Shameful judicial decision allowed Pima County pedophile to “abscond”

It took a Pima County Superior Court jury only an hour of deliberation before convicting David Soto Cecena, 41.

His crime?

His child victim was 4-years-old when Cecena began sexual abusing her. By the time she was 14, nine years later, this vicious child rapist was sexually exploiting the terrified girl on a daily basis.

The cold-blooded pedophile is described as having “absconded” when his bail, which was originally set at the ridiculously low amount of $10,000, was further lowered to a mere $5,000 by sympathetic judge, Deborah Bernini, when she learned the pedophile’s 11-year-old son was terminally ill. Bernini might have shown similar compassion for the victim of Cecena’s continuous brutality, and for the future victims of this pedophile, by denying his hardship request.

As might reasonably be expected, Cecena made the lowered bail and fled. He was not present for either the trial or verdict. In the unlikely possibility he is ever caught, a sentence, which ranges from 13 to 27 years, will be imposed.

Unfortunately, Judge Bernini is not up for retention on the November 2 General Election ballot. On the Pima County court’s welcome video Presiding Judge Jan Kearney says their mission is to provide timely, fair and efficient justice which instills public confidence in the system.

In this case the mission has fallen far short of its goal.

Recently Deborah O’Malley, formerly with The Heritage Foundation Center for Legal and Judicial Studies and now a Fellow at the John Jay Institute wrote this cogent review titled A Defense of the Elected Judiciary.

We urge you to read it. There are forty-eight judges up for retention in Maricopa County (greater Phoenix area), eight judges in Pima County (greater Tucson), and seven judges standing for retention on Division One of the Court of Appeals. Of the five Arizona Supreme Court Justices, only the name of the chief justice will appear on the November ballot.

Not a single Arizona judge has ever been removed through the farcical retention process.

8 Responses to Shameful judicial decision allowed Pima County pedophile to “abscond”

  1. PV Voter says:

    On the linked “retention process” page, it says: “Merit selection is not a system that grants lifetime judgeships. In Arizona, after an initial two-year term of office and every few years thereafter, judges appointed under merit selection are evaluated by the voters in an uncontested retention election. Voters have the power to remove or retain judges during the retention elections.”
    After reading this I have five well chosen words: What a load of crap!!

  2. Frankly Speaking says:

    Reading this has infuriated me. What will it take to elect our judges and have them truly accountable? This system is massaged by those in power in order to perpetuate what they have instituted to benefit themselves.

  3. Capitol Watcher says:

    The only real transparency comes in the form of elections of judges as Arizona currently has in 13 of our 15 counties. But watch out! After the 2010 census, that could be changed as the citizens in more counties will lose their right to vote in these important elections when their population climbs high enough to move them into the mix with Maricopa and Pima. Then it will be impossible to undo the damage.

  4. American Dad says:

    Why has our legislature allowed this judical selection/retention sham to progress to this point where we’re reaching the end of our legal recourse rope with the new census numbers loming ahead? We’ve had a Republican majority and should have dealt with this before the 11th hour.

  5. LD 11 PC says:

    Ask Adam Driggs. He takes his marching orders from a former Chief Justice who counsels him to hold any judicial reform measures. Adam listens so well he will now be a state senator rather than a representative.

  6. California Dreamer says:

    I don’t know how parents are able to contain themselves when confronted with this violence against their children. Years ago a California woman made the news when she killed the church camp employee who sodomized her young son. Amazingly, she served prison time. She should have gotten an award!

  7. Joe Evans says:

    Great system that has never removed a single judge in decades. The proponents say it’s not a lifetime judgeship, but it sounds like it meets all of the standards to qualify. They can’t all be top-notch, though it’s clear they want us to think so. This is the ultimate insider’s game, crafted and played to benefit a select few. Informative post. Thanks!

  8. frdmftr43 says:

    Population size detrmines how judges are picked. Smaller communities do vote on the positions. It is not easy to get much info on judges and voters do not do research on those on the ballot for retention. Most people don’t vote on them at all, or they check no all they way down the page, or they only vote for one or two they recognize. If voters were better informed, some of these judges would be removed.