You might think that any American judge would be severely penalized for tormenting an innocent child in open court, but you would be wrong. Federal judges, protected by life tenure, can mistreat people in their courtrooms, including spectators, with near impunity and little fear of meaningful punishment. That is just what happened last month in San Diego, when senior Federal District Judge Roger Benitez committed what can only be described as a blatant act of child abuse.
When Mario Puente brought his 13-year-old daughter to Benitez’s courtroom, he hoped that her visible support might help him persuade the judge that he was committed to turning his life around, rather than being returned to prison for violating his parole on drug charges. Benitez, a George W. Bush appointee, was indeed moved by the girl’s presence, but in a stunningly inhumane direction. Before the hearing was over, the teenager found herself weeping in handcuffs at the judge’s command, even though she had done nothing more than sit quietly in the spectators’ section while her father attempted to talk himself out of more prison time.
Before we get to the paucity of consequences for the judge, let’s get a full picture of what transpired, as described by the Los Angeles Times’ analysis of the court transcript.
Puente had already served five years for drug possession, and had offended again while on supervised release, which would almost inevitably mean returning to prison. Allowed to address the court before sentencing, the defendant tried to explain the impact of continually running into his old drug-using friends, and how he might be able now to avoid them if he could remain on the outside.
“It’s a reoccurring cycle. It’s a revolving door,” he told Benitez, adding that he could avoid bad company only by moving away from San Diego, “leaving what I know, leaving everybody I know.”
Fatefully, Puente then made a reference to his daughter, meant only to emphasize his commitment to relocation. She is “following the same footsteps as I am right now,” he said.
Benitez interrupted and asked Puente what he meant.
“She’s basically growing up where I grew up, so she’s encountering the same people that I grew up with that’s going to lead her into the same path that I went down,” the defendant answered.
That triggered a harsh reaction from Benitez, who turned to the courtroom marshal.
“You got cuffs?” he asked, as he ordered the girl to approach the bench.
“Put the cuffs on her,” the judge instructed the marshal, who evidently complied without protesting, cuffing the crying child behind her back.
Benitez told the marshal to place the girl in the jury box, and finally released her from the restraints after a long pause. But he wasn’t done. Rather than allow her to return to the gallery, Benitez began lecturing her.
“How did you like the way those cuffs felt on you?” the judge demanded.
“I didn’t like it,” she tearfully replied.
“How did you like sitting up there?” Benitez asked.
“I didn’t like it,” she said again.
“Good. That was the message I was hoping to get to you,” Benitez told her. “So your dad’s made some serious mistakes in his life, and look at where it’s landed him. … And if you’re not careful, young lady, you’ll wind up in cuffs, and you’ll find yourself right there where I put you a minute ago.”
“You’re an awfully cute young lady,” he continued, “and I have a feeling you have a wonderful life ahead of you. But from what I just heard … from your dad causes me to be very troubled.”
Finally allowing the girl to return to her seat next to an aunt and a family friend, Benitez returned to the court’s actual business, sentencing Puente to an additional 10 months in prison.
There is no name for Benitez’s actions other than child abuse. With zero cause, provocation, or possible justification, he manacled an innocent kid while hectoring her about a grim future as she wept.
Almost any other professional—teacher, social worker, security guard—would be quickly suspended for such behavior, and probably fired. But Benitez has life tenure as a federal district judge, which makes him nearly free from serious consequences. He cannot be sued for damages, because he has judicial immunity for conduct on the bench. And he cannot be removed from office other than by impeachment in the House of Representatives and conviction in the Senate.
The Code of Conduct for United States Judges requires judges to be “respectful, and courteous to litigants, jurors, witnesses, lawyers, and others with whom the judge deals in an official capacity,” but it has no provisions for enforcement.
The only conceivable recourse against Benitez is under the relatively toothless Judicial Conduct and Disability Act of 1980. To his credit, Chief Judge Dana Sabraw, of the Southern District of California, has initiated a complaint under the act, but that can lead, at most, to a private or public censure—and perhaps a temporary interruption of newly assigned cases—leaving Benitez free to continue his bullying ways.
It would be useful here to note some solution for the complete lack of accountability for federal judges, but it is difficult to think of one. We can take some satisfaction that the chief judge is pursuing a complaint against Benitez, even if the available remedies are feeble. And it is good to know that Puente’s case was transferred to another judge, who reduced his prison sentence to time served.
It should be unsettling for every judge in California, and beyond, to realize that cases will continue to be heard, and prison sentences will continue to be handed out, by a judge who so casually maltreated a child. It is therefore frustrating that other federal judges have said nothing in public about Benitez’s egregious misbehavior.
The Code of Conduct does not prevent judges from criticizing each other. Police officers may have a code of silence, and mobsters are said to take an oath of omertà, but the public would benefit if judges were willing to call out their colleagues for extreme and unquestionable misconduct.
As to Benitez himself, well, it appears that he hasn’t even apologized. He has refused to answer questions about the events, and he instructed an administrative clerk to say that he “regrets that he is not permitted to comment on matters pending before the court.”
That is a cowardly cop-out. The Puente case is no longer pending in his court, and the traumatized child was never involved in a pending “matter” at all. Moreover, the Code of Judicial Conduct specifically allows a judge to provide “explanations of court procedures.”
Of course, that would require Benitez to show some respect for the public and the people in his courtroom, and he has already demonstrated that he has none.
