9th Circuit Court Judge has bestiality porn on website.

N&P: Discuss governments, nations, politics and recent related news here.

Moderators: Alyrium Denryle, Edi, K. A. Pital

Post Reply
User avatar
Redleader34
Jedi Knight
Posts: 998
Joined: 2005-10-03 03:30pm
Location: Flowing through the Animated Ether, finding unsusual creations
Contact:

9th Circuit Court Judge has bestiality porn on website.

Post by Redleader34 »

The LA Times wrote: One of the highest-ranking federal judges in the United States, who is currently presiding over an obscenity trial in Los Angeles, has maintained his own publicly accessible website featuring sexually explicit photos and videos.

Alex Kozinski, chief judge of the U.S. 9th Circuit Court of Appeals, acknowledged in an interview with The Times that he had posted the materials, which included a photo of naked women on all fours painted to look like cows and a video of a half-dressed man cavorting with a sexually aroused farm animal. Some of the material was inappropriate, he conceded, although he defended other sexually explicit content as "funny."

After details about the website were published on latimes.com this morning, the judge offered to entertain motions to recuse himself from the obscenity trial of Hollywood filmmaker Ira Isaacs, who is accused of distributing criminally obscene sexual fetish videos depicting bestiality and defecation.

Prosecutors said they were conferring with supervisors within the Department of Justice about how to proceed. In the meantime, they wanted jurors to be admonished to disregard publicity in the case. Defense attorney Roger Diamond made no objection to Kozinski continuing to hear the case, which began with opening statements this morning.

This afternoon jurors were taken to the appeals court's offices in Pasadena to view three videos at issue in Issacs' trial.

Stephen Gillers, a New York University law professor who specializes in legal ethics, told The Times that Kozinski should recuse himself from the Isaacs case because "the public can reasonably question his objectivity" concerning the issues at hand.

Gillers, who has known Kozinski for years and called him "a treasure of the federal judiciary," said he took the judge at his word that he did not know the site was publicly available. But he said Kozinski was "seriously negligent" in allowing it to be discovered.

"The phrase 'sober as a judge' resonates with the American public," Gillers said. "We don't want them to reveal their private selves publicly. This is going to upset a lot of people."

Gillers said the disclosure would be humiliating for Kozinski and would "harm his reputation in many quarters," but that the controversy should die there.

He added, however, that if the public concludes the website was intended for the sharing of pornographic material, "that's a transgression of another order."

"It would be very hard for him to come back from that," he said.

Kozinski said he would delete some material from his site, including the photo depicting women as cows, which he said was "degrading . . . and just gross." He also said he planned to get rid of a graphic step-by-step pictorial in which a woman is seen shaving her pubic hair.

Kozinski said he must have accidentally uploaded those images to his server while intending to upload something else. "I would not keep those files intentionally," he said. The judge pointed out that he never used appeals court computers to maintain the site.

The sexually explicit material on Kozinski's site earlier this week was extensive, including images of masturbation, public sex and contortionist sex. There was a slide show striptease featuring a transsexual, and a folder that contained a series of photos of women's crotches as seen through snug fitting clothing or underwear. There were also themes of defecation and urination, though they are not presented in a sexual context.

Kozinski, who was named chief judge of the 9th Circuit last year, is considered a judicial conservative on most issues. He was appointed to the federal bench by then-President Ronald Reagan in 1985. He has a national reputation for a brilliant legal mind and has developed a reputation as a champion of the First Amendment right to freedom of speech and expression. Several years ago, for example, after learning that appeals court administrators had placed filters on computers that denied access to pornography and other materials, Kozinski led a successful effort to have the filters removed.

The judge said it was strictly by chance that he wound up presiding over the Issacs trial in U.S. District Court in Los Angeles. Appeals court judges occasionally hear criminal cases when they have free time on their calendars and the Isaacs case was one of two he was given, the judge said.

Kozinski said he didn't think any of the material he posted on his website would qualify as obscene.

