Broward Judge Gary Farmer suspended, accused of repeatedly making inappropriate comments in court
The Florida Supreme Court on Wednesday indefinitely suspended Broward County Circuit Judge Gary Farmer, a former Senate Democratic leader, after an investigative panel accused him of "pervasive and extensive" behavior demonstrating "unfitness to hold office."
Farmer was elected as a judge in Broward County's 17th Judicial Circuit in 2022 after six years in the Florida Senate. He served as minority leader during the 2021 legislative session but was ousted after a vote of no confidence by fellow Democrats.
Arguing he has "learned his lesson," Farmer's lawyers urged the Supreme Court to reject an April 10 recommendation by an investigative panel of the state Judicial Qualifications Commission calling for his immediate suspension.
Wednesday's court order said that Farmer's suspension without pay will go into effect on Tuesday. Farmer, 62, will remain suspended until the allegations against him are resolved.
"The court encourages the commission to conduct any remaining proceedings promptly, in a manner consistent with the commission's rules and the procedural rights of the respondent (Farmer)," the order said.
Panel found multiple incidents of misconduct
A notice of formal charges filed by the investigative panel accused Farmer of repeatedly making inappropriate comments in court. The commission makes recommendations about judicial conduct to the Supreme Court, which has ultimate disciplinary authority over judges.
The suspension recommendation also alleged Farmer "willfully ignored the requirements of applicable statutes or rules of procedure, or was unaware of the most basic elements of the law which governed his actions as a judge in the felony division."
The panel "believes that his misconduct is egregious and serious, and could clearly affect the public's perception of the judiciary," Alexander John Williams, an attorney for the commission, wrote.
"While Judge Farmer might argue that he has changed his behavior ... the panel believes that in this case, the damage is already done," the recommendation said.
Farmer's lawyer admits some comments were inappropriate
The probe into Farmer began after a complaint about comments he made while presiding over felony cases in August. The panel found comments "discriminatory, offensive, sexually charged, and demeaning."
As an example, Farmer "referenced and quoted extensively from a comedy sketch that makes fun of gay people," documents filed by the commission said.
"That is not the only time you used double entendre as humor in the courtroom. While presiding over the August 15, 2024, hearing you said, 'Spring is here, I got so excited I wet my plants' and 'What did the shirt say to the pair of pants? Wassup britches!' Apparently, these are some of what you referred to as your 'exceptionally, exceptionally bad jokes,'" the commission's lawyer wrote in the notice of formal charges addressed to Farmer and filed at the Supreme Court.
Farmer's lawyers, however, argued that the judge's jokes were intended to "lighten tension, reduce stress for criminal defendants, and show a sense of humanity." They likened his comments to "'Dad jokes' that are corny but not offensive, and were not degrading to the solemnity" of court proceedings.
Some of the jokes referenced in the allegations "were somewhat racy and, upon reflection, were inappropriate," Farmer's lawyers acknowledged.
However, Farmer "took full responsibility and apologized for those remarks" during a hearing before the investigative panel "and he does so again today," his lawyers said in a court document filed last week.
Farmer "has taken these lessons to heart and has refrained from making such jokes" since the complaint was filed with the circuit's chief judge, the document said.
Farmer did not cooperate with investigation
The probe into Farmer began in October, and Farmer appeared before the panel for a hearing in December. The panel notified Farmer on March 6 about a second investigation and ordered him to appear for a hearing on March 28.
Farmer "provided no response whatsoever, written or otherwise, to the second notice of investigation, save his email on the morning of the hearings claiming that he had intended to appear," the suspension recommendation said.
Farmer's decision "to not appear as ordered in the Order to Show Cause (hearing) simply brings his lack of responsiveness into high relief," the recommendation said.
The investigative panel said four factors must be considered when recommending that a judge be suspended.
"Under the right conditions, a single one of these factors might carry enough weight to warrant a recommendation of suspension: Here, the respondent (Farmer) touches on all of them," Williams wrote.
Farmer spent three decades as a trial lawyer and reported his financial worth as $4.37 million as of Dec. 31, 2021, according to state records.
The judge "expressed regret, lapse in judgment, as well as shame and embarrassment" for his conduct, his lawyers wrote in a response to the charges.
In addition, Farmer "has shown the type of judicial temperament, demeanor and professionalism" after a transfer to the foreclosure division from the criminal division following last year's complaint, his lawyers added.
