Petition to Impeach Iowa District Court Judge George L. Stigler

WE, the undersigned Citizens of the State of Iowa do, by our signatures to this Petition, call upon the Iowa House of Representatives to exercise its Power under the Constitution of Iowa (Article III Sections 19 and 20) and the Code of Iowa (Chapter 68, Section 602.2201) and draw up impeachment articles against George L. Stigler, Judge of the First Judicial District, Black Hawk County, Iowa, for MALFEASANCE IN OFFICE. And we implore the Iowa State Senate to remove him from office.

According to the Iowa Supreme Court: “’malfeasance’ is the doing of an act which a person ought not to do at all.” Proksch v. Bettendorf, 218 Iowa 1376, 1379 (1934).

While serving in his capacity as a District Court Judge, George L. Stigler did:

1) deliberately, willfully and wantonly exceed his authority as a Judge;

2) ignore all controlling legal authority and precedent;

3) ignore all evidence and testimony presented by the Department of Human Services (DHS);

4) place children in the home of a pedophile, who was placed on the Central Abuse Registry in accordance with Iowa Statute  692A.2;  

5) ordered a CINA petition be established or criminal charges filed by the county attorney within a week of a hearing or a non-custodial parent could not maintain temporary physical placement in order to protect the children;

6) accuse a parent trying to protect his children of orchestrating the act of second degree sexual abuse and lascivious acts with a minor child by his former wife for the sole purpose of gaining physical placement, which is in direct violation of Iowa Code of Judicial Conduct, Canon 3 (A)(8);

7) lead the questioning throughout the entire court hearing to the witnesses trying to obtain an outcome he was seeking against a litigant who is a member of a parental rights organization, which is in direct violation of Iowa Code of Judicial Conduct, Canon 2 (C);

8) assume the role of an advocate on behalf of the pedophile in this case by abusing his judicial power to question witnesses, which Judge Stigler has already been previously warned about In Re Benham v. King, No. 4-224/03-1518 (IA 6/9/2004);

9) has a history of allowing personal bias to dictate a final outcome and has a history of showing judicial activism of which the Judicial Qualifications Commission and the Supreme Court of Iowa acknowledge but refuse to remove him from the bench (see below):

In re Stigler, 607 N.W. 2d 699, 705-709 (Iowa 2000).  In that case the court agreed with the Judicial Qualification Commission that Judge Stigler's actions violated Canon 3(D)(1) of the Iowa Code of Judicial Conduct where the judge considered an application for attorney fees in a case where the judge earlier had exhibited displeasure with an attorney adverse to the application.  Stigler, 607 N.W.2d at 708-09.  The attorney had filed a complaint against the judge, and the judge had prior thereto announced his intention not to hear matters in which the attorney was involved.  Id.  The court noted that if Judge Stigler had not previously announced a bias toward the attorney, his ruling might be excused as a mere error of judgment, but his acknowledgment of bias made it much more serious.

10) ignore Iowa Statute 598.1(1) “best interest of the child” in placing these children with a known pedophile;

11) ignore the definition of “joint custody” or “joint legal custody” as established in Iowa Statute 598.1(3);

12) ignore Iowa Statute 709.1 “Sexual Abuse Defined”;

13) ignore Iowa Statute 709.3 “Sexual Abuse in the Second Degree”;

14) ignore Iowa Statute 709.8 “Lascivious Acts with a Child”;

15) ignore Iowa Statute 728.12  “Sexual Exploration of a Minor”;

16) display a unfriendly attitude towards a litigant with hostile remarks and impervious questions, which is in violation of Iowa Code of Judicial Conduct, CANON 3 (A)(3).

17) ignore written testimony from a physician stating the children were showing signs of being emotionally and physically abused by their mother.  

The Undersigned Iowa Citizens hereby declare that we condemn all judicial foolishness and judicial activism. And we demand that the imperialistic judge who commits such offenses must be punished by removal from his office to protect all citizens and future litigants.