The New York State Commission on Judicial Conduct has recommended a censure for Darien Town Justice Jennifer R. Nunnery, following a thorough examination of her conduct on social media. The commission’s inquiry into Nunnery’s actions was centered around a series of comments she made on her Facebook account between December 2020 and April 2021.
Nunnery’s online presence became a subject of controversy due to the nature of her posts. In one notable instance, she expressed a sentiment of satisfaction in cross-examining individuals, employing explicit language and self-praise. These comments raised eyebrows and were accompanied by hashtags such as “#ladyboss” and “#bossbitch.” Another post recounted a seemingly inappropriate encounter where Nunnery recognized a person’s appearance in a local setting and made light of it. Additional comments resurfaced, including references to past experiences involving heavy drinking and drawing inappropriate imagery on an unconscious individual’s face.
Further scrutiny was directed towards Nunnery’s interactions with political content. She was found to have liked posts related to candidates for Buffalo City Court and a local school board. This action gave rise to concerns that she might have inadvertently endorsed these candidates, a behavior incompatible with judicial regulations.
See also: Plaintiffs’ Attorneys Request $181 Million in Fees in Facebook Data Privacy Lawsuit
In a comprehensive statement provided to the New York Law Journal, Nunnery accepted responsibility for her online actions, acknowledging their inappropriateness. She reflected on her military background and the use of a military persona while interacting with a fellow veteran, which she now recognizes as having been misguided and lacking in decorum. Nunnery also addressed her comments on a successful witness examination, admitting that they were ill-judged.
Ready to make a change in your legal career? BCG Attorney Search can help you find the perfect job.
Acknowledging personal struggles in her marriage during the time of these incidents, Nunnery explained that her emotional state contributed to her lapses in judgment. She emphasized her commitment to faith and personal growth, striving to ensure that her words, including those on social media, align with her values. As a judge, Nunnery affirmed her dedication to impartiality, respect, and fairness towards all individuals who appear before her in the courtroom.
In conclusion, Nunnery expressed her humility and the valuable lessons she has gained from this experience. She asserted her recognition of the expectations placed upon her as a judge, both within and beyond the courtroom. Nunnery stated her determination not to let this instance of misconduct define her moving forward.
Looking ahead, Nunnery has a 30-day window to request a review of the commission’s decision. A formal reprimand will be issued if she chooses not to do so. The commission’s recommendation for censure serves as a reminder of the importance of upholding professionalism and ethical conduct, especially for those holding positions of judicial authority.
In a legal landscape where public perception of judges’ character and behavior plays a crucial role, Nunnery’s case underscores the significance of maintaining offline and online dignity and appropriateness. As the legal community observes the outcome of this incident, it serves as a cautionary tale and a reminder that adherence to the principles of judicial ethics is paramount, regardless of the challenges one may be facing.
Don’t be a silent ninja! Let us know your thoughts in the comment section below.