"Is it prurient? I don't know what to tell you," he said. "I think it's odd and interesting. It's part of life."

Before the site was taken down, visitors to http://**alex.kozinski.com were greeted with the message: "Ain't nothin' here. Y'all best be movin' on, compadre."

Only those who knew to type in the name of a subdirectory could see the content on the site, which also included some of Kozinski's essays and legal writings as well as music files and personal photos.

The judge said he began saving the sexually explicit materials and other items of interest years ago.

"People send me stuff like this all the time," he said.

He keeps the things he finds interesting or funny with the thought that he might later pass them on to friends, he said.

Either, A, the Judge is into beastailty, or B, we have a /b/ tard in the higher echelons of the federal government, Either possibility is unnerving. He is a pro free speech guy though. How odd
Dan's Art

Bounty on SDN's most annoying
"A spambot, a spambot who can't spell, a spambot who can't spell or spam properly and a spambot with tenure. Tough"choice."

Image
Image
User avatar
CaptainZoidberg
Padawan Learner
Posts: 497
Joined: 2008-05-24 12:05pm
Location: Worcester Polytechnic
Contact:

Post by CaptainZoidberg »

I don't see how this is anyone's business. If all of the actors consented, and no animals were raped / abused, then I fail to see the legal issue.
User avatar
CaptainChewbacca
Browncoat Wookiee
Posts: 15746
Joined: 2003-05-06 02:36am
Location: Deep beneath Boatmurdered.

Post by CaptainChewbacca »

CaptainZoidberg wrote:I don't see how this is anyone's business. If all of the actors consented, and no animals were raped / abused, then I fail to see the legal issue.
Could they get him for distributing pornography?
Stuart: The only problem is, I'm losing track of which universe I'm in.
You kinda look like Jesus. With a lightsaber.- Peregrin Toker
ImageImage
User avatar
Alyrium Denryle
Minister of Sin
Posts: 22224
Joined: 2002-07-11 08:34pm
Location: The Deep Desert
Contact:

Post by Alyrium Denryle »

CaptainChewbacca wrote:
CaptainZoidberg wrote:I don't see how this is anyone's business. If all of the actors consented, and no animals were raped / abused, then I fail to see the legal issue.
Could they get him for distributing pornography?
no. they were on a private directory
GALE Force Biological Agent/
BOTM/Great Dolphin Conspiracy/
Entomology and Evolutionary Biology Subdirector:SD.net Dept. of Biological Sciences


There is Grandeur in the View of Life; it fills me with a Deep Wonder, and Intense Cynicism.

Factio republicanum delenda est
weemadando
SMAKIBBFB
Posts: 19195
Joined: 2002-07-28 12:30pm
Contact:

Post by weemadando »

This leads into one of my problems with most justice systems.

There is an inherent prejudice in the systems. If you're against the death penalty you're barred from taking part in any murder trial in the US, but if you're pro-death penalty it's fine.

In this case, the judge clearly doesn't have a moral objection to the content being questioned and is going to be removed because of that, but if he was a fire and brimstone crazy right wing ultra-conservative who was spouting on about how God says it's wrong to look at such things, then that's perfectly goddamn fine.

It just makes no sense to me.
User avatar
Galvatron
Decepticon Leader
Posts: 6662
Joined: 2002-07-12 12:27am
Location: Kill! Smash! Destroy! Rend! Mangle! Distort!

