PHILADELPHIA, PA — A special judicial panel of judges who have apparently never taken a case that they could identify with have formally admonished so-called “Cow Porn” judge Alex Kozinski for the unforgivable sin of putting softcore silliness on his website where it can easily be located.Although judges with religious and social lives regularly officiate over court cases concerning topics of interest to people with religious and social lives, the fact that 58-year-old Kozinski had the audacity to acknowledge himself as a sexual being appears to have been too much for the not-so-blind justices.
Although the panel did not specifically condemn the chief justice of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit in San Francisco for possessing the ribald cartoons, photos and animations that he carelessly stored in a folder entitled “stuff” on his personal website, it did hold Kozinski’s feet to the fire for allowing them to be viewable to the public.
Ironically, judges who attend public religious services, openly possess firearms or engage in other perfectly legal, if controversial, activities have not been deemed worthy of such a public finger waving.
Other than the public humiliation associated with the rebuke, the panel did not impose any penalties. Instead, chief judge of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit, Anthony J. Scirica chided Kozinski, opining that “Once the judge became aware in 2007 that offensive material could be accessed by members of the public, his inattention to the need for prompt corrective action amounted to a disregard of serious risk of public embarrassment.”
Thanks to Scirica and his companions, Kozinski need no longer fear “public embarrassment,” because it’s here.
The presence of typical virally transmitted graphics on the judge’s site became a public issue in 2007 when the Los Angeles Times revealed the earth-shattering fact that Kozinski’s site included photos of naked women painted to look like cows, a video of a man trying to escape from a sexually aroused donkey and an assortment of other ribald visual fare.
Since Kozinski was presiding over the obscenity trial of radical pornographer Ira Isaacs, whose work includes body fluids not traditionally associated with erotic behavior, the judge’s sometimes similar taste in racy humor quickly became a political issue. Although Kozinski insisted that the content was humorous and not obscene, he recused himself from the case and declared a mistrial.
Roger Jon Diamond, Isaacs’ attorney, contends that Kozinski’s naughty stash of accidentally accessible adult humor is nothing to apologize for.
“He was innocent all along, and he overreacted to the government’s attempt to get rid of him,” Diamond insists.
Nonetheless, Kozinski requested a judicial investigation, which concluded that he had stored the images temporarily in folders on a family server that was also used to store personal photos and other data, including a video of the judge bungee jumping. At times, the site also hosted materials for a judicial conference and law school classes that he taught. Like many largely tech confused individuals, apparently Kozinski did not understand that the contents of those folders were accessible by members of the inquisitive public.
While the panel criticized the libertarian minded Reagan appointee for not doing enough to keep the files from the public’s gaze, Kozinski’s apology and later removal of the material, combined with the public scolding, was deemed sufficient punishment.
Not by Beverly Hills attorney Cyrus Sanai, however.
Sanai considers the decision to be “a complete whitewash” and contends that Kozinski also illegally distributed copyrighted music and deserves to be taught a stronger lesson.
“That kind of action, when taken by ordinary citizens,” Sanai told the press, “results in the imposition of huge liabilities.”
Kozinski, on the other hand, seems largely unrepentant, although willing to do what it takes to keep things quiet.
“Is it prurient?” he asked rhetorically of his collection in a June 2008 interview with the Los Angeles Times. “I don’t know what to tell you. I think it’s odd and interesting. It’s part of life.”
If only more members of the judiciary realized that simple fact.
