Patricia M. Murphy

Anyone who accuses Judge Murphy of malfeasance is out of their mind. No one is more fair and balanced to the parties - all sides, than her.

The origin of the Ventura family law department's hostility toward protective mothers has its genesis in the 1980s where women were increasingly assertive of their victimization in patriarchal families, giving voice to what has been a phenomenon for ages: domestic violence and sexual abuse of women and children. Throughout the 80's and 90's, disgraced psychiatrist and self-publishers Richard Gardner and Ralph Underwager called this "an epidemic of vindictive women and false accusations." They appeared as expert witnesses in hundreds of abuse cases defending perpetrators of sexual abuse in court. Underwager proposed that children were "brainwashed into making false accusations" and "false memory of abuse was a disorder of young women that was induced in therapy." He formulated that "parental alienation was the result of programming of the child," and that "false sex abuse accusations were another way of mothers gaining leverage in the courts." Gardner testified in court that these "alienated" children need to be transferred to the "rejected" father and that the mother must have "no contact at all with the children." He further advised, "the court might have to threaten sanctions such as fines or permanent loss of custody and even jail if the mother does not comply." Gardner and Underwager were both disgraced in the 1990's by defending sex with children. Underwager told a Dutch magazine, Paidika, in 1993 that pedophiles could "boldly and courageously affirm what they choose," and Gardner argued in his 1993 book, True and false Accusations of Child Sex Abuse, that pedophilia could "encourage early sexualization and enhance the survival of the human species." When asked what a good mother should do if her child alleged sexual abuse, Gardner replied, "sometimes you say I don't believe you, I'm going to beat you for saying it, you don't ever talk that way about your father." Gardner and Underwager's legacy lives on today in our antiquated court syste

Dear Public, It has come to our attention that Judge Patricia Murphy was sued for prosecutorial misconduct in connection with illegal acts she [allegedly] committed during her time in the Ventura County District Attorney's office. This suit was wrongfully barred by summary judgement on the grounds of "absolute prosecutorial immunity" in Murphy's personal capacity by our Ventura courts, a decision the 9th district court of appeals disagreed with and overturned in 2014. The case number is 09-55763 and links to the appeals court decision is copied below. Appeals Court's Published Opinion: https://www.radianttruth.com/Murphy_Appeals.pdf https://www.govinfo.gov/app/details/USCOURTS-ca9-09-55763 Appellant-Plaintiff Frederick Jackson in 2013 accused then District Attorney Patricia Murphy and the VCDA office of wrongfully denying his civil rights and for committing "various illegal acts," which the appeals court agreed was meritorious enough to overcome the prosecutorial immunity rule against Patricia Murphy personally. Jackson's suit prayed for over one million dollars in damages against Murphy. According to the appeal's court decision, "We hold that the grant of summary judgment was erroneous." Patricia Murphy [allegedly] committed various misconduct that Jackson asserted was "systematic conspiracy" by Murphy and members of the Ventura County District Attorney's office to illegally deprive him of his civil rights and railroad a criminal conviction. Jackson alleged coercion by Murphy, relying on a third-party's perjured testimony and abusing criminal plea deals to elicit a false confession from him. Murphy [allegedly] did this while knowing that the third-party's information was false. The appeals court granted Jackson the right to sue now Judge Patricia Murphy for her prosecutorial misconduct. [The poster asserts that] Ventura Judge Patricia Murphy is a corrupt former prosecutor. As a judge, she holds tremendous power over the citizens of Ventura Co

CA37980 *But, I have no opinion of this judge, Judge Murphy.

37972 TRR took time to redact a court staff's, victims' advocate's posts'-Ventura Radiant Truth's posts; crickets-when they have left reckless, intentional threatening posts, by abusive, highly threatening, LASC family, attorney troll, who has made threats against a litigant-private citizen and likely a vulnerable opponent--made sexual threats, sexual pictures, and threats to go after litigant -same MO as loser, who demands deletion of posts-same MO as my abusive ex's, abusive, lying, bully, malfeasant, LASC family lawyers', with one abusive lawyer in bed with an abusive judge and judges's cronies????? Is TRR this naive' to be manipulated by very dangerous judges and lawyers and their threatening, dangerous, criminal conduct.

Judge Murphy, Consider this your Single Scope Background Investigation. We will be watching! If you have information on Judge Murphy, we want to hear from you. Email us at RadiantTruth@pm.me. Very Truly, Ventura County's Radiant Truth

Dear Public, It has come to our attention that Judge Patricia Murphy was sued for prosecutorial misconduct in connection with illegal acts she committed during her time in the Ventura County District Attorney's office. This suit was wrongfully barred by summary judgement on the grounds of "absolute prosecutorial immunity" in Murphy's personal capacity by our Ventura courts, a decision the 9th district court of appeals disagreed with and overturned in 2014. The case number is 09-55763 and links to the appeals court decision is copied below. Appeals Court's Published Opinion: https://www.radianttruth.com/Murphy_Appeals.pdf https://www.govinfo.gov/app/details/USCOURTS-ca9-09-55763 Appellant-Plaintiff Frederick Jackson in 2013 accused then District Attorney Patricia Murphy and the VCDA office of wrongfully denying his civil rights and for committing "various illegal acts," which the appeals court agreed was meritorious enough to overcome the prosecutorial immunity rule against Patricia Murphy personally. Jackson's suit prayed for over one million dollars in damages against Murphy. According to the appeal's court decision, "We hold that the grant of summary judgment was erroneous." [Redacted] Jackson alleged coercion by Murphy, relying on a third-party's perjured testimony and abusing criminal plea deals to elicit a false confession from him. [Redacted] The appeals court granted Jackson the right to sue now Judge Patricia Murphy for her prosecutorial misconduct. Ventura Judge Patricia Murphy is a [redacted] . As a judge, she holds tremendous power over the citizens of Ventura County, making decisions of life and death. [Redacted]. A leopard never changes its spots. [Redacted] Very Truly, Ventura County's Radiant Truth

“Presiding Judge Patricia Murphy retaliated against a petitioner seeking a domestic violence restraining order for reporting misconduct by Judge Walsh, who was previously censured by the Commission on Judicial Performance for violating campaign finance laws. Judge Walsh solicited and accepted post-election campaign contributions from attorneys in a defunct political campaign, which in itself is an illegal act, but then additionally he failed to disclose conflicts of interest during court actions that he had accepted these contributions. This misconduct gave the appearance that Judge Walsh was taking bribes from attorneys in exchange for his court influence. In 2019, Judge Walsh showed bias in favor of police unions protecting officers from disclosure of their misconduct records to the public. Judge Walsh issued a court order blocking any pre-2019 records from being released in opposition to newly passed California Law SB-1421, which modified the Penal Code to allow public inspection of police records. This decision was clearly wrong and intended to shield officers from misconduct allegations in opposition to the intent of the state legislature. This decision was also intended to shield the court from retrying pre-2019 cases tainted by police misconduct such as when an officer is found to be lying under oath. Anonymous finds that this is unacceptable. Our source reported Judge Walsh for sleeping during trial... In responding to the complaint, Judge Murphy gave false testimony under oath, lying to cover for Judge Walsh to claim he wasn't sleeping to defeat the complaint, despite the petitioner listing multiple witnesses. None of the petitioner's witnesses were contacted to corroborate her claims, which shows clear bias by investigating Judge Murphy intended to protect a fellow judge. Judge Walsh is well past retirement age, and the accusation that he fell asleep during trial is very credible. Subsequent to the complaint filed against Judge Walsh, J