By Donald H. Harrison
SAN DIEGO — In downtown San Diego, one of the federal courthouses is named for Judge Jacob Weinberger, who I’m certain would be shaking his head right now. All this speculation about Mayor Bob Filner’s guilt or innocence would have him wondering whatever happened to the deliberative justice system in which evidence was presented in a courtroom, and, within the bounds of law, witnesses were questioned by attorneys. Has it all disappeared?
On Monday, July 22, Irene McCormack Jackson, formerly communications director for Mayor Filner, was joined by famed attorney Gloria Allred to reveal that she is at least one of the women who is bringing a sexual harassment lawsuit against the mayor.
There were two other news conferences dealing with the Filner case as well. In one, we learned that City Council President Todd Gloria, a Democrat, and City Councilman Kevin Faulconer, a Republican, have renewed their demand that Mayor Filner resign. While routine city business is being handled by the newly appointed administrator Walt Ekard, they said, policy matters are at a standstill. According to them, no one wants to even talk to Filner.
We also heard from City Attorney Jan Goldsmith that it’s possible that if the city incurs penalties because of Filner’s alleged behavior, the city government might sue Filner to recover those damages. And, further, we’ve learned, while this matter progresses, Filner will not meet alone with females; there will always be someone else in the room.
As for Filner, he issued a statement vowing a vigorous defense against all the charges being brought against him. In the background, meanwhile, is a growing demand for a recall election if the mayor doesn’t voluntarily step down.
In this publication, we have argued that Bob Filner, like every person accused of crimes or other misdeeds, is entitled to due process. We believe there is a majesty to our justice system that stands in stark contrast to the trial by newspaper headline and television and radio soundbites that we are currently witnessing.
The late Judge Weinberger was no stranger to politics. Before his elevation to the federal bench, he had been involved in politics in two states. In 1910, as a delegate from the town of Globe, he was a member of the convention that drew up a state constitution for the Territory of Arizona. Later moving to San Diego, he served for many years as a member of the San Diego Board of Education, before being appointed successively as the city attorney, a Superior Court judge, and finally as this area’s first resident federal judge.
After he got on the bench, he kept mum not only about the legal cases that were being heard in his courtroom, but also about other cases that occasionally found their way to public comment and speculation. He wasn’t interested in people’s opinions about the cases, he wanted only to know the evidence. And when he rendered a judgment, it was based on that evidence, not on emotion.
I am not going to take the side of either Bob Filner or of Irene McCormack Jackson. I’m going to try to be like Judge Weinberger and wait to see what the facts are as they are developed under rules of evidence in a court of law.
In this case, as in life, patience is a virtue.
*
Harrison is editor of San Diego Jewish World. He may be contacted via donald.harrison@sdjewishworld.com