“Close your legs? Call the police? Did you do any of those things”Â
Superior Court Judge John F. Russo Jr., who asked a woman if she kept her legs closed to prevent sexual assault, is accused of violating rules of conduct.Â
Â
According to a complaint filed this Monday, Russo made the statement during a 2016 hearing. The woman, who was seeking a restraining order against a man who allegedly coerced to have sex, described her encounter to Russo who asked her, “Do you know how to stop somebody from having intercourse with you?”.Â
Â
When the woman answered that one method would be to run away, Russo then said, “Close your legs? Call the police? Did you do any of those things?”Â
Â
The complaint, filed by the state Supreme Court’s Advisory Committee on Judicial Conduct, alleged that Russo “mistreated the victim”. The judge is also accused of three additional violations alleging breaches of the code– including an instance when he attempted to exert his judicial office to influence a personal legal matter.Â
Â
Russo refused to undergo a mental-health examination
According to reports from App, Russo has been placed on paid administrative leave since last April, after he refused to undergo a mental-health examination ordered by Ocean County Assignment Judge Marlene Lynch Ford. In a court filing, Ford revealed that Russo allegedly threw a file at his law clerk and even threatened to mace an attorney (later apologizing for his actions).Â
Â
Ford also said that Russo displayed signs of “extreme emotional immaturity”, “including the display of a ‘poop emoji’ in his chambers.” In a sealed court filing obtained by the App, it was outlined that the New Jersey judge exhibited, “physical aggression, racism, sexism and bizarre behavior.”Â
Â
Russo’s attorney said on Wednesday that he has 20 days to respond to the complaint.Â
Â
“Judge Russo looks forward to a public hearing in which he will be able to respond to the allegations against him,” attorney David Corrigan said. “We have respect for the process as well as the advisory committee on judicial conduct, and therefore won’t comment further.”
Â
Â
Â
Â