Case Against Ex-Judge Kline Gutted
by Rachanee Srisavasdi
Originally published by The Irvine World News, October 30, 2003
The last criminal case against embattled former Orange County Judge Ronald Kline collapsed Monday when a federal judge ruled that child-pornography evidence gathered from his courtroom computer was inadmissible.
U.S. District Court Judge Consuelo Marshall ruled that police never would have obtained digital photos of naked boys and links to child-pornography Web sites, found on Kline’s courtroom computer, had it not been for the unlawful hacking by a Canadian man deemed a government agent.
The decision means that—barring a reversal—Kline, 63, cannot be prosecuted in federal court on seven counts of possession of child pornography, which carried a maximum penalty of 35 years in prison.
It was the third major legal victory for Kline, an Irvine resident.
About 1,500 pictures of naked boys and a diary gleaned from Kline’s home computer were tossed out of the federal case in June because Marshall ruled that their seizure traced back to the Canadian hacker, Brad Willman.
And in July, Kline avoided prosecution in state court on five felony charges that he molested a 14-year-old boy in 1979, following a U.S. Supreme Court ruling that invalidated prosecution of older sex-abuse cases. Kline, who had pleaded not guilty in that case, had faced five years and eight months in prison if convicted.
Kline, wearing a gray blazer, blue shirt and tie, sat next to his three attorneys Monday, listening intently.
Prosecutors had argued that material gathered from Kline’s courtroom computer should be admissible, saying the computer was the property of Orange County Superior Court and subject to searches.
Kline’s lead attorney, Paul Meyer, argued that law enforcement had conducted the search—not the court management—and that therefore the search was unconstitutional. He also said the search was unlawful because it stemmed from the initial illegal search by Willman, who Marshall ruled in June was acting on behalf of law enforcement when he unlawfully accessed Kline’s home computer.
Marshall agreed, saying, “Once a court finds that the first search was illegal, then all subsequent searches and evidence found from those searches are also illegal.”
She also said that while public employees should not expect privacy from employers, who can conduct searches at any time, law enforcement should go through another process.
Outside the courtroom, Kline declined to comment. Meyer said he was pleased by Marshall’s decision, which he said “recognizes established law that states that law enforcement cannot profit from illegal conduct.”
Assistant U.S. Attorney Gregory Staples said he was disappointed by the judge’s ruling and that prosecutors intend to appeal it to the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in San Francisco.
Meanwhile, the case itself will remain on hold pending the appeals-court decision. Kline will remain in house detention until Meyer asks for it to be suspended.
Kline’s case made headlines two years ago when the then-sitting judge was charged with possession of child pornography.
The charges stemmed from information received by Willman, who illegally hacked into Kline’s home computer, then forwarded explicit diary entries to a pedophile watchdog group. The group, in turn, forwarded the information to Irvine police. News of the jurist’s federal arrest prompted a man to come forward, saying that as a youth he was molested by Kline.
Willman, 24, said Monday that he was “very disappointed” with Marshall’s ruling, saying Kline should be held criminally liable.
“In one way, he’s won because he won’t have to go to prison. But in another way, other people know about him now, and they can watch out for him,” Willman said. “He’s not as free as he used to be before all of this happened.”