Post by Galvatron »

So the man's a sexual freak. He should run for congress on the GOP ticket.
User avatar
CaptainZoidberg
Padawan Learner
Posts: 497
Joined: 2008-05-24 12:05pm
Location: Worcester Polytechnic
Contact:

Post by CaptainZoidberg »

Alyrium Denryle wrote:
CaptainChewbacca wrote:
CaptainZoidberg wrote:I don't see how this is anyone's business. If all of the actors consented, and no animals were raped / abused, then I fail to see the legal issue.
Could they get him for distributing pornography?
no. they were on a private directory
It actually said at one point that he sent pictures to his friends sometimes if he found them "interesting".
User avatar
Master of Ossus
Darkest Knight
Posts: 18213
Joined: 2002-07-11 01:35am
Location: California

Post by Master of Ossus »

CaptainZoidberg wrote:I don't see how this is anyone's business. If all of the actors consented, and no animals were raped / abused, then I fail to see the legal issue.
Ummm... he's currently adjudicating a dispute involving (really, REALLY weird) pornography. I dunno about you, but this sort of thing would lead to a conflict of interest.
"Sometimes I think you WANT us to fail." "Shut up, just shut up!" -Two Guys from Kabul

Latinum Star Recipient; Hacker's Cross Award Winner

"one soler flar can vapririze the planit or malt the nickl in lass than millasacit" -Bagara1000

"Happiness is just a Flaming Moe away."
User avatar
Coyote
Rabid Monkey
Posts: 12464
Joined: 2002-08-23 01:20am
Location: The glorious Sun-Barge! Isis, Isis, Ra,Ra,Ra!
Contact:

Post by Coyote »

Oh, I don't know.. he's in a position to know what constitutes "wierd" pornography. More so than a person who thinks that the "Missionary Position" is kinky.
Something about Libertarianism always bothered me. Then one day, I realized what it was:
Libertarian philosophy can be boiled down to the phrase, "Work Will Make You Free."


In Libertarianism, there is no Government, so the Bosses are free to exploit the Workers.
In Communism, there is no Government, so the Workers are free to exploit the Bosses.
So in Libertarianism, man exploits man, but in Communism, its the other way around!

If all you want to do is have some harmless, mindless fun, go H3RE INST3ADZ0RZ!!
Grrr! Fight my Brute, you pansy!
User avatar
Alyrium Denryle
Minister of Sin
Posts: 22224
Joined: 2002-07-11 08:34pm
Location: The Deep Desert
Contact:

Post by Alyrium Denryle »

CaptainZoidberg wrote:
Alyrium Denryle wrote:
CaptainChewbacca wrote: Could they get him for distributing pornography?
no. they were on a private directory
It actually said at one point that he sent pictures to his friends sometimes if he found them "interesting".
That is a bit different, and so long as they are of legal age it is perfectly legal IIRC.
There is an inherent prejudice in the systems. If you're against the death penalty you're barred from taking part in any murder trial in the US, but if you're pro-death penalty it's fine.
Indeed. I was thinking about that the other day. I can never actually sit on a murder jury (or any jury for that matter) because no lawyer would ever select me and I am pretty much legally barred from sitting in a capital murder case due to my stance on the death penalty. This sort of situation is hardly conducive to a fair trial.
GALE Force Biological Agent/
BOTM/Great Dolphin Conspiracy/
Entomology and Evolutionary Biology Subdirector:SD.net Dept. of Biological Sciences


There is Grandeur in the View of Life; it fills me with a Deep Wonder, and Intense Cynicism.

Factio republicanum delenda est
User avatar
Rogue 9
Scrapping TIEs since 1997
Posts: 18687
Joined: 2003-11-12 01:10pm
Location: Classified
Contact:

Post by Rogue 9 »

I don't think most people here will ever sit on a jury, because lawyers don't like intelligent people being on juries. Stupid people are easier to sway with rhetoric, you see.
It's Rogue, not Rouge!

