Transgender sex offender Richard Cox battles judge over damning letters
Richard Cox, a transgender woman and convicted sex offender, is involved in a legal case in Virginia where the appeals court revived loitering charges related to allegations of Cox entering female locker rooms at schools and recreation centers, with witnesses claiming Cox appeared naked in front of young girls. Cox is challenging a judge, Daniel Lopez, asking for recusal due to potential conflicts of interest, notably because Lopez previously handled Cox’s child pornography conviction and considered evidence such as letters Cox wrote in prison, which Cox now seeks to exclude. Cox’s defense argues that Lopez’s prior rulings and the admission of prison letters bias the case. The case also involves Cox’s request to have these letters expunged, but the prosecution states the deadline for expungement has passed. The legal proceedings continue, with the appeals court clarifying the law’s request to the loitering charges, though they did not decide whether Cox will face trial on those charges yet.
Transgender sex offender Richard Cox is back in court as a Virginia Court of Appeals ruling revived the loitering charges and rejected the way Circuit Court Judge Daniel T. Lopez previously dismissed them. Now Cