New Jersey judge who told rape victim she should've 'closed her legs' during abuse gets banned from courts
A New Jersey judge who grabbed headlines after asking an alleged rape victim if she could have closed her legs during the attack will never serve as a judge in the state again.
John Russo Jr was removed from judicial office in a unanimous decision issued by the state Supreme Court on May 26. The former Ocean County Superior Court judge was permanently barred from presiding over a New Jersey courtroom again because of “repeated and serious acts of misconduct" according to Chief Justice Stuart J Rabner, who authored the opinion on behalf of the court.
According to NJ.com, the decision to oust Russo was expected after a three-judge panel in January recommended his removal for violating the Code of Judicial Conduct on at least four separate occasions. The most prominent incident was when he asked an alleged rape victim a series of questions that were “wholly unwarranted, discourteous and inappropriate," as described by the state’s Advisory Committee on Judicial Conduct (ACJC).
Russo reportedly questioned the woman, who was seeking a restraining order against her alleged attacker, about her efforts to stop the alleged assault.
"Do you know how to stop somebody from having intercourse with you?” he asked her as she appeared in court in Ocean County in 2016.
The woman responded saying “run away or try to get away,” but Russo went on to ask if there was anything else she could have done during the assault.
“Block your body parts?” he asked. “Close your legs? Call the police? Did you do any of those things?”
Chief Justice Rabner wrote in the opinion that it would be “inconceivable” that Russo could preside over cases of domestic violence or sexual assault after those comments.
“No reasonable victim could have confidence in a court system were he to preside over those kinds of cases again,” he wrote.
Russo, a former mayor of Toms River, apologized for his remarks via his attorney during a Supreme Court disciplinary hearing in July 2019.
Nonetheless, he claimed that he was trying to help a “demoralized” witness on cross-examination and “get her re-engaged in the hearing". However, the SC noted in its opinion that his "explanation does not square with the record.”
“No witness, alleged victim, or litigant should be treated that way in a court of law,” Rabner wrote. “Judges set the tone for a courtroom. Especially when it comes to sensitive matters like domestic violence and sexual assault, that tone must be dignified, solemn, and respectful, not demeaning or sophomoric. (Russo) failed in that regard.”
The three-judge panel noted four instances of misconduct on Russo's part, including a certain matrimonial case for which he did not recuse himself despite knowing one of the parties involved. According to the panel, the instances did not indicate dishonesty when considered separately, but that his testimony regarding two of the allegations "lacked candor, fabricated after-the-fact explanations for events, and displayed a lack of integrity that is unworthy of judicial office."
The state SC further wrote in their decision to remove Russo and bar him from future judicial positions that the four incidents “viewed together” had “lasting consequences.”
“His pattern of misconduct and unethical behavior not only undermined the integrity of different court proceedings but also impaired his integrity and the Judiciary’s,” Rabner wrote. “His overall behavior reflects a lack of probity and fitness to serve as a judge. And his conduct breached the public’s trust.”