Bay Area Divorce Lawyer Brad Baugh Military Service Claims Determined False by Stolen Valor Veterans Group

For over 25 years, Silicon Valley divorce lawyer Brad Baugh has been known for his endless, repetitive boasting about his heroic exploits as a soldier in the Vietnam War. Part of his sales pitch to potential clients is that they would be hiring, and helping a veteran who had served his country with distinction. And he rarely missed an opportunity to remind colleagues, court employees and family court judges of the selfless sacrifice he made as a front line fighter in Southeast Asia.

But an investigation by a "stolen valor" veterans research organization has determined that Baugh's claims about military service during the Vietnam War era are not true. Government records and other sources, including the 1968 yearbook from Del Valle High School in Walnut Creek show the lawyers assertions to be demonstrably false. In 1968, Baugh went directly from high school, to Stanford University in the fall, and never served in the military.

Attorney Brad Baugh appears in several places in the 1968 Del Valle High
School yearbook - including this listing for the student council. The same
year he claimed to a soldier in Vietnam.

Baugh repeatedly promoted his status as a veteran to generate business and grow his law practice, according to current and former clients, many of whom said they fell for the ruse and did hire Baugh because he was a vet.

Court appointed experts who worked on family court cases involving the lawyer said Baugh would also brag about the high number of enemy fatalities he was personally responsible for during his service in Vietnam.

Several experts interpreted Baugh's unsettling recitation of his "kill count" as a veiled threat or intimidation tactic, intended to ensure that the testimony of experts was favorable to his clients.

1968 Del Valle High School Senior
 Brad Baugh yearbook listing.

The veterans group said they will ask the Supreme Court and State Bar to disbar the controversial attorney, and are closely reviewing the case for possible referral to the U.S. Department of Justice for criminal prosecution under the Stolen Valor Act.

California Business and Professions Code § 6106 prohibits acts involving dishonesty or corruption, "whether the act is committed in the course of his relations as an attorney or otherwise."

The law has been well established since at least 1992, according to the State Bar Compendium of Professional Responsibility, a directory of past disciplinary decisions against lawyers.

Baugh may also be vulnerable to civil lawsuits. A jury in Montana recently assessed $1.7 million in damages against fake veteran Laron Shannon for fraud and negligent misrepresentation in a case involving his business, Oilfield Warriors, an oilfield services company.

Shannon misrepresented himself to clients and investors as an active U.S. Marine when he "never actually served in the United States Marine Corps or in any other military service branch," according to the lawsuit.

The litigation was filed by Don Kaltschmidt, an actual, former Marine who thought he was investing in a veteran-owned business.

“When someone infiltrates this community of veterans, it’s a violation of our code… We earned the right to be called Marines, and when someone who has not earned that right (calls themselves a Marine), you feel violated,” he said. “This lawsuit was not about me. It was about making sure Shannon didn’t do this again.” the Flathead Beacon reported.

Clients, former clients, court employees and others in the legal community who contributed to this report asked not to be named for fear of retaliation by Baugh, who is known to be ruthlessly vindictive and is well-connected in the Santa Clara County Bar Association and among judges and court clerks.

One court employee said they believed former law partners of Baugh were in on the military service deception, which generated substantial business for Baugh and his associates. "Brad's lies have been so brazen and reckless that he's like a serial killer who leaves clues because he wants to get caught." 

California State Bar Imposes "Secret" Discipline on San Mateo County District Attorney Stephen Wagstaffe - Whistleblowers Charge Whitewash, Cover Up

Whistleblower leak:

Whistleblower Leak: Divorce Lawyer Brad Baugh Falsified Orders Catalog - Honest Services Fraud, Moral Turpitude, Attorney Misconduct Allegations - Santa Clara County Superior Court

Many of the orders in this catalog of 51 orders were embellished, altered, or falsified by controversial divorce attorney Brad Baugh. A significant number of orders are contradicted by court reporter transcripts.

All of the illegal order alterations benefit Baugh's client, according to an attorney who has identified alterations by comparing the orders to transcripts from the same court hearing. In a similar scandal, Iowa Judge Edward Jacobson is being investigated by state court administrators.

• Iowa judge admits hundreds of his rulings were ghost-written by attorneys, raising a host of ethical and fairness concerns.
• Sioux City woman says retired judge's scandal led to child abuse.  
• Iowa reviewing judge who allowed ghost written orders.
• Investigation finds Iowa judge improperly resolved over a dozen cases. 

Felony Case Complaint Summary: Santa Clara County Criminal Case Against Controversial Divorce and Family Law Attorney Valerie Houghton

View the catalog of Houghton criminal case documents.

Prominent Court of Appeal Judge Breaks Code of Silence: Discloses Pro Per and Socioeconomic Bias Are Systemic and Institutionalized

A federal judge has broken a long-established code of silence among judges and court workers, and confessed what self-represented court users in California have asserted for years.

In multiple interviews, United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit Judge Richard Posner disclosed that most judges regard self-represented litigants as "kind of trash not worth the time." In court, a self-represented litigant without an attorney is referred to as a "pro per" or "pro se" party. The terms are interchangeable and mean the same thing.

Bay Area Newspaper Calls for Judge Bruce Mills Resignation: Serial Misconduct Shielded by Court of Appeal and Federal Judges

Judge Bruce Mills has been shielded from accountability for serial misconduct spanning 17 years by 1st District Court of Appeal Justices Jim Humes, Anthony Kline, William McGuiness, Ignazio Ruvolo, and Barbara Jones, according to whistleblowers. Federal judges Phyllis Hamilton, Joseph Spero, William Alsup, and Beth Labson Freeman protected Mills at the federal level.  

East Bay Times editorial board calls on controversial Contra Costa County Judge Bruce Mills to resign. 

For the second time in five years, the Commission on Judicial Performance has initiated formal disciplinary proceedings against him. Those proceedings are rare; only two to three are launched each year.

It’s time for Mills to step down, to spare everyone the time and expense of another drawn-out proceeding. This isn’t the first time he abused his authority as a judge. Not even close.

...Mills’ attorney, Jim Murphy, says the Commission on Judicial Performance should have never brought the current case, that it has a conflict because it has been criticized by the man jailed in the contempt case.

Murphy’s argument seems pretty weak, but it might have some weight if it were taken in isolation. The problem is that Mills’ abusive behavior has been going on for nearly two decades.

Murphy told this newspaper 11 years ago that his client, the judge, had learned his lesson and would change his ways.

“He is not going to ignore this,” Murphy said as he discussed the commission’s findings in a 2006 case. “I trust that he will never have any further complaints from the commission.”

That proved to be wishful thinking. Mills needs to go.

California Traffic Court Judges Remain Unaccountable for Serial State Law Violations Against the Poor

Statewide traffic courts scandal news reports expose institutionalized socioeconomic bias against the poor by California courts and judges. Bias based on socioeconomic status is prohibited by state law in four separate sections of the Code of Judicial Ethics, covering both the adjudicative and administrative responsibilities of judges.  

Over one year later, no disciplinary action taken against a single judge by the California Commission on Judicial Performance.  Read, download, and share the special 38-page compilation below: