News

Brock Turner judge recuses himself from child-porn case

Aaron Persky cites publicity, impartiality as reasons for recusal

Embattled Santa Clara County Judge Aaron Persky, who is currently facing a recall campaign for his controversial sentencing of former Stanford University student-athlete Brock Turner, has recused himself from an upcoming hearing in a child-pornography case.

In a statement filed with the court on Friday, Persky wrote that while on vacation earlier this month, he and his family were exposed to publicity surrounding the case, in which Persky sentenced a 48-year-old San Jose resident who pleaded guilty to a felony child-pornography charge to four days in county jail. The Recall Persky campaign released in early August information and documents related to the sentencing, pointing to it as further evidence of Persky's alleged bias in sex-crime cases.

"This publicity has resulted in a personal family situation such that a person aware of the facts might reasonably entertain a doubt that the judge would be able to be impartial," Persky wrote in his brief statement, which the district attorney's office provided to the Palo Alto Weekly.

Persky was set to oversee a hearing for defendant Robert Chain this Thursday on a motion to have his felony charge reduced to a misdemeanor. This has repeatedly been moved to Oct. 6, and will now be overseen by Judge Kenneth Barnum.

Chain was arrested in Sunnyvale in May 2014 following an investigation conducted by the Silicon Valley Internet Crimes Against Children Task Force and charged the next month with one count of possessing/controlling matter depicting a person under age 18 engaging in or simulating sexual conduct, according to court documents. The crime carries a maximum three-year penalty and no minimum. Persky eventually gave him the four-day sentence, three year's probation and ordered him to register as a sex offender.

What's local journalism worth to you?

Support Palo Alto Online for as little as $5/month.

Learn more

Chain's attorney, Brian Madden of San Jose firm Madden & Redding, declined to comment on the record.

Assistant District Attorney Terry Harman said in a statement that "It is a judge's responsibility to recuse him or herself if there are issues of impartiality."

"We're focused on the prosecution of the defendant in this matter," she said. "We're confident that the case will be handled by the bench fairly."

Michele Dauber, the Stanford law professor who is chairing the Recall Persky effort, told the Weekly that the campaign is "relieved" Persky won't be handling this case.

"Judge Perksy's record in child-pornography cases shows he's biased when compared with every other judge in Santa Clara County," she said, pointing to research the campaign conducted on sentencing outcomes for 14 similar felony possession of child-pornography cases in Santa Clara County that showed every other defendant received a sentence of six months. Chain's case was the only one overseen by Persky, according to the recall campaign.

Stay informed

Get daily headlines sent straight to your inbox.

Sign up

The Palo Alto Weekly has created Storify pages to capture ongoing coverage of the Brock Turner case as well as sexual-assault issues at Stanford University. To view them, go to storify.com/paloaltoweekly.

Follow Palo Alto Online and the Palo Alto Weekly on Twitter @paloaltoweekly, Facebook and on Instagram @paloaltoonline for breaking news, local events, photos, videos and more.

Brock Turner judge recuses himself from child-porn case

Aaron Persky cites publicity, impartiality as reasons for recusal

by / Palo Alto Weekly

Uploaded: Tue, Aug 23, 2016, 1:13 pm

Embattled Santa Clara County Judge Aaron Persky, who is currently facing a recall campaign for his controversial sentencing of former Stanford University student-athlete Brock Turner, has recused himself from an upcoming hearing in a child-pornography case.

In a statement filed with the court on Friday, Persky wrote that while on vacation earlier this month, he and his family were exposed to publicity surrounding the case, in which Persky sentenced a 48-year-old San Jose resident who pleaded guilty to a felony child-pornography charge to four days in county jail. The Recall Persky campaign released in early August information and documents related to the sentencing, pointing to it as further evidence of Persky's alleged bias in sex-crime cases.

"This publicity has resulted in a personal family situation such that a person aware of the facts might reasonably entertain a doubt that the judge would be able to be impartial," Persky wrote in his brief statement, which the district attorney's office provided to the Palo Alto Weekly.

Persky was set to oversee a hearing for defendant Robert Chain this Thursday on a motion to have his felony charge reduced to a misdemeanor. This has repeatedly been moved to Oct. 6, and will now be overseen by Judge Kenneth Barnum.

Chain was arrested in Sunnyvale in May 2014 following an investigation conducted by the Silicon Valley Internet Crimes Against Children Task Force and charged the next month with one count of possessing/controlling matter depicting a person under age 18 engaging in or simulating sexual conduct, according to court documents. The crime carries a maximum three-year penalty and no minimum. Persky eventually gave him the four-day sentence, three year's probation and ordered him to register as a sex offender.

Chain's attorney, Brian Madden of San Jose firm Madden & Redding, declined to comment on the record.

Assistant District Attorney Terry Harman said in a statement that "It is a judge's responsibility to recuse him or herself if there are issues of impartiality."

"We're focused on the prosecution of the defendant in this matter," she said. "We're confident that the case will be handled by the bench fairly."

Michele Dauber, the Stanford law professor who is chairing the Recall Persky effort, told the Weekly that the campaign is "relieved" Persky won't be handling this case.

