First, the Judicial Conduct Commission knew that Judge William Adams acted with extreme conflict of interest. Specifically, the Commission knew the case involved alleged child abuse by Judge William Adams' personal attorney (William Dudley who Judge William Adams had around that time "hired" to represent him in a child custody case according to Judge William Adams' own testimony). The child said that Judge William Adams' personal lawyer among others asked him to lie that his mother had "touched him" (among other lies). This would be a crime and unethical (solicitation of perjury, etc.).
Second, the Judicial Conduct Commission knew that Judge William Adams made extremely corrupt rulings. He held it was frivolous to believe the child. There was no factual basis for that whatsoever. The child was not impeached in any way whatsoever. There were third party witnesses who supported the child's statements, a child psychologist who interviewed the child and found him credible, etc. There was no evidence contrary to what the child said other than general denials. The child was characterized as honest and intelligent by both parents. It not only is not frivolous to believe a child. It is wrongful even criminal sometimes to ignore a child's outcry.
Parents lose children over ignoring outcries of abuse. They can even be prosecuted criminally for ignoring their children. There are mandatory reporting requirements for one thing. Also, ignoring a child's outcry of abuse can be considered child endangerment or complicity in the child abuse. Yet, this is exactly what Judge William Adams did. He actually did worse. He not only ignored the child's outcry of abuse. He attacked the mother for believing her child (also, her lawyer). He had no intellectually honesty at all rather he was overtly dishonest. He admitted he believes children when he signs arrest warrants (children he usually doesn't know) yet he attacked this mother and her lawyer for believing the child. Obviously, if the child had lied as requested, the child most certainly would not have been ignored by the prosecutor, CPS, etc. This was the purest form of corruption imaginable. Judge William Adams made clear that the law is one thing for him, the State, and most everybody on the planet but something else for this mother, this child, and the mother's lawyer. This was to cover up the crime committed by his lawyer William Dudley according to the child.
Judge William Adams also ridiculed the mother's concern that the child care provider used by the mother was mentally ill. He denied all discovery on the issue. This was further corruption of the judicial process by the corrupt Judge William Adams. Well, even a Judge cannot completely hide the truth. The mental health records were obtained from MHMR and showed the child care provider to be homicidal, psychotic, suicidal, etc. This wasn't going to stop the corrupt Judge William Adams. He refused to even look at the records and then said "he didn't know that" (conscious ignorance -- the documents were right in from of corrupt face). He ultimately held that it was irrelevant that the child care provider was homicidal psychotic, suicidal, etc. which obviously makes not just the child care provider but him also insane (or corrupt, or both). He had no regard for the well being of the child. The was fixed. It was corrupt. No evidence was going to make any difference. Pure corruption.
The child said where the meeting occurred, when the meeting occurred, who was present, etc. The restaurant waiters testified that the meeting occurred and identified two of the people present. A child psychologist testified she found the child's statements credible and what the child said amounted to horrific child abuse. The child "acted out" in ways consistent with the meeting in several respects. The child repeated lies that William Dudley and his dishonest friends such Lanette Joubert had been stating for months. He was told to lie in ways consistent with the lies that Wiliam Dudley and Lanette Joubert had been telling for months (they had been lying that the mother was having sex with her lawyer for months, they had no evidence of this at all, and the child was told to lie and say he saw his mother and the lawyer in bed together). Obviously, there is zero chance the child made these things up. Judge Adams didn't care. He didn't care less about the truth. He was going to cover up the truth (in this instance the truth is a crime). He was corruptly covering for his own lawyer. Judge William Adams' behavior cannot be characterized as anything other than complicity in a crime. The Judicial Conduct Commission knew about all this and did nothing.
Judge William Adams also held that it was frivolous to subpeona witnesses to the event described by the child. For example, the child said William Dudley was present at the meeting where the child was told to lie. According to corrupt Judge William Adams, it was frivolous to subpeona William Dudley as a witness. In other words, the corrupt Judge William Adams was not going to allow a real hearing to take place. William Dudley and the others at the hearing were never held to account. The same William Dudley who argued that he was irrelevant as a witnessed appeared voluntarily at trial and testified on the same . He is irrelevant when he wants to be irrelevant and relevant when he wants to be relevant. This mother was not allowed any discovery of any type. Her lawyer was threatened repeatedly including he was threatened for believing her. He was sanctioned for calling witnesses on her behalf. The corruption was total and complete. The commission knows this, and the commission did nothing at all. It did no investigation. It did nothing.
Third, it knows that Judge William Adams engaged in a campaign of retaliation. He sanctioned this mother's lawyer over $10,000 for believing her child and for calling witnesses on her behalf. Of course, it would have been total disloyalty to the client and disregard for her interests to ignore the child. He sent out dishonest messages designed to cause the trouble. As just one example, he told his ex wife that the lawyer was a danger to his child and the child should not be allowed to walk home from school alone. There was no factual basis for that whatsoever. It was just malicious dishonesty of the same type as telling the child to lie about his mother. He repeated the lie that the mother and the lawyer and the mother were involved sexually. There was no factual basis for that. It was just a total lie. He had joined the lie being told by his personal lawyer William Dudley.
