In fact, “unethical” doesn’t do her justice.
A courtroom security camera caught Lincoln County (Oklahoma) District Judge Traci Soderstrom during a murder trial as she paged through her iPhone, checking Facebook, surfing the web, and texting as the trial went on, supposedly under her supervision. This continued for hours. The case involved the brutal murder of Braxton Danker, 2, who was beaten to death by 32-year-old Khristian Tyler Martzall. Soderstrom ordered the jury at the outset of the trial to turn off their phones. “This will allow you to concentrate on the evidence without interruption,” intoned the judge. Then she had her own eyes glued to her phone screen during opening statements and witness testimony.
After the video was discovered, the judge dealt with the scandal by having camera moved rather than try to explain or apologize for her behavior.
The Oklahoma Council on Judicial Complaints is apparently investigating Soderstrom, but I assume this is a formality. There’s nothing to investigate: the video is enough. The Code of Judicial Conduct states, “A judge shall act at all times in a manner that promotes public confidence in the independence, integrity and impartiality of the judiciary.” Hmmmm. Does that mean that it is inappropriate for a judge to concentrate on her phone during a murder trial rather than on the trial itself, after telling the jury that the same trial demanded their full attention undisturbed by electronic devices? Tough one! Judge Costanza has a comment…
Media accounts emphasize that the judge continued texting even “when the victim’s convict mother wept bitterly on the stand.” It doesn’t matter if she texted while an accountant was reading tax code footnotes—it’s still unforgivable and contemptuous of the law. One example of judge tuning out a trial in front of her is as bad as another
This horrible woman, an elected judge, has demonstrated beyond not just a reasonable doubt but all doubt that she lacks respect for the justice system, the law, her office, and the public. She is lazy, incompetent, irresponsible and dishonest. She is unfit to be a judge, and unfit to be a lawyer. There should be no mercy shown to her by the judicial discipline committee, and no apology can be sufficient to rehabilitate her even slightly.
What an asshole!
Ethics Alarms 
Egad! I know lawyers and judges have been slow to adapt to new technology and how to use it but this is one reason why that’s almost a good thing!
In what world did she think it was appropriate? Did no one notice this while the trial was going on? Will her distraction cause problems for the trial? For example, could there be a motion for a mistrial?
See the post on ways to spot an idiot…
Frankly, I’ve always been mystified by people wanting to become judges. I can’t imagine a more mind-numbingly boring job — having to listen to people lie and attorneys posture for upwards of five or six hours a day sounds like being in hell to me.
The judge should have given her full attention to proper procedures to make decisions about all questions of what the law is with this particular case.
Once the jury found the defendant guilty, there was no way the judge could decide the appropriate sentence. In other words, even though the judge was there in the body, her brain was totally absent, which was and is a danger to the defendant to receive a fair trial.
This judge should lose her position, and she should never be allowed to practice law on any level for her life span.
If she says I am sorry and will not do it again, the chances weigh heavily she will do it again in the future. This judge is a danger to society.