Judge Sues For Alleged Privacy Violations After Commenting On Blogs

Judge Shirley Strickland-Saffold

Cayohoga County Judge Shirley Strickland-Saffold has sued the Cleveland Plain Dealer for allegedly violating her right to privacy on the internet.  Judge Strickland-Saffold recently got in trouble after posting anonymous comments on articles relating to a criminal case over which she was presiding.  The case involves a string of high-profile serial killings. Additionally, these comments specifically denigrated the qualification and ability of the criminal defense attorney in the case.

Initially, Judge Strickland-Saffold denied posting the more than eighty comments under the pseudonym “Lawmiss” but on Friday, reversed that position and filed a federal lawsuit for $50 million for alleged privacy violations.  The Plain Dealer cited its privacy policies and defended its action as the public had a compelling interest in knowing that a judge presiding over an active pending criminal case was actively and semi-publicly opining on that case.

Judge Strickland-Saffold’s current position is that she shared the AOL e-mail address with her 23-year-old daughter, that she does sometimes use the pseudonym “Lawmiss”, but that she has never commented any case before her – be it pending or past.  She has since been asked to recuse herself and has said she will take the defendant’s request for recusal under advisement.

In another post from November of last year, Judge Strickland-Saffold allegely commented “Rufus Sims did a disservice to his client.  If only he could shut his Amos and Andy style mouth. What makes him think that is [sic] he insults and acts like buffon [sic] that it will cause the judge to think and see it his way. There are so many lawyers that could’ve done a much better job. This was not a tough case, folks. She should’ve hired a lawyer with the experience to truly handle her needs. Amos and Andy, shuffling around did not do it.”  This comment was in reference to the sentencing of an RTA bus driver to six months for vehicular homicide. Rufus Sims, who defended the woman, is now one of the lawyers on the pending criminal case before the judge.

I am an licensed practicing attorney and a regular blog commenter on Gawker media sites under the pseudonym “OMG!Ponies!”.  There are however numerous people who do know that “OMG!Ponies!” is me.  Yet in all of my time commenting on blogs, while I read the privacy statements, I do not assume that there is some “right to privacy” on either those blogs or on the internet at-large.  I certainly do not believe that there is some constitutional guarantee of anonymity.

I often indulge in vulgarity, generally with comic intent (though not always to comic effect) or to add emphasis to a point I may be trying to make.  As vulgar and profane as my comments are, I bear in mind that they are being posted in connection to an e-mail address and an IP address.  In short, though I am shaded by relative anonymity, I am grounded in reality.

From the position of an attorney, I know that certain judges before whom I appear have opinions of me and/or the firms for whom I have worked.  However, I do not ask the judges what they think of me and I do not expect them to tell me.  Besides, I can usually tell by how loud the judge is yelling at me.  For a judge to disparage an attorney publicly (and yes, a blog is public) seems to me, without having read Ohio’s ethical and judicial canons, to be an ethical violation.

If it is, in fact, Judge Strickland-Saffold who has been posting these comments, then she can look forward to disciplinary hearings and appeals arising out of the cases on which she commented.

In response to this developing story and to curtail a worsening atmosphere of profanity and crudeness, many newspapers are reporting that they are revising their posted privacy policies.  While readers of this site may expect anonymity, be advised that this is a moderated site and hate speech comments will be deleted.