• Story alerts
  • Letter to Editor
  • Pin it

On May 7, San Diego County Superior Court judge DeAnn Salcido held a press conference in front of the Hall of Justice and alleged widespread violation of the law by the superior court judges of San Diego County.

Before the press conference, several protesters passed out blue flyers and held signs criticizing the judges for giving custody of children to abusers. At around 9:00 a.m., the press showed up and set up their equipment. Then Salcido arrived, flanked by Robin Yeamans (her attorney) and Dr. Robert Geffner, president of the Institute on Violence, Abuse and Trauma (IVAT).

As Salcido began to speak, the protesters, the press, and others crowded in to hear what she had to say. Salcido said she was filing a writ in the court of appeals to force the San Diego superior courts to obey the law. She alleged that Peter Deddeh, the supervising judge of the East County branch of the superior court, systematically instructed other judges to break the law and did not impose the mandatory requirements for domestic-violence offenders. Salcido said that Deddeh’s lax attitude toward violent offenders and disregard for the law jeopardized public safety, and when she tried to follow the law she was harassed and retaliated against by Deddeh, who allegedly told her to administer only “Chevy justice” to domestic-violence victims and to save the “Cadillac justice” for more important cases.

Salcido said she could no longer keep silent after the murder of Chelsea King, when she found out that it was Deddeh who allowed John Gardner to plea bargain to only six years in prison for the violent rape of a child, ultimately resulting in Gardner’s release and the murder of Chelsea King and Amber Dubois.

Geffner and Yeamans each spoke briefly, and Salcido answered a few questions. One person asked Salcido if she was coming forward now because she was being challenged in the upcoming election. Salcido answered that she had been trying for years to get the courts to comply with the law.

  • Story alerts
  • Letter to Editor
  • Pin it

Sponsor Partners


uncleleo May 11, 2010 @ 4:54 p.m.

Judge Michael Smyth is the same way.

See here:


The article explains that Judge Michael Smyth said that the he "did not require [Thomas] Sadler to register for life as a sex offender, noting that the crimes for which Sadler was convicted did not indicate sexual intent."

But the cop admitted it and says the exact opposite:

“I can’t explain what came over me that day, your honor,” Sadler said in court, adding that he was suffering from stress after being passed over for a promotion. “I was a man and I saw a prostitute and I wanted to have sex. … I didn’t want to hurt her.”

So the cop admits that he wanted to have sex with this prostitute but the judge STILL says the cop's actions "did not indicate sexual intent." Wha?! Was Smyth asleep during the trial? What kind of kangaroo court is San Diego running? Here's a man going around town with a gun -forcing women to perform sexual favors for him. And he doesn't even have to register as a sex offender? I guess the message here is: authority figures have leeway when it comes to misbehaving.


Sign in to comment

Win a $25 Gift Card to
The Broken Yolk Cafe

Join our newsletter list

Each newsletter subscription means another chance to win!