Schulte Story ‘Distorted, Unfair’

The Sept. 17 article “Simpson Custody Arbiter Advocated Fathers’ Rights,” relating to Commissioner Thomas Schulte, is distorted and unfair.

The suggestion that Commissioner Schulte’s judgment would be tainted because, as a lawyer, he was retained by fathers in pursuit of their constitutional rights, is shallow thinking, at best.

It is difficult to conjure up a lawyer’s specialty that would not impact his thinking as a jurist, given your theory of jurisprudence. For example, could a deputy district attorney possibly serve as a judge in a criminal matter, given his theoretical bias? The bias you have imputed to Commissioner Schulte is equally absurd.

Commissioner Schulte has received plaudits from the Orange County Bar Assn. and from the family law section of that bar, including having been named jurist of the year.

You failed to report important legal issues that are unique to cases like that of O.J. Simpson. It is extremely difficult for [one who is not a parent] to obtain custody in a dispute with a natural parent. Commissioner Schulte did not create this law, but he is lawfully bound to enforce it. Perhaps an informal article on the law in this area would be informative, on the one hand, and less offensive to those of us who respect the work and the ethics of Commissioner Schulte, on the other.

GERALD J. PHILLIPS

Orange

* I read with dismay the hit piece on Commissioner Tom Schulte.

As a practicing family lawyer of 25 years standing, I can state without reservation that Commissioner Schulte’s reputation within the knowledgeable family law Bar is:

1) An extremely fair, evenhanded and conscientious jurist;

2) An individual whose professional ethics and standards were and are of the highest quality attainable;

3) A lawyer who is most sensitive to the problems, difficulties and nuances of contested custody litigation; and

4) A jurist who, on his own, revamped the handling of the domestic violence calendar in Orange County long before it was fashionable to do so.

It is appalling that a newspaper such as yours would stoop to the techniques, standards and methodologies of the Rupert Murdoch school of journalism.

The most salient fact ignored in the biased article is that four of Orange County’s most respected, knowledgeable experts in custody litigation stipulated to let Commissioner Schulte hear the case. They are under a gag order and cannot respond.

So your paper resorts to rumor, innuendo and unnamed, unknown sources for the sake of an O.J. story.

MICHAEL L. MICHEL

Newport Beach