This is only part of the story. Judge William Adams was bribed. He received value from William Dudley (legal services or promise of legal services) around this time. Judge William Adams made corrupt, retaliatory rulings. He retaliated outside the courtroom also (the message to his ex wife is a particularly well documented example but he retaliated in other ways also like with the Bar which is a whole additional story of dishonesty and corruption particularly James Ehler and Marie Haspil).
Three or four judges in Texas have been convicted of bribery in the last 12 to 24 months (probably more). Half a dozen lawyers in Cameron County have been convicted or awaiting trial on corruption charges including the District Attorney for the County. One attorney was found guilty of bribing not only the judge but a fact witness to testify about an accident he didn't see. The fact witness who accepted the bribe as an interesting coincidence possibly not a coincidence has the same last name as the father at issue who together with William Dudley and others asked the child to lie that his mother "touched" him. One man spent 25 years in prison wrongfully because a child was ignored (Michael Morton). The child in the Michael Morton case was much younger than the child involved in the Judge William Adams corruption. The child told the truth. The child was ignored. An innocent man went to prison for 25 years. The corrupt Williamson County legal establishment not only ignored what the child said but stalled and stalled covering up the DNA evidence that eventually exonerated the wrongfully convicted man. The evidence was hidden with frivolous legal stalling for roughly 5 years while the innocent man sat in prison (an obvious attempt at a cover up).
The point is that the legal system does contain corruption. It is not frivolous to believe what the child said particularly in this case where these same lawyers had set up several innocent parents for prison over the course of a decade (probably more but these are the ones known to me). The bar knows about these cases particularly the one involving Stanley Rains. James Ehler who is a corrupt lawyer with the bar covered up the Stanley Rains related crimes also. Those crimes went on for a decade. Stanley Rains was repeatedly called a pedophile and denied access to his child with no evidence supporting that at all. In one instance, among many, "evidence" was fabricated. These corrupt lawyers acting as a teal represented that a witness stated they saw Stanley Rains' p***s hard while his daughter sat on his lap in the care driving the care. It was a total lie. The witness was eventually identified and interviewed. The witness denied saying any such thing. The Stanley Rains was 10 years or more of continuous corruption and both the bar and the judicial conduct commission covered it up. On on occasion, James Ehler was visibly amused when William Dudley got caught red handed lying to a tribunal. James Eheler is a corrupt and evil man. Stanley Rains' child was molested but not by him. A maternal relative molested the child and later molested other children receiving at least two convictions for child molestation. At the same time, Stanley Rains was denied access to his child based on the allegation unsupported by any evidence that was a pedophile, the convicted pedophile was allowed free access to the child. The convicted pedophile was tied up with the Sheriff and other Victoria County Officials later convicted of child molestation.
The point is that wrong things do happen. It is not frivolous to allege that something wrong happened within the legal system. On the contrary, it is wrong to ignore this kind of evidence which is exactly what the Corrupt Judicial Conduct Commission has done for years and the bar also. They know in this instance that Judge William Adams is corrupt and committed crimes (at a bare minimum they know there are serious allegations and they ignored the allegations -- did nothing at all). This a pattern of corruption at the corrupt Judicial Conduct Commission lasting at least a decade, and this is probably why there is an epidemic of judicial bribery and legal corruption in Texas.
What did the corrupt Judicial Conduct Commission do? It did exactly nothing. Many members of the commission were present at the Sunset Commission Hearing where testimony was given by three witnesses concerning these matters. Thomas Cunningham in particular was present. It not only did exactly nothing but it wrote a decision in the case relating the Judge William Adams' beating his child that was intentionally deceptive. They refused to look into these issues because they claimed lack of jurisdiction to review judicial decisions (which is generally true but no true if the decision if the decision involves bribery, extreme conflict of interest, and blatant corruption as exists here). However, although they claimed lack of jurisdiction, to review his decisions, they nevertheless did. They wrote an opinion saying that a multitude of unnamed lawyers praised the fairness of his decisions. They ignored the lawyer who said otherwise. Unnamed witnesses are of course inherently suspect like the unnamed witness in the park who supposedly saw Stanley Rains' p***s hard (through a car door, clothing, and a child). Did the witnesses even exist? Who selected the witnesses? How many witnesses were Judge William Adams' corruption buddies who benefit from his corrupt and criminal rulings? The Judicial Conduct Commission was intentionally deceptive particularly Thomas Cunningham who wrote the deceptive, dishonest opinion.
There will never a legitimate legal system in Texas as long as the Judicial Conduct Commission considers its job to be covering up for corrupt judges. The same for the bar as to lawyers. It is not funny to lie in Court. It is not funny to tell baseless lies about sex. It is not funny to lie about the law. James Ehler thinks these things are funny. The Judicial Conduct Commission has not been observed laughing about corruption as James Ehler did but it clearly covers it up and deceives.