“If we desire respect for the law, then we must first make the law respectable.”
L. Brandeis, Other People's Money (National Home Library Foundation ed. 1933).

Complaint Filed Against Judge Randa Trapp to California State Commission On Judicial Performance

*This is a shortened version of the complaint, created to not bog down the reader.

Emad Tadros, M.D.

Diplomate American Board of Psychiatry and Neurology

3914 Third Ave. San Diego CA 92103

Phone: 619-291-4808 & Fax: 619-291-4426

May 25, 2012

California State Commission On Judicial Performance

455 Golden Gate Ave. #14400

San Francisco CA 94102-7007


I am submitting my formal complaint in regards to The Honorable Randa Trapp, Superior Court Judge, Department C-70, 330 West Broadway, San Diego CA 92101. Please appreciate the fact that this complaint is never intended to disrespect or demean anyone and I uphold my respect to the Hon. Trapp, regardless. February 6, 2006, I filed before Judge Trapp a copy of a 10-page-letter that was directed to Doyne. In this letter I expressed serious concern(s) about Doyne’s unprofessional behavior…24 hours later…I filed one-page-Exhibit directed to Judge Trapp’s attention where…I formally requested Due-Process. According to Mandatory CRC 5.225 Judge Trapp would be the one and only authority to “Accept and Process” complaints…. (Exhibit 3). In Judge Trapp’s 2-23-06 hearing, I reiterated my grave concerns about Doyne’s unprofessional behavior and asked that Judge Trapp’s professional intervention would save unneeded legal research and fees. Judge Trapp did nothing.

On October 8, 2006, I mailed Judge Trapp a thick packet…detailing… serious concerns about Doyne Credentials’ Fraud, purchasing a fake Specialty Diploma where the same was sold to a housecat and a murderer in Prison. (Exhibit 4) Judge Trapp did nothing. “CANON 2: “A JUDGE SHALL AVOID IMPROPRIETY AND THE APPEARANCE OF IMPROPRIETY IN ALL OF THE JUDGE’S ACTIVITIES A. Promoting Public Confidence: A judge shall respect and comply with the law and shall act at all times in a manner that promotes public confidence in the integrity and impartiality of the judiciary.”

On October-14-2008, I filed a Civil Complaint requesting a jury trial (with Doyne being the Defendant) alleging Fraud, violation of BPC 17200, negligence and Breach of Contract…

June 2009, I discovered that at no time Judge Trapp filed her Mandatory CRC FL327 “The Mandatory Order Appointing Custody Evaluator” nor Doyne ever fulfilled his obligation filing the CRC Mandatory FL326, which is a“Verification of Doyne Education, Credentials, Experience and his legal jurisdiction before the court and that all must be signed Under the Penalty of Perjury.” Doyne’s appointment …. was a mutual violation of CRC 5.225 due to lacking FL327 and Doyne never filing FL326…

It is also an undisputed fact that Judge Trapp has had prior years’ of trust receiving continuing education lectures, personal knowledge and contact with Doyne on many other events. Canon 4-D Financial Activities: (5) Under no circumstance shall a judge accept a gift, bequest, or favor if the donor is a party whose interests have come or are reasonably likely to come before the judge.”

December 2010 Judge Bloom is replaced by The Hon. Trapp (the 2005 Family Court Judge) to my Civil Case in 2012…

April 14, 2012, “Tentative Ruling” was issued by Judge Trapp before our first hearing on 4-15-2012… granting Tadros to pay attorney fees to Doyne… Judge Trapp made a factual written opinion regarding the issue of her own disqualification…: “Plaintiff previously sought a Change of Venue based on the same publicity argument presented here.” How can Judge Trapp be an objective and unbiased trier of fact when she made such statement confirming her predetermined motive and intent without facts in evidence and before hearing any oral argument? This very statement cannot be any better proof of Judge Trapp’s prejudice and bias. (Exhibit 5 C pp.16-17) “CANON 3 A JUDGE SHALL PERFORM THE DUTIES OF JUDICIAL OFFICE IMPARTIALLY AND DILIGENTLY (1) A judge shall hear and decide all matters assigned to the judge except those in which he or she is disqualified.”

April 15, 2012 @ 9 AM, Tadros acted at the earliest time since discovering that Judge Trapp would not recuse herself.  She was properly served with Code of Civil Procedure 170.1 motion prior to the scheduled hearing @2pm. (Exhibit 5 D pp.18-32). Additionally a supplementary Decl. was filed.  (Exhibit 5 E 33-43)

During the 4-15-12 @ 2 PM  During the 4-15-12 @ 2 PM  Judge Trapp made a stern warning, before I started, pointing her fingers at me, frowning, sharp tone of voice, instructing me that I must respect her “striking my motion to recuse her off the record” and that I must not talk about it on the record. … I further stated “I respectfully do not recognize you as my civil judge and that I could not proceed with the civil case when she was my family court judge.”…. I objected what the judge had ordered me to strike the record that she was my Family Court Judge. I stated that this was violation of my civil rights…..then Judge Trapp took the Proposed-Order from Doyne’s attorney, asked to cross the word “Proposed” and as usual she rubberstamped everything Doyne had requested in full as a “Court-Order” for me to pay Doyne… (Exhibit 6)

“Canon 3 C (5) A judge shall perform administrative duties without bias or prejudice. A judge shall not, in the performance of administrative duties, engage in speech, gestures, or other conduct that would reasonably be perceived as (1) bias or prejudice…..”

The tentative minute’s pre 170.1 motion… became unchanged, when in fact it would require Judge Trapp to refer this issue to the presiding judge for adjudication of an unbiased trier to fact. In contradiction, Judge Trapp orally (there has never been an entry of judgment striking same) struck Dr. Tadros’s 170.1 motion off the record pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure 170.4 B (Exhibit 5 F pp.39/8-12) “Canon 3- E. Disqualification (2) In all trial court proceedings, a judge shall disclose on the record information that is reasonably relevant to the question of disqualification under Code of Civil Procedure section 170.1, even if the judge believes there is no actual basis for disqualification.”…

Despite Judge Trapp granting order for Doyne to be paid in full, the major media outlets Frontline, NPR, PBS and Propublica handled it differently. Once they were informed about the shocking findings of Doyne’s Diploma Mill, they took very serious interest in this and interviewed few judges including Judge Harry T Edwards US Court of Appeals and Judge Donald Shelton Circuit Court of Michigan. Both judges openly expressed their expertise in this broadcast:


(Exhibit 11) http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/real-csi/

…..The alleged Diploma Mill’s owner Robert O’Block threatened me with a one Million dollar lawsuit if I continued to pursue my legal steps exposing Doyne purchasing O’Block’s fraudulent Credentials …www.thepubliccourt.com

1- What do we expect the public to do with CRC, when some Judges do not

recognize their own Mandatory CRC?
2- Are there any ramifications when the Mandatory CRC get violated?

3- Who should be disrespected and kicked out of our courtrooms: The Public or CRC Violators?

I ask you please to investigate what deem to be professionally appropriate measures in this very unhappy matter.


Emad Tadros, M.D.