Farmer's attorneys also argued that some of the remarks or comments included in the charges against him were "taken out of context" or "involve facts, circumstances and/or history that is not accurately or completely reflected" in the allegations.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
25 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Mass. Sen. Warren: DOGE accessed ‘sensitive' student loan data at Education Dept., calls for probe
U.S. Sen. Elizabeth Warren says she wants to know how the quasi-governmental Department of Government Efficiency gained access to 'sensitive' student loan information at the U.S. Department of Education. On Monday, Warren and U.S. Sen. Ed Markey, both Democrats, called for the agency's acting inspector general to find out how that breach happened. They were joined by Democratic senators from eight states, including U.S. Sen. Richard Blumenthal of Connecticut. Warren said lawmakers learned of the potential breach of systems at Federal Student Aid after DOGE, which was helmed until recently by tech titan Elon Musk, infiltrated the agency. In response, Education Department officials revealed that DOGE workers 'supported' a review of the FSA's contracts. As a part of that review, one employee was granted 'read-only' access to two internal systems that held sensitive personal information about borrowers. The agency said it had since revoked that access. But, according to Warren, it did not explain why that access had been revoked, or whether the employee had continued access to other databases. 'Because of the [Education] department's refusal to provide full and complete information, the full extent of DOGE's role and influence at ED remains unknown,' the lawmakers wrote in a June 8 letter to René L. Rocque, the agency's acting inspector general. That 'lack of clarity is not only frustrating for borrowers but also dangerous for the future of an agency that handles an extensive student loan portfolio and a range of federal aid programs for higher education,' the lawmakers continued. Warren, Markey and their colleagues have called on Roque's office to determine whether the department adhered to the Federal Privacy Act, which dictates how the government can collect and use personal information. They also asked Roque to 'determine the impact of DOGE's new plans to consolidate Americans' personal information across government databases.' 'It won't end well for Trump' if he does this amid LA protests, ex-GOP rep says All Ivy League schools are supporting Harvard lawsuit — except these 2 Embassies directed to resume processing Harvard University student visas Over 12,000 Harvard alums lend weight to court battle with Trump in new filing Markey: Trump using National Guard in LA to distract from big cuts in 'Big Beautiful Bill' Read the original article on MassLive.
Yahoo
25 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Oklahoma inmate Richard Glossip to face new murder trial but without death penalty
Oklahoma's top prosecutor said Monday that the state intends to pursue a new murder trial against Richard Glossip but without the death penalty after the U.S. Supreme Court vacated his capital conviction in a rare victory for a death row prisoner. State Attorney General Gentner Drummond's decision to retry Glossip, 62, on a first-degree murder charge came out of a status conference hearing. Drummond said in a news release that the evidence still implicates Glossip in the 1997 murder of Oklahoma City motel owner Barry Van Treese. Glossip, a motel manager working for Van Treese, has maintained his innocence while on death row for almost three decades. While Drummond, a Republican, has not agreed with Glossip's innocence claims, he was supportive of the Supreme Court's ruling in February, when the majority of justices agreed, as Drummond put it, that "it is now an undeniable fact that he did not receive a fair trial." Drummond said Monday that he would ensure Glossip now receives an impartial trial. "While it was clear to me and to the U.S. Supreme Court that Mr. Glossip did not receive a fair trial, I have never proclaimed his innocence," Drummond said in a statement. "After the high court remanded the matter back to district court, my office thoroughly reviewed the merits of the case against Richard Glossip and concluded that sufficient evidence exists to secure a murder conviction." Oklahoma County District Attorney Vicki Behenna, a Democrat, had previously indicated that Glossip would not be eligible for the death penalty now if he were to be retried. Drummond said he would seek a life sentence for Glossip at his next trial. "While I cannot go back 25 years and handle the case in the proper way that would have ensured true justice, I still have a duty to seek the justice that is available today," he added. The continuation of the state's prosecution against Glossip resumes a twisting case that saw him dodge death several times with nine separate execution dates that had to be postponed. Various courts delayed the executions as he appealed, while state corrections officials also came under scrutiny a decade ago for botched execution attempts. But Glossip's case had been championed in recent years by a bipartisan group of Oklahoma legislators after an independent report they commissioned in 2022 found that "no reasonable jury hearing the complete record would convict Glossip of first-degree murder." The report centered on the state's primary witness, Justin Sneed, who had confirmed to the report's investigators that he had discussions with multiple family members about "recanting" his testimony over an 11-year period. Investigators also said the district attorney's case file included documentation