Dauber's statements are so bad. It's widely held that judicial independence is threatened by the nature of this recall effort, of which her rhetoric being a prime example. So this law firm is donating legal services. Why does she bring this up? Is her position that innocent judges should have $250K sitting around to defend themselves from attacks?

Right now there are efforts to mount recalls for 4 different judges in San Francisco. It's the same kind of thing. Poke at their decisions and kick them out of office. It will be a very bad turn if Dauber gets her way. As a law professor, she ought to know better.

Let the Judicial Council or California Supreme Court decide the issue. Those would be the best qualified entities.
The criticisms launched by the non-lawyer Professor and her minions are misguided.
The Judge has valuable years of service to the public as a deputy District Attorney and Judge. He enjoys the support of those who appeared before him.
When might we expect a ruling?

Judge Persky first tried to stop the signatures' collection, and he is now trying to stop his name being on the ballot. He his trying to be above the law and the Santa Clara County Voters that elected him! PERSKY, YOU ARE NOT ABOVE THE LAW OR A GOD BEHID YOUR BENCH. YOU ARE A CORRUPTED JUDGE AND WE THE PEOPLE WILL VOTE YOU OUT!

On June 5, 2018, VOTE YES to recall judge Persky, rape culture, and White Male Privilege!

Michele Dauber is like a sports parent who gets upset at the referee for not calling a foul on the opposing team as the clock expires, even though her kid's team won by a landslide, so she makes it her personal mission to destroy the referee because she believes they should have won by even more. Turner was convicted and jailed, and remains on the sex offender registry for life. The recall effort seems to be driven by the desire for revenge, and I, for one, find it extremely offensive that she has disguised it as an appeal to help women.

The appellate court case deals with legal issues not addressed by the campaigners who have posted on the article. The appeal is about clarify the trial court recall process for the whole state. If the law firm for Judge Persky is serving pro bono (for the public good and without charge), good for the firm. If Judge Persky survives the recall, he will just send any future cases involving the firm to another judge.

Ms Dauber reminds me of donald trump: Can't get your way? Exaggerate, mis-inform then try to fire the one who is in disagreement.

Actually, it’s a Trump supporter and team member that is running Persky’s campaign. Shocking that Trump supports rape apologists. Not!

It's the actions that speak, not the associations. Dauber's actions are just like Trumps, and we can at least agree that Trump's actions are disgusting. Her ego has run amok and she cares not if it negatively affects the basis of an independent judiciary.

What other judges do you think should be removed because of their decisions on rape? I'm sure it's easy to find all sorts of cases that you disagree with.

This is nothing but angry villagers trying to find any sort of "Victory" in their quest, and has now set their sights on a sitting judge...this one only, because of this case only. That's a terrible Trumpian action.

Carol, for people like yourself that equal sports competition to sexual crimes is that we have the rape culture we have today. Even some judges like Persky fall to those thinking fallacies! SHAME ON YOU cAROL!

On June 5, 2018 VOTE YES to recall judge Persky and RAPE CULTURE!

Due to repeated violations of our Terms of Use, comments from this poster are automatically removed. Why?

I agree with Carol's analysis.
It is not at all clear that the Judge can get a fair hearing with all the biased reporting on tv and in the press. Hopefully, the Judges are above that misinformation.
And by the way, this is not a rape case. Anyone who says it is loses credibility.
The sentence is legal. The Judge did his job. He considered the witness's statements and the probation report. He did his job. That is the bottom line.

This election is about a bunch of people out to make a political point taking aim at the independence of judges. It's not about Persky. Dauber being a law professor is bringing shame to the profession. Her comments are always incendiary and vindictive. She makes it very personal about Persky and stands out for the nature of her comments as being highly biased. Yes, she's like Trump, because she's a media seeker and her self interests are paramount. This doesn't mean that Trump supporters like Dauber. There's more than one way to be similar.

Such a campaign shouldn't even exist. The effort to recall 4 judges in San Francisco is brought about just because of the media campaign to attack judicial independence from the mob mentality in the case of doing anything to unseat Judge Persky. It's a very bad situation.

Now if the Appeal does not succeed, then the law about recalls needs to be changed. We shouldn't have mobs deciding the sentences for criminals. Saying it is to fight rape culture is silly. Think of all the people who get away without even being charged for rapes. You think that stiffer sentences will make more get charged? I don't see it. If anything, it might make it be fewer. It's a poor way to make a politcal point and be sensational and grab news coverages.

Now Dauber is just not so smart. She got that threat in the mail and she said it happened a week earlier too. Then she said it might be a copycat. Well, the simpler explanation was that it was the same nut case sending her letters both times. But she saw a copycat. So there you are. Talking about copycats sounded more newsworthy and sensational. So she did. It really did look like she welcomed the attention of the media about the event. So, she's trying to be Steve Bannon.

So many paid shills defending Persky. Look at the comment above that Brock Turner didn't rape "Emily Doe". He put dirt, leaves and his fingers in her vagina, so it technically wasn't rape? There were two witnesses who tackled Brock Turner when he tried to run away. There was more than enough evidence to put him away and yet...

The minimum sentence was 5 years but since Brock Turner is a Stanford athlete, he was in jail for 3 months of his 6 month sentence. Shame on Judge Persky.

This is exactly what rape culture is all about. So many ways to excuse a rich man. Sorry boys, your time is up!

I think you mean the Maximum sentence was 5 years. I don't know if that's true either, but it's closer. None of this would have happened if the min. sentence was 5 years. I believe a typical sentence is 1 year with 6 months being served. The probation lady said to give this case a break, and the Judge did. That's what's got the mob upset.

The maximum sentence was 14 years for Brock Turner because he was found guilty on three counts of sexual assault. The prosecutors recommended 6 years.

This is why there is so much outrage against Judge Persky and Turner's 3 months in jail.

Web Link

I will not be voting for removal of Persky. In my opinion this is a witch hunt conducted by a no name academic who may want to run for public office. If the perpetrator were not a white young man would the same witch hunt be conducted I ask myself? Being the grandmother of a half dozen young women I keep telling them to watch what situations they get themselves involved in and to remain vigilant.

I wish the efforts had gone into creating better judicial fairness. Judicial elections are kind of a joke, and it’s very difficult to get objective and summarized information about a judge’s focus as a lawyer or in rulings as a judge. It would have been a lot more helpful if information about all judges made it easier to understand when they may be unprofessional or improperly biased. The biggest problem is judges whose bias to moneyed interests means ordinary people have no real recourse for justice.

Making this about Persky will mean people will vote for different individual reasons, but the results will be interpreted in ways that could be very damaging to justice (either way). I don’t think Professor Dauber has anything but good motives, but I also don’t think she thought this through, or maybe doesn’t understand the bigger picture in politics very well. I don’t like Persky’s ruling but I really dislike this being put to vote. People will vote yes and no for various reasons, but the results will be interpreted in ways that will not serve the general cause of improving the justice system, which is what should have been the focus. If it loses because people think it sets a bad precedent, even if they think Persky shouldn’t be on the bench, it will surely be interpreted widely as showing support for Persky’s jurisprudence.