"Judge Perksy's record in child-pornography cases shows he's biased when compared with every other judge in Santa Clara County," she said, pointing to research the campaign conducted on sentencing outcomes for 14 similar felony possession of child-pornography cases in Santa Clara County that showed every other defendant received a sentence of six months. Chain's case was the only one overseen by Persky, according to the recall campaign.

The Palo Alto Weekly has created Storify pages to capture ongoing coverage of the Brock Turner case as well as sexual-assault issues at Stanford University. To view them, go to storify.com/paloaltoweekly.

Comments

Hopenchange
Professorville
on Aug 23, 2016 at 2:56 pm
Hopenchange , Professorville
on Aug 23, 2016 at 2:56 pm
7 people like this

[Post removed.]


Marie
Registered user
Midtown
on Aug 23, 2016 at 3:17 pm
Marie, Midtown
Registered user
on Aug 23, 2016 at 3:17 pm
20 people like this

Thank you Michele for being willing to stand up for victims. I admire you very much. We are very lucky to have you in our community. Please ignore all the ignorant nay-sayers.


mauricio
Registered user
Embarcadero Oaks/Leland
on Aug 23, 2016 at 3:34 pm
mauricio, Embarcadero Oaks/Leland
Registered user
on Aug 23, 2016 at 3:34 pm
27 people like this

This judge should have recused himself from the Brock Turner trial as well. He will never be allowed to preside over a sexual assualt or child pornography trial again. He seems intrinsically biased against victims of sex crimes. Frankly, he needs to voluntarily step down and enter prolonged and deep theraphy.


Leave persky alone
College Terrace
on Aug 23, 2016 at 4:12 pm
Leave persky alone, College Terrace
on Aug 23, 2016 at 4:12 pm
23 people like this

As usual, the weekly has decided that it will support one side in this matter and thereafter all coverage will be one sided and biased against judge perskey. Note they deleted a comment t about dauber, but leave a rude comment against persky.
Maurucio- enough with the insulting and negative comments against persky. What you and the other anti- persky zealots seem to forget is that the judge followed the probation department guideline. Judges should never base their decisions on vocal people with personal agendas, that go against our legal principles. [Portion removed.]


nomorebsplease
Barron Park
on Aug 23, 2016 at 4:50 pm
nomorebsplease, Barron Park
on Aug 23, 2016 at 4:50 pm
20 people like this

Don't leave Persky alone.

He does not get a pass just cause the probation department recommended something. It was just a recommendation!!!!!!!!!!!!

HE SHOULD NOT HAVE FOLLOWED THAT FLAWED RECOMMENDATION, PRETTY SIMPLE AND HAPPENS ALL THE TIME.

two years would be against our legal principles? what are you talking about?
Sexual assault should not be dismissed [portion removed].


Zak
Menlo Park
on Aug 24, 2016 at 1:38 pm
Zak, Menlo Park
on Aug 24, 2016 at 1:38 pm
10 people like this

Persky has shown such an indulgent "boys will be boys" attitude towards defendants in sex crime cases [Portion removed]. 


Know Weigh
Registered user
Midtown
on Aug 24, 2016 at 1:50 pm
Know Weigh, Midtown
Registered user
on Aug 24, 2016 at 1:50 pm
13 people like this

Perskt has shown far too much sympathy for sex offenders, and far too much antipathy toward their victims.

All is not right with this guy, he is seemingly incapable of being a judge. [Portion removed.]

Perskt should step down [portion removed].


Curbside Commentator
Barron Park
on Aug 24, 2016 at 5:00 pm
Curbside Commentator, Barron Park
on Aug 24, 2016 at 5:00 pm
12 people like this

I support Judge Persky and judicial independence. All of the anger arises from but one decision wherein the judge acted well within his judicial discretions and followed the applicable laws. There has been no evidence cited by critics as to judicial malfeasance, or sentencing bias (as to race or gender). That this judge may sentence differnetly than others, but all within the guidelines given them, is not bias worthy of a recall petition. It is a major blow to judicial independence if we can recall a judge because in our opinion his/her opinion is wrong. If we disagree with the state's sentencing guidelines that shape a judge's decision we can work to constrict them. If at the end of an elected judge's term we are displeased with his/her body of work we can hope to elect someone else.
But we set an extremely dangerous precedent that goes to the core of judicial independence if we see fit to haul off the bench a judge for one decision we didn't like.


someone
another community
on Aug 24, 2016 at 6:13 pm
someone, another community
on Aug 24, 2016 at 6:13 pm
1 person likes this

Michele Dauber tweeted and gave many interviews saying that Judge Persky is from Stanford. He is an undergrad from Stanford, but his law degree from UC Berkely. He should be considered as a Berkeley alum! [Portion removed.]


Voter
Old Palo Alto
on Aug 25, 2016 at 6:48 am
Voter, Old Palo Alto
on Aug 25, 2016 at 6:48 am
6 people like this

Is he still here?


I would have thought he should have the sense to pack his bags long ago. Does he really want to suffer the indignity and humiliating defeat of a recall? I would have thought as a judge he had more sense than this.


Don't miss out on the discussion!
Sign up to be notified of new comments on this topic.

Sorry, but further commenting on this topic has been closed.