Bubbaworld

In a Tulsa World report date 7/09/2004 and titled, “Porn use by judge alleged” it was revealed that at least nine sexually explicit pictures and a suggestive e-mail were found on the state owned computer assigned to Judge Thompson.

The referenced report indicated that the computer had been examined by the Administrative Office of the Courts and that a request for the examination had been made by The Associated Press.

The Tulsa World report quoted Judge Thompson’s attorney Clark Brewster as saying:

“I know for a fact a terminated employee’s computer was copied and transferred to the judge’s computer so he would have certain forms. This occurred just before his computer was examined.”

“It may well have been something captured on his computer by virtue of research or a court exhibit.”

The referenced report also revealed that during the examination of the judge’s computer an e-mail was recovered which appears to indicate that the judge was conducting personal business involving rental property on the state computer and that the e-mail also contained a reference to oral sex.

The report went on to quote Zelma Hindman as saying that the judge had pornography on his state computer and that at one time she had seen an icon of a naked woman on the computer’s screen. The report indicated that at some point in time Judge Thompson’s computer was experiencing problems requiring repair. The article went on to quote Hindman as saying:

“Some techs came from Oklahoma City to work on them and discovered that (the judge) had been looking at porn on it.”

The Conclusion:

On 8/18/04, just days before Judge Thompson was scheduled to face a pre-trial hearing on the petition to oust him from office he submitted a letter of retirement to Governor Brad Henry. In his letter of retirement, Judge Thompson requested that his retirement become effective on 9/01/04. Once the retirement letter was submitted, the ouster petition filed against Thompson was dismissed. By retiring when he did Judge Thompson is eligible to draw a pension of $88,800 for life. Shortly after submitting his letter of retirement Thompson called a press conference to deny allegations that he used a penis pump while on the bench. The judge blamed Sapulpa Police Chief Jim Wall for being “the architect of this treachery” and behind efforts to oust him from office.

In light of Thompson’s denials Oklahoma City attorney Pat Ryan, assigned to prosecute the ouster petition against Judge Thompson, issued a statement saying:

Through the course of my investigation, I spoke to numerous witnesses unassociated with the Sapulpa Police Department, who support the allegations against Judge Thompson. Numerous jurors in two different murder trials heard Judge Thompson use the penis pump. A defense investigator heard the sounds of the pump during one of the trials as well. In addition, there are numerous tape recordings of the trial proceedings which captured the sound of the pump. Members of courthouse staff also saw the judge use the pump during jury trials.

Ryan went on to state:

Contrary to Judge Thompson’s explanation that the penis pump was a gag gift witnesses observed and photographed two different pumps under the judge’s bench in his courtroom. A photograph of the first pump was actually taken before the date Judge Thompson claims to have received it as a gift. To now claim his innocence having chosen to avoid the very proceedings which would determine the truth of the allegations made against him is repugnant to witnesses courageous enough to testify and the citizens of the state of Oklahoma.

On 9/07/04, Oklahoma Attorney General Drew Edmondson appointed Richard Smotherman, the district attorney for Pottawatomie and Lincoln counties, to determine whether criminal charges should be brought against former Creek County District Judge Donald D. Thompson. In making the appointment, the Attorney General stated:

There were allegations made in the petition for ouster that under appropriate circumstances could also be violations of the law. The judge has denied any wrong doing at all. The questions remain, if those allegations were submitted to a prosecutor, would a prosecutor deem the evidence sufficient to warrant a criminal charge?

As of the date of this writing the investigation continues and no decision regarding criminal prosecution has been announced.

Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8