The following is just my personal opinion based on observations in court over around 6 hearings. I admittedly hold the bias of being a good father who had Randall preside over my case, and who was put into a very hard position for my children both custody wise and financially, despite being the vastly more secure and stable parent, and wanting custodial of my kids.
In the cases I have seen him preside over, Randall makes decisions based more on his personal opinion of matters then on the law and the best interest of the child. The only time I have seen him rule in favor of a father was when a mother was willingly giving custodial to the father.
If you are a father and you don't have a lawyer (which is the case for many of us, because a huge chunk of our income is being taken for CS), do no expect him to disallow insidious chicanery from the opposing party's attorney. He openly treats attorneys as being more valuable than the parties in the case, and favor parties with an attorney. I watched him do this numerous times.
In court I watched as father after father was treated by Randall as a second-class parent and a bank. From what I have seen, he rules on child support with zero concern over the father's well being or how destroying him financially will affect the child. So, if you are a father, and you have a new case, do whatever you can to avoid Randall being your judge.
As for custody, he seems to mainly go with what the mother asks for, or with the minimal by-the-book percentage for the father.
Overall I would say Randall knows his family law, but he is a bit of a narcissist, a nepotist, and gives preferential treatment to mothers at the expense of the livelihood of the fathers, and therefore at the expense of the child or children of that father.
I see comments above that his redeeming quality is rescuing children from abusive homes. That is definitely commendable, and we need judges like that! So, maybe he would be better suited to preside over cases that involve abuse, and leave the cases of disputed custody between two good parents to a more impartial judge.
This judge DOES NOT listen to complete arguments and can not seem to see through blatant lies and misuse of the system. Appears he would rather continue cases than actually HEAR them. I think the local news would be interested to know he is biased and prejudiced.
i cannot agree with how how judge pacheco handled my case because he was only given a small portion of evidence when the restraining order was granted against me on behalf of long beach city college professors from the english department the professors never signed the order the vp of student support services Dr. greg peterson did all of the emails some of which were several pages long only the most prejudicial comments were presented to the judge I am a disabled student who recently suffered a head injury and did not want to crime to a public hearing and wanted some privacy and dignity in the but the clerk got in the way and would not let me speak to the judge over the phone or in his chambers it is also the fact that I do not dress in men's clothing even though I am still biologically male I did not want the college to use this as an excuse against me in court the actual complaint there were no threats of violence against anyone but just a statement of the over reaction the law enforcement authorities do to students at lbcc if they show any form of non violent protest or political dissent against there situation on campus I was perfectly willing to speak with the judge in court at a docket time of his choosing after 10 am in a private hearing with only a couple of reporters from school or a local paper present if they choose to not the entire public waiting to have their cases heard and made fun of me in regards to what I would be wearing I will only say the case against me has a political motive because I am over the 90 unit cap for priority registration and have been able to maneuver around it at school but the college is trying any way possible to push students out of the college who do not meet their for profit objectives they are trying every legal and illegal method at their disposal to deny students access to the classroom and use the 90 unit cap as an excuse to push these students to the curb by any means possible but the judge probably has too many cases and is also probably not the forum to discuss these matters the restraining order was nothing but a plan by dr peterson and professor pop dean jenniffer rodden and dr rodney rodriguez eng dept head to cover their tracks in realizing they had screwed up in devising a plan to discipline me the first day of school and without considering conflict resolution measures instead on the first day of school they even violated my privacy by mentioning a previous case that was in a filing cabinet of the previous dean that was never supposed to be made public and the brit lit professor female made the mistake of revealing that information to the entire class and losing composure first which caused me to be upset and yell at her for about 10 seconds as i left the room even though there were two seats left in the classroom that is what started it all So by only paying attention to the protection order and the clerk getting in the way not allowing for some accommodations to be made before I came to court that day I also could not come to court because I had a seizure that morning and was too tired and told the clerk some of my awful behavior could be blamed on the head injury and some not but the entire court that day could have made at least 1 minor adjustment or accommodation to the situation and they did not and that is why i am upset with that court room as a whole i hope judge pacheco has a very happy holidays but iis just a little more understanding next time
I have to say that this us the most disappointment experience that I haved ever had in regards of a Judge like this person is! I submitted proof with my Attorney and in no way did this Judge allowed my attorney to properly defend my case! All he did was acknoledge the othe parent without an attorney and at the end after going back to the court to see this Judge he ended giving the other parent what he wanted wich was 70% more visitation then me!!! Is a damn shame to see how our tax dollars are being wasted on biased Judges like this Judge Randall F Pacheco....Shame in every sense if the word!!
I have been in Judge Pacheco court on May 18th, 2017. The court appointed child assessor for custody, the assessor found it irrelevant the fact that the father locks in a room a 3 years old child for extended periods of time, as a form of punishment, diner is usually cereals, the fact that maintaining 50/50 custody the children will be over 4 hours strapped in the child seats in the car on a very busy 405, since she recommends a school mid way of the parents residences. She also forgot that the father that works only 12 hours a week keeps them in day care for 8 to 10 hrs a day, did not pay child support, and has a restraining order for domestic violence. In lieu of granting full custody to the mother that has the children in an A+rated pre school with a continuing program to the 8th grade, school that involves the children in numerous extra curricular activities, has a large family to assist and protect them, Judge Paceco prefers to grant the custody to the father, legal alien of iranian origin, so that he can continually abuse and neglect them. I would like your opinion regarding this ruling is the mother the better parent for not being a willing abuser of a situation and have young children spend more than one third of the day strapped in a car seat, woken up at the crack of dawn to be in school by 7AM so she can get to work and than again have them at 5PM in full traffic tired and hungry instead of having a normal childhood. And if so why punish her for thinking first of the child well being and not at her comfort?
I had a attorney as well as my kids father however wasn't even given the opportunity to explain anything. In mediation concerns that I had which were true later were declared as unfounded from a social worker which was called afterwards. Due to this the judge gave me no opportunity to explain my concerms nor give me the benefit of the doubt that I had been co-parenting for years avoiding court for the best interest of our children. He was given 50/50 although he's a full-time realtor and couldn't even spend every other weekend with his children while leaving them with a babysitter to volunteerly work while also failing to report his income to childsupport office regarding 9 houses. Admitted to the judge he did threaten me if I didn't close the childsupportcase that we'd go bk to court, judge did nothing! He got everything he wanted and now our children are seperated throughout the week on a unhealthy pattern when their having difficulties already in school. Had my paperwork to prove it and was blamed instead and told If he was picking them up after 8 pm I was responsible for that which it was done but closing houses and picking our daughters up after 8pm laying them dwn close to 10 pm on schoolnights was affecting them in class being able to focus. A bunch of B.S. I almost got visitation because I was working at 5am holding a fulltime job with no childsupport allowing their father to pick them up so they could rest enough. I got blamed for not reporting his income and employment. Goodluck with this one. I really feel my ex's attorney knew this judge very well and I didn't get a fair trial.
Prepared to preside over the case , read the whole case file and was fair to all sides and took the time to give all sides an opportunity. Was not afraid to apply the law when the easy decision was to continue the status quo.
Someone else is having same trouble as me (see above). Judge doesn't hear evidence, only takes the lies spouted by my ex as proof without real proof. I'm a woman, does that mean I should be deprived visits with my kids that he had allowed to stay with an expected child molester?