HAB | KotL | VRWC/ELC/CDA | TRotR | The Anti-Confederate | Sluggite | Gamer | Blogger | Staff Reporter | Student | Musician
User avatar
Turin
Jedi Master
Posts: 1066
Joined: 2005-07-22 01:02pm
Location: Philadelphia, PA

Post by Turin »

Rogue 9 wrote:I don't think most people here will ever sit on a jury, because lawyers don't like intelligent people being on juries. Stupid people are easier to sway with rhetoric, you see.
In all fairness, lawyers and judges also have schedules to maintain. If it's not a capital or otherwise crime, the juror-questioning is pretty lackadaisical. Or at least it was when they picked me for a jury. They asked me whether I knew the defendant or any of the witnesses and that was about it. :cry:
User avatar
Oni Koneko Damien
Sith Marauder
Posts: 3852
Joined: 2004-03-10 07:23pm
Location: Yar Yar Hump Hump!
Contact:

Post by Oni Koneko Damien »

Master of Ossus wrote:
CaptainZoidberg wrote:I don't see how this is anyone's business. If all of the actors consented, and no animals were raped / abused, then I fail to see the legal issue.
Ummm... he's currently adjudicating a dispute involving (really, REALLY weird) pornography. I dunno about you, but this sort of thing would lead to a conflict of interest.
Why? Is what he has illegal? Does he make any sort of profit off of his porn? Why does someone's perfectly legal personal interests somehow constitute a 'conflict of interest' for their job? Unless said job has an ingrained bias against such interests. In which case I think that's more a problem with the justice system than with him.
Gaian Paradigm: Because not all fantasy has to be childish crap.
Ephemeral Pie: Because not all role-playing has to be shallow.
My art: Because not all DA users are talentless emo twits.
"Phant, quit abusing the He-Wench before he turns you into a caged bitch at a Ren Fair and lets the tourists toss half munched turkey legs at your backside." -Mr. Coffee
User avatar
CaptainZoidberg
Padawan Learner
Posts: 497
Joined: 2008-05-24 12:05pm
Location: Worcester Polytechnic
Contact:

Post by CaptainZoidberg »

Oni Koneko Damien wrote:
Master of Ossus wrote:
CaptainZoidberg wrote:I don't see how this is anyone's business. If all of the actors consented, and no animals were raped / abused, then I fail to see the legal issue.
Ummm... he's currently adjudicating a dispute involving (really, REALLY weird) pornography. I dunno about you, but this sort of thing would lead to a conflict of interest.
Why? Is what he has illegal? Does he make any sort of profit off of his porn? Why does someone's perfectly legal personal interests somehow constitute a 'conflict of interest' for their job? Unless said job has an ingrained bias against such interests. In which case I think that's more a problem with the justice system than with him.
If he had a website or something, than of course I'd consider him to have a conflict of interest.

But in this case its a private collection, so I'm not sure the law would really even affect him that much.
User avatar
SirNitram
Rest in Peace, Black Mage
Posts: 28367
Joined: 2002-07-03 04:48pm
Location: Somewhere between nowhere and everywhere

Post by SirNitram »

Master of Ossus wrote:
CaptainZoidberg wrote:I don't see how this is anyone's business. If all of the actors consented, and no animals were raped / abused, then I fail to see the legal issue.
Ummm... he's currently adjudicating a dispute involving (really, REALLY weird) pornography. I dunno about you, but this sort of thing would lead to a conflict of interest.
Is this more of a conflict of interest than someone who refuses to define obscenity except as 'I know it when I see it', or any prude? That's the question that really boils out of this.
Manic Progressive: A liberal who violently swings from anger at politicos to despondency over them.

Out Of Context theatre: Ron Paul has repeatedly said he's not a racist. - Destructinator XIII on why Ron Paul isn't racist.

Shadowy Overlord - BMs/Black Mage Monkey - BOTM/Jetfire - Cybertron's Finest/General Miscreant/ASVS/Supermoderator Emeritus

Debator Classification: Trollhunter
User avatar
Vendetta
Emperor's Hand
Posts: 10895
Joined: 2002-07-07 04:57pm
Location: Sheffield, UK

Post by Vendetta »

SirNitram wrote:Is this more of a conflict of interest than someone who refuses to define obscenity except as 'I know it when I see it', or any prude? That's the question that really boils out of this.
If the website is a non-commercial venture, no. If it's a commercial venture, then yes.
Post Reply