and also resulted in undue harassment and crank calls.

In any event, the law does not require the recipient of said annoying messages (i.e. harassment) to try and block them. And, the onus should not be on the victim in any event.

I already said this, but I already made it clear that no one communicated anything of stopping contacting the judge. You really love to harp on this topic, and yet it's not even the topic for why I'm here. I could argue with you endlessly, and make all sorts of good points that I've made to my lawyer. The fact remains that it doesn't matter to me. Also, my issue with arguing with legal people is that most lack any ability to think abstractly, so it's vexing. I've considered it with you, but I can't tell if you can or not.
You can disagree all you ant, and even think I'm obtuse. But, the law does not have to conform to YOUR way of thinking. It just does not. You do not have to agree with the application of the law for it to be in effect. As I said, I cannot say whether or not the state can meet the burden of proof, but experience tells me that a large number of emails is sufficient for a conviction. But, it will depend upon the content of the messages as well as the time frame. I suspect if you berated, insulted, and cursed out the judge that they will easily fall into the section of PC 653m.

One reason I'd prefer I didn't end up with the crap in my record is because it'll get in my way of becoming an MRI technologist.
I do not believe that PC 653m is a disqualifying conviction for any medical licensing.

Quote Quoting Mercy&Grace
View Post
Carl, don't judge's assistants read judges public emails ? If/when there is something the judge needs to be made aware of the assistant informs the judge.
If the email is sent to the court (a shared address, or a general address), sure. But, if they go to the judge herself, not likely. The judges I know read their own emails. But, I only have a close, personal relationship with a handful of Superior Court judges (and none in the Sacramento County Court) so I clearly cannot speak for all of them.