describing how the state provided Sneed information "so he could conform his testimony to match the evidence" from other witnesses. Glossip's original 1998 conviction was overturned in 2001, when a state appeals court found that the evidence against him was weak. But the state took him to trial again, and a second jury found him guilty in 2004. At Glossip's trial, Sneed, a motel handyman, admitted that he had killed Van Treese, but said that it was at Glossip's direction and that he had been promised $10,000. In exchange for testifying against Glossip, Sneed received a life sentence while Glossip was given the death penalty. Prosecutors said Glossip orchestrated the plot because he was embezzling from the motel and feared being fired. The Supreme Court on Monday tossed out Glossip's capital conviction in a 5-3 ruling. Justice Neil Gorsuch did not participate, presumably because he was involved in the case when he was on a federal appeals court that includes Oklahoma. Justice Sonia Sotomayor wrote in the majority's ruling that prosecutors "knew Sneed's statements were false" and that "because Sneed's testimony was the only direct evidence of Glossip's guilt of capital murder, the jury's assessment of Sneed's credibility was necessarily determinative here." "Hence, there is a reasonable likelihood that correcting Sneed's testimony would have affected the judgment of the jury," she added. After the Supreme Court's decision, Glossip was moved off death row, but was held without bail in the Oklahoma County Detention Center on a first-degree murder charge. A next court date in Glossip's case is scheduled for June 17. Glossip's attorney, Don Knight, did not immediately comment about the prosecutors' decision, but he welcomed the Supreme Court's ruling in February that spared his longtime client from the death chamber. "He had nine execution dates, three last meals, and obviously, to finally get relief has been huge for him," Knight said, "and he's thrilled beyond words." This article was originally published on
Yahoo
25 minutes ago
- Yahoo
State Legislature Acts To ‘Make Texas Healthy Again'
Under Senate Bill 25, which awaits Gov. Greg Abbott's signature, Texas could become one of the first states to mandate warning labels on foods containing artificial dyes and specific chemicals. The bill, dubbed the Make Texas Healthy Again Act, requires labels on products containing one or more of some 40-plus additives, such as Blue 1, Red 40, Yellow 5, butylated hydroxyanisole (BHA), and titanium dioxide. The label would state: 'WARNING: This product contains an ingredient that is not recommended for human consumption by the appropriate authority in Australia, Canada, the European Union, or the United Kingdom.' The warning label must be prominent, readable, and would apply to products packaged after January 1, 2027. A loophole allows producers using existing packaging through 2036 to avoid the requirement. The bill also invalidates state labeling rules if federal regulations supersede them. 'Texas can really lead here. … These bills represent a Texas way that prioritizes transparency, prioritizes good education and prioritizes incentive change,' Calley Means, a top adviser to U.S. Health Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr., said during a Senate Health and Human Services Committee hearing. Beyond labeling, SB 25 increases physical activity requirements for middle school students from four to six semesters of 30-minute daily sessions and mandates nutrition education for undergraduates, developed by a seven-member Texas Nutrition Advisory Committee appointed by the governor by December 31, 2025. The committee would include experts in metabolic health, a licensed physician, a Texas Department of Agriculture representative, and others. In addition, doctors and nurses must complete continuing education on nutrition to maintain their licenses. 'This sweeping legislation is not just another bill. It's a call to action — one that so many Texans and Americans are realizing — that something is wrong and that something needs to change in our food industry and in our sedentary lifestyle,' Sen. Lois Kolkhorst (R-Brenham), the bill's sponsor, told The Texas Tribune. The bill garnered bipartisan support, with 10 Senate Democrats and three House Democrats sponsoring or co-sponsoring. 'This is about the MAHA parents and the crunchy granola parents coming together to say, 'We are sick and tired of being sick and tired,'' said Rep. Lacey Hull (R-Houston) before the House passed the bill on May 25. Food industry groups, including Walmart, Coca-Cola, Pepsi, General Mills, and Frito-Lay, opposed the labeling, warning in a letter that it 'could destabilize local and regional economies.' Rep. Barbara Gervin-Hawkins (D-San Antonio) expressed concern that 'the cost of food will continue to rise,' the Tribune reported. Kolkhorst countered in February that 'the market will adjust.' Supporters, like the Episcopal Health Foundation, see health benefits. 'The amount of money and time we're spending treating diabetes as opposed to preventing it is huge, especially in Texas,' said Brian Sasser, the foundation's chief communications officer, per the Tribune. Andy Keller of the Meadows Mental Health Policy Institute added, 'In a world that pretends the brain is not part of the body, this bill will put tools in the hands of children, parents and teachers to begin truly addressing emotional health and wellbeing.' The bill aligns with federal Make America Healthy Again initiatives, with Kolkhorst noting Kennedy's personal call urging its passage. 'As in so many cases, we're not waiting on Washington,' said Sen. Bryan Hughes (R-Mineola) in February. 'Texas will act.'
