Judge Kozinski admonished for explicit items on website

Harry Longshanks

ILikeBigPutts&ICannotLie
Joined
Oct 9, 2008
Messages
12,044
Reaction score
101
Location
Home on the Range
http://www.cnn.com/2009/CRIME/07/02/judge.explicit.files/index.html

Judge Kozinski admonished for explicit items on Web site

Story Highlights

  • Alex Kozinski is chief judge of the 9th Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals
  • Items on judge's Web site included photos of naked women painted like dairy cows
  • Judicial council says his actions embarrassed federal judiciary
  • Kozinski has apologized for his "unfortunate carelessness"
By Bill Mears
CNN


WASHINGTON (CNN) -- A judicial council on Thursday admonished the chief judge of the nation's largest federal appeals court for having "sexually explicit photos and videos" on his personal Web site, but decided against any further punishment.

Judge Alex Kozinski, 58, of the San Francisco, California-based 9th Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals previously apologized and had recommended an investigation because of the public controversy over the material.

A panel of judges assigned to investigate concluded Kozinski's "possession of sexually explicit offensive material combined with his carelessness in failing to safeguard his sphere of privacy was judicially imprudent." His actions, the panel wrote, "can reasonably be seen as having resulted in embarrassment to the institution of the federal judiciary."

But Kozinski was not disciplined because he had removed himself from an ongoing obscenity trial when news broke of the visual material on alex.kozinski.com, which the judge launched in 2002, according to the 41-page opinion issued by the judicial council.

According to the council's written opinion, the material included a photograph of naked women painted like dairy cows, a woman shaving her pubic hair, and a video of a half-dressed man "cavorting with a sexually aroused farm animal."

Kozinski testified to a judicial conduct panel that much of the material was "like odd things that I've thrown into a room without looking at them." He said some of the files were e-mailed by friends, much of which he did not bother to view.

He admitted storing some of the sexually explicit photos, but said, "I don't know why I kept them."

The judge also said he never considered his site public and thought he had blocked access to the subcategory file in question, which was labeled "stuff."

There was no immediate reaction from Kozinski or his lawyer to the panel's admonishment.

Kozinski had earlier apologized to the investigative panel for his "unfortunate carelessness."

"I have caused embarrassment to the federal judiciary," he said. "And thus whatever shame was cast on me personally, it reflected on my colleagues and our system of justice as well."

The controversy erupted when Kozinski was about to serve as a trial judge -- separate from his work on the higher appeal court -- in a 2008 obscenity prosecution of adult film producer Ira Isaacs. Kozinski recused himself when the Los Angeles TImes published a story about the Web site material, and he later asked for a probe into the incident.

The Isaacs case has not gone to trial, but is on appeal over pending motions at the 9th Circuit. Kozinski is not expected to take part in the matter.

Kozinski is one of the most colorful and outspoken members of the federal bench. Born in Communist Romania, he emigrated to the United States at age 12 and still speaks with an Eastern European accent. His parents were Holocaust survivors.

He was named to his current seat in 1985 by President Reagan, and he was the youngest federal appeals judge in the nation at the time.

A mainstream Jewish conservative with libertarian views on free speech, the judge is admired for his writing skills, intellectual curiosity and sense of humor. He is also one of the few federal judges who will do press interviews, speaking with CNN on several occasions about a variety of topics. He also wrote an online "diary" for Slate.com a few years ago.

He is especially outspoken in oral arguments on his appeals court, and his detractors say he tends to dominate the questioning, often to the dismay of his fellow judges.
 
Naked women painted like dairy cows...........:dohanim:


Either I give up on men or I just don't understand them sometimes. hahaha
 
Naked women painted like dairy cows...........:dohanim:


Either I give up on men or I just don't understand them sometimes. hahaha

That isn't nearly as disturbing as a video of a half-dressed man "cavorting with a sexually aroused farm animal."
 
That isn't nearly as disturbing as a video of a half-dressed man "cavorting with a sexually aroused farm animal."

Verrrry good point! :shock:
 
Think the judicial system took care of one of it's own in this case? :banana:

I have been on a few juries in my life time, but this seems to be pretty bizarre for a sitting judge.

A video of a half-dressed man "Cavorting with a sexually aroused farm animal" that might have been emailed to him by a friend?

Film at 11:00 PM I guess....lol
 
Naked women painted like dairy cows...........:dohanim:


Either I give up on men or I just don't understand them sometimes. hahaha

Misty, that's not an either-or. That's an and.

When will they learn--absolutely nothing on the Internet is private. It's just a question of how much someone wants to find you.
 
Kozinski's a great judge. He's also a prodigy. Further, he's apparently human. If it makes anyone feel better, from what I hear this file was open to his whole family -- it really was stuff he thought was bizarre or amusing, not salacious stuff he was keeping for his own fetishistic ends. Sounds like a public reprimand is as much as he could deserve -- frankly maybe more than he deserved.
 
Kozinski's a great judge. He's also a prodigy. Further, he's apparently human. If it makes anyone feel better, from what I hear this file was open to his whole family -- it really was stuff he thought was bizarre or amusing, not salacious stuff he was keeping for his own fetishistic ends. Sounds like a public reprimand is as much as he could deserve -- frankly maybe more than he deserved.

Very NSFW...

If you Google his name, you can still see all the images and video he had posted. (If you delete a Google image, it still stays online for weeks, or even months.) These are not funny, they are disgusting, and very, very graphic. I don't know how he is personally, but...wow.
 
Back
Top