Let’s count reasons judge’s boorish behavior should get him removed

If you're like me, you read recent articles about District Judge Nicholas Del Vecchio linking him to a litany of civil sexual abuse and sexual harassment allegations and found yourself asking a question:

What is this little black-robed weasel still doing on the bench?

Del Vecchio is named in a 38-count complaint filed by a special prosecutor for the Judicial Discipline Commission.

The complaint runs 31 pages and outlines a pattern of behavior that shouts to have Del Vecchio yanked from the Family Court bench like an abscessed tooth.

The complaint's lowlights include allegations Del Vecchio, before taking the bench in 2000 after seven unsuccessful tries, took nude photos and coerced the daughter of his ex-wife into performing oral sex on him. Although Del Vecchio denies the allegation, and the passage of time and lack of physical evidence would make the accusation difficult to prove, the complaint written by commission attorney Mary Boetsch lists a withering litany of other damning accusations that will certainly be much easier to illustrate.

There's Count 11, in which former court clerk Patti Camarote swears that in 2003 she was told by Judge Del Vecchio to have sex with law clerk Michael Bognar to "make a man out of him."

There's Count 13, in which former judicial executive assistant Wendy Cox says Del Vecchio told her to date "certain attorneys, to go out to lunch or dinner with them, because you could tell they were interested in her and she could thereby solicit and obtain campaign contributions for your campaign; that you stressed to her that she should dress nice which she understood to mean seductively," according to the complaint.

There's Count 15, in which former bailiff Richard Tamez swears he heard Del Vecchio make "racially related remarks" in court. According to the complaint, the judge once asked, "Where's my lazy Mexican bailiff? He's probably asleep under his chair."

There's Count 20, which finds Family Court employee Beata Funk accusing Del Vecchio of making numerous inappropriate sexual comments about her.

There's Count 26, in which former court clerk Wilma Sawtelle overhears Del Vecchio make numerous "sexually suggestive" remarks about female litigants and attorneys.

And I'm sure Family Court Judge Stefany Miley will be mortified to learn what her colleague is alleged to have said about her in Count 29.

Like a smutty lounge comic who refuses to leave the stage, the judge's inappropriate comments just keep on coming.

There are far more presumably easily verified accusations of misconduct and inappropriate behavior in the complaint's 38 charges.

Unless you are an unabashed believer in complex conspiracy theories, the large number of people who say they experienced the judge's boorish behavior make any thought that Del Vecchio's courthouse enemies are out to get him seem more than far-fetched. If half the charges don't stand up, that only leaves him culpable in 19.

Which brings me to today's question: Why hasn't the Judicial Discipline Commission swooped in to remove Del Vecchio from the bench? Why hasn't Chief Judge Kathy Hardcastle dropped the hammer and stripped Del Vecchio of his cases?

The complaint is fine, but the commission saw fit to remove District Judge Elizabeth Halverson from the bench without an official complaint. Hardcastle moved like lightning to take away Halverson's caseload.

There's little in the complaint against Halverson that even remotely compares to the depth of sleaze of which Del Vecchio stands accused. A rookie judge, Halverson is accused of falling asleep on the bench, botching some rulings, and verbally abusing the hired help.

Del Vecchio has been drawing a salary from us taxpayer suckers since 2000 and is up for re-election this year. His unprofessional comportment, as outlined in the complaint, leaves the commission and Hardcastle with no reasonable choice but to act quickly.

If Halverson really was such an imminent threat to the bench that she had to be escorted from the building before any ethics charges were filed against her, then what does that make Del Vecchio?

Does anyone reasonably believe he can conduct his duties now that these blistering allegations against him have been made public?

If Halverson needed to be removed before the filing of an official complaint against her, then Del Vecchio ought to be hanged from the courthouse flagpole.

I'm guessing a few of the judge's former employees will gladly provide the rope.

John L. Smith's column appears Sunday, Tuesday, Wednesday and Friday. E-mail him at Smith@reviewjournal.com or call (702) 383-0295.