LASC Judge Pat Connolly Draws Election Challenge

Thursday, February 5, 2026

Page 1

LASC Judge Pat Connolly Draws Election Challenge

Paul Thompson, Chief Prosecutor in Harvey Weinstein Case, Files Declaration of Intent

By Roger M. Grace, editor

PAUL THOMPSON

judicial candidate

Los Angeles Superior Court Judge Pat Connolly—who once described himself as “pugnacious,” who in 2023 interceded in a case by seeking the disqualification of the bench officer to whom it was assigned, and has been thrice reprimanded by the state’s judicial disciplinary body—yesterday drew an election challenge.

Filing a declaration of an intent to run against Connolly in the June 2 primary was Deputy District Attorney Paul A. Thompson of his office’s Major Crimes Division. Formerly with the Sex Crimes Unit, he was leading prosecutor in the case against former producer Harvey Weinstein, who was convicted in 2022 on three counts of sexual assaults.

Queried as to why he has targeted Connolly, Thompson provided a comprehensive response. It is published on Page 4 of today’s issue.

Connolly won election to an open seat in 2008.

Disciplined by CJP

He received a public admonishment by the Commission on Judicial Performance (“CJP”) in 2021. The decision and order says:

“…Judge Connolly displayed improper demeanor toward two criminal defense attorneys during an arraignment and, in a different criminal case, made an inappropriate remark about the jury’s verdict to a defendant who had been acquitted- The commission determined that a public admonishment was warranted due to Judge Connolly’s significant prior discipline (a public admonishment in 2016 and a private admonishment in 2010) and his failure to fully acknowledge that his conduct was inconsistent with the California Code of Judicial Ethics.”

The CJP recited:

“In 2016, Judge Connolly received a public admonishment for a course of conduct reflecting embroilment with a criminal defense attorney and for setting multiple post-trial hearings regarding possible contempt charges, which was an abuse of his authority. In 2010, Judge Connolly received a private admonishment for using profanity during a judicial profile interview and in chambers discussions with attorneys.”

Asserts Lowenthal’s Bias

In 2023, Connolly sought the disqualification of Los Angeles Superior Court Judge Daniel Lowenthal in connection with a resentencing bid by a man convicted in 2007 of first-degree murder. Connolly had been the prosecutor.

He asserted that Lowenthal “has improperly assumed the role of Petitioner’s counsel.”

Connolly asserted he had a stake in the matter because the prosecution’s alleged failure to disclose exculpatory evidence was being asserted. Orange Superior Court Judge Cheri Pham ruled that Connolly did not have standing.

In denying the resentencing petition later that year, Lowenthal made the point—though not relevant to the ruling, but for apparent sake of promoting harmony within the court—that there was no wrongdoing on the part of Connolly as prosecutor.

Connolly did not respond to a request for comment on the challenge.

Other Challenged Judges

Two other Los Angeles Superior Court judges have drawn election challenges.

Private practitioner Dan Kapelovitz has filed a declaration of intent to seek the office held by Judge David Walgren, accusing the incumbent of being biased in favor of the prosecution. Judge Robert S. Draper has two potential opponents: Deputy District Attorney Tal K. Valbuena and private practitioner Allan L. Dollison.

The State Bar in 2021, in reporting discipline imposed on Dollison the previous year, noted that he was under the care of a psychiatrist. The candidate yesterday provided the METNEWS, by email, with biographical material on himself, but did not responded to an inquiry posed to him on Sunday, and repeated yesterday, as to whether he remains under such care and, if not, when the treatment ended.

Also, Dollison mentioned in his email that he is a “disabled veteran” but did not disclose, in response to being asked—inasmuch as it might impact his ability to perform judicial duties—what the nature of the disability is.

The Commission on Judicial Performance, in announcing a disciplinary investigation of Draper, noted that he has been seeing a psychiatrist and speculated that he might be suffering from a disability. He has been confined to chambers work.

Los Angeles Judge Marc D. Gross, whose term ends next Jan. 4, said yesterday he decided not to seek reelection—meaning that Office No. 66 is an open seat.

Gross was appointed to the bench in 2012 by then-Gov. Jerry Brown. His law degree is from USC.

He said:

“My last day on the bench will be March 18. I plan to take vacation and travel until the official retirement date. We’ll see about what’s next.”

Judges Kathleen Blanchard, Richard Fruin, and Christina Hill had not filed declaration as of press time yesterday, which was the last day for doing so. Monday is the deadline for filing declarations for open seats.

