Tulsa County District Judge James Caputo this week issued a public apology for using jurors’ private information in his campaign for re-election, but he won’t say how many jurors had their contact information taken from court records.
“I’m not trying to be avoiding you, it’s just that I can’t. I have to respect what I’ve been ordered to do, which is to maintain confidentiality,” Caputo told the Tulsa World on Friday.
Officials have indicated that Oklahoma’s Committee on Judicial Elections took up the matter but the committee does not have to make its findings public.
According to Oklahoma statute, the Code of Judicial Conduct states that judges and judicial candidates shall not “require or compel court staff to aid or assist in a campaign for judicial office or use court resources” in political or campaign activities.
People are also reading…
It is unclear whether Caputo’s published apology was forced or voluntary, but it appeared as a letter he signed on his attorneys’ letterhead on the Tulsa County Bar Association’s website for a few hours on Thursday afternoon.
“A heartfelt apology is tendered to the former jurors who received letters from me asking them to support my re-election on November 6, 2018,” Caputo wrote in the letter. “One of the rules which governs judicial campaigns contains a provision which means that a judge cannot use court resources to further an election. The letters should not have been sent. An apology is issued to all of the jurors who were delivered those letters and for the decision to send them which did not inspire confidence in the judiciary.”
Ann Keele, president of the Tulsa County Bar Association, explained why the posting was removed from the organization’s website.
“Recently, our staff was approached with a request that we post a letter on the TCBA website. The letter was posted for a short time before it was removed so that the TCBA’s Executive Committee could determine whether our website was the appropriate forum for the letter and whether we were under any obligation to post the letter,” she wrote in an email. “The Executive Committee will evaluate the request and all related issues in the coming days. We do not anticipate sharing any of the information we have learned regarding the request.”
What will Caputo do if the bar association chooses not to repost his apology?
“I can’t answer that question,” he said. “I don’t know what they will do, so I don’t know what I will do.”
Caputo also declined to say why he didn’t post the apology letter on his campaign website or Facebook page, or some other site with a more general public audience.
Norman Russell, an associate district court judge for Kiowa County, serves on the appeals committee of the Oklahoma’s Committee on Judicial Elections.
Contacted Friday about whether or not any action would be required because of the removal of Caputo’s letter from the local bar association’s website, Russell said confidentiality rules prevented him from answering questions.
“We are still looking at some things — nothing else has changed,” Russell said.
At the time his mailer went out, Caputo was facing two challengers in June’s primary election — Tracy Priddy, a former assistant district attorney who is now in civil practice, and James Williamson, a former longtime state lawmaker who now works in Gov. Mary Fallin’s office as secretary of state.
Caputo and Priddy later advanced to November’s general election ballot.
In the campaign mailer, Caputo made a direct plea to jurors for their support in his campaign for the primary election on June 26, as well as the general election, set for Nov. 6.
He also asked the jurors to visit his campaign Facebook page and website to share “any memories you had from serving on the jury panel in my courtroom.”
Caputo stated in the campaign letter that he had presided over 112 criminal jury trials over the last seven-plus years, but it is unknown how many of those jurors had their information used.
Vicki Cox, trial court administrator for Tulsa County, answered general questions about how jurors’ information is typically handled.
“Say Judge X needs 40 jurors. The computer randomly draws from the 250 to 300 people who actually check in (for jury duty). We give the judge’s list of the panel to the judge’s bailiff,” Cox said.
She said that information includes names, addresses, and in some cases, phone numbers. Some judges prefer to receive the lists electronically, while others prefer printed copies.
Bailiffs obtain phone numbers from jurors whose are not included in records in case they need to be contacted about scheduling changes.
Cox was asked if there were any other official uses for jurors’ private information.
“I think every judge in this building sends personal letters — 13 or 14 on each case, and we also have certificates — to thank them for their service and the sacrifice they made in taking time out of their lives,” Cox said.
