A former clerk for Judge Alex Kozinski said the powerful and well-known jurist, who for many years served as chief judge on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit, called her into his office several times and pulled up pornography on his computer, asking if she thought it was photoshopped or if it aroused her sexually.
Heidi Bond, who clerked for Kozinski from 2006 to 2007, said the porn was not related to any case. One set of images she remembered was of college-age students at a party where “some people were inexplicably naked while everyone else was clothed.” Another was a sort of digital flip book that allowed users to mix and match heads, torsos and legs to create an image of a naked woman.
Bond is one of six women — all former clerks or more junior staffers known as externs in the 9th Circuit — who alleged to The Washington Post in recent weeks that Kozinski, now 67 and still serving as a judge on the court, subjected them to a range of inappropriate sexual conduct or comments. She is one of two former clerks who said Kozinski asked them to view porn in his chambers.
In a statement, Kozinski said: “I have been a judge for 35 years and during that time have had over 500 employees in my chambers. I treat all of my employees as family and work very closely with most of them. I would never intentionally do anything to offend anyone and it is regrettable that a handful have been offended by something I may have said or done.”
Kozinski provided the statement after The Post called and emailed a spokesman with a detailed list of the allegations this story would include. After the story posted online, the judge told the Los Angeles Times, “I don’t remember ever showing pornographic material to my clerks” and, “If this is all they are able to dredge up after 35 years, I am not too worried.”
Unlike the politicians wrapped up in similar controversy, Kozinski has life-time tenure. It will be interesting to see how this plays out.
9 comments:
Resign or be impeached judge.
He showed someone porn? He should be drawn and quartered. It's no different than Harvey Weinstein.
Read the articles. He abused his power as a federal judge. If he was a supervisor in any business he would be fired.
Why is everyone presuming that these allegations are true?
Maybe one day he asked a male clerk his opinion on a particular piece of pornography, and then felt compelled out of equality to also ask a female clerk. Seems to me the guy is a champion of equal treatment of the sexes.
Uh, because they are.
“I have been a judge for 35 years and during that time have had over 500 employees in my chambers. I treat all of my employees as family and work very closely with most of them. I would never intentionally do anything to offend anyone and it is regrettable that a handful have been offended by something I may have said or done.”
This judge was always a bit creepy for my tastes. Back in 2009, there was an allegation that he stored pornography on his government computer. I don't think it was ever disputed. Everyone is entitled to his or her privacy but not if you are using a public terminal. And now these allegations which, in and of themselves, are not probative but taken together, show a judge who shall we say is incapable of exhibiting judicial restraint. Time for him to hit the road. Maybe he can start a second career as the new Harold Robbins.
Read Lithwick
This whole thing is such a mess!
Post a Comment