Filing such declarations yesterday were Deputy Public Defender Donna Tryfman and Deputy District Attorney Angie Christides.

Tryfman, an attorney since 1995, has a degree from the University of LaVerne College of Law. She is represented by political consultant Crystal Litz. Christides was admitted to practice in 2003. Her law degree is from Loyola.

DONNA TRYFMAN

judicial candidate

Here are the races for open seats, as they shaped up as of mid-afternoon yesterday:

Office No. 14 (held by Judge Christina Hill): Los Angeles Deputy District Attorney Angie Christides

Office No. 39 (held by Judge Kimberley Guillemet): Los Angeles Deputy District Attorney Angie Christides, Los Angeles Deputy Public Defender Binh Q. Dang.

Office No. 60 (held by Judge Richard Goul): Los Angeles Deputy District Attorney Rosalba Luz Gutierrez.

Office No. 64 (held by Judge Lauren Weis Birnstein): —

Office No. 65 (held by Judge Timothy Martella): —

Office No. 66 (held by Judge Marc D. Gross): —

Office No. 87 (held by Judge Holly Fujie): —

Office No. 131 (held by Judge Joseph Brandolino): Los Angeles County Deputy Alternate Public Defender David Ross, Los Angeles County Deputy Public Defender Donna Tryfman.

Office No. 196 (held by Judge Craig Richman): Los Angeles County Deputy District Attorney Candice Henry.

Office No. 176 (held by Judge Hector Guzman): Los Angeles Deputy District Attorney Gloria Marin.

Other incumbents had not filed declarations of intent as of mid-afternoon but have not confirmed that they do not intend to run. Possible open seats are:

Office No. 141 (held by Judge Kathleen Blanchard).

Office No. 181 (held by Judge Richard Fruin).

★★★★

Prosecutor Thompson Tells Why He Is Challenging Judge Connolly

I believe that we all have a duty to do what we can to make our communities better. I am running for judge because after 19 years as a Deputy District Attorney, I believe that I can best serve my community as a Superior Court Judge.

I considered running for an open seat, and, in many ways, it would have been easier to do so. But if I ran for an open seat, I would have very likely taken on someone who was, like me, qualified to serve our community as a Superior Court Judge. Instead, I’m running against Pat Connolly because he has proven through three terms that he is incapable of growth, reflection, maturity or good judgment. He has repeatedly been disciplined by the CJP with public shaming, but shaming will not change his behavior.

Here is his resume, in short:

• He left the District Attorney’s Office in 2001 because an upper manager said something that made then Deputy District Attorney Pat Connolly believe that his ethics were being questioned.

• He later returned to the office and in 2005 was chastised by a federal judge for “ethical amnesia” for refusing to release an inmate after being ordered to do so.

• When he ran for judge in 2008, former Los Angeles District Attorney Gil Garcetti questioned whether he had the judgment to be a judge.

• In 2010, he used an expletive to the California Daily Journal to describe the Los Angeles County Bar Association because they rated him unqualified to be a judge.

• Later in 2010, he was privately admonished by the CJP for conduct unbecoming of a judge.

• In 2016, he was publicly admonished for abusing his contempt authority to bully a defense attorney. In the admonishment, the CJP said he had entered the fray and ceased his role as an unbiased judge.

• In 2018, he questioned the not guilty verdict of a Compton Jury. (I have tried many cases in Compton and respect Compton juries’ verdicts.)

• In 2020, he held against two defense attorneys the fact that they abided stay-at-home orders and insinuated he would not review material favorable to their bail motion because they were abiding those orders.

• In 2021, he was punished for the 2018 and 2020 conduct. During the public admonition, his third disciplinary action, he made statements to the CJP that they found to be untruthful.

• In 2023, he again joined the fray as a litigant against another Los Angeles Superior Court Judge, attempted to get that Judge recused from the case and was shut down by the judge reviewing his motion. As mentioned, he had previously been punished for “joining the fray,” but he didn’t hesitate to do it again, when it suited him. It is worth noting that he objected to the Judge in that case in part because the judge questioned his prosecutorial ethics, joking a list of people to do so.

There are bullies at all levels of society. I have tried to take them on where I could. One of my signature cases was the prosecution of the sex offender Harvey Weinstein. I can’t take on every bully, but in this race, I see an opportunity to give the voters a choice between an unqualified bully and a person who has dedicated his career to public service.