Marking the first time that an Illinois judge has faced formal disciplinary charges of sexual misconduct, a state agency accused a Cook County judge Tuesday of engaging in a wide range of misbehavior with a half dozen women, four of them prosecutors assigned to try cases in his courtroom.
The complaint alleges that Associate Judge Oliver Spurlock had sex in his chambers with a court reporter; failed to recuse himself from cases involving a victim’s assistance coordinator with whom he was having a “personal and romantic” relationship; and repeatedly propositioned female prosecutors, asking them out for drinks or meals and kissing two of them against their wishes.
Spurlock allegedly made a practice of commenting on prosecutors’ appearance, kissing his fingers in appreciation or making a clicking sound with his mouth whenever a particular outfit met with his approval.
The complaint also alleges that Spurlock talked with one prosecutor about pornographic movies he had seen and showed her a lingerie catalog, pointing out the items that he liked.
The Illinois Judicial Inquiry Board, the state agency that polices judicial conduct, has never before filed a complaint alleging such misconduct. But there have been numerous cases in other states, and some legal experts believe such misconduct is not that uncommon.
A New Jersey judge who offered to fix parking tickets for women in exchange for sex was sentenced last week to 30 months in federal prison. A Texas judge was suspended in 1997 after making inappropriate sexual comments to three female prosecutors, whom he reportedly called his “all-babe court.”
In Washington, a judge allegedly told a female lawyer, “Come into my chambers, counsel, and take your clothes off.” In West Virginia, a judge received a public reprimand for squeezing the breasts of a 15-year-old summer employee.
Though there are many cases of judges being accused of such misconduct, there are relatively few instances of judges being punished harshly, legal experts say.
Marina Angel, a Temple University law professor and author of a study on sexual harassment by judges, wrote in a 1991 law review article: “Judges have solicited sexual favors from criminal defendants, civil litigants, lawyers, law clerks, law students, court employees, job applicants, probation officers, juvenile court wards and jurors. Some have specifically demanded sex for favorable treatment and have retaliated when their demands were not met.
“Despite the seriousness of this conduct, however, sanctions imposed against offending judges have been surprisingly light. In a typical case, a judge found to have engaged in sexually harassing conduct received nothing more than a censure, reprimand or admonishment.”
Lynn Hecht Schafran of the National Organization for Women’s Legal Defense and Education Fund calls sexual harassment by judges a “big problem.” To show how such misconduct sometimes results in light punishment, she cited the case of Edward Seaman, a New Jersey judge charged with sexually harassing his law clerk.
More Top Picks Best Red Light Therapy Devices For Pain
“After hearing testimony from two other women who saw him reach under her skirt, the judicial conduct commission found he had violated various canons of the code of judicial conduct and they recommended a letter of censure–the absolute minimal response,” Schafran said. “When their recommendation went up to the New Jersey Supreme Court, the justices recommended a stiffer penalty–that he be suspended for 60 days.
“The community was up in arms. The legislature was moving to start impeachment proceedings, so the judge finally resigned.”
One case in which a judge was severely punished for sexual harassment was that of David Lanier, a politically connected judge in rural Tennessee who groped and propositioned court employees, defendants and other women who found themselves alone with him in his chambers. Several said the judge exposed himself under his robe and demanded oral sex; two said he raped them.
The district attorney–Lanier’s brother–took no action. But federal prosecutors eventually brought him to trial. In 1992, Lanier was sentenced to 25 years in prison for abusing his official power to deprive his victims of their civil rights.
Legal experts say it’s difficult to quantify such sexual misconduct–in part because of the risks inherent in publicly accusing a judge of wrongdoing.
But a number of state task forces on gender bias and sexual harassment cited in Angel’s research indicate the problem is widespread.
One, the New Jersey Supreme Court Task Force on Women in the Courts, said 25 percent of women lawyers in the state reported receiving unwelcome sexual advances from judges. And according to a Maryland task force, 19 percent of female attorneys and 22 percent of female court employees said judges subjected such women to unwelcome verbal or physical sexual advances.
The complaint filed against Spurlock by the Judicial Inquiry Board will go before the Illinois Courts Commission, a five-judge panel that determines whether a judge should be disciplined. If the commission decides that discipline is warranted, it can levy sanctions ranging from a reprimand to removal from the bench.
Spurlock couldn’t be reached for comment Tuesday. But Spurlock’s lawyer, William Martin, said: “The complaint, by its nature, states one side of the case, and this complaint is lengthy and presently anonymous on its face as to the identity of the witnesses. . . . We ask readers of the complaint to bear in mind that it is a completely one-sided document and urge them to keep an open mind until they hear all the evidence before the courts commission.”
Spurlock also faces a disciplinary charge accusing him of refusing to answer questions during the Judicial Inquiry Board’s investigation. Jeffrey Stone, a lawyer for the inquiry board, called that flouting the authority of the board and said it “calls into question (Spurlock’s) willingness to participate in the review of judicial conduct and judicial ethics.”
The complaint, which doesn’t name any of the female prosecutors or court employees involved in the allegations, says Spurlock engaged in a pattern of misconduct from January 1989 to July 1997.
Spurlock became a judge in 1988. His most recent courtroom assignment had been in Night Narcotics Court, but he was reassigned in August when the allegations first surfaced.
Donald O’Connell, chief judge of Cook County Circuit Court, said Spurlock presently has no power over litigants or lawyers. He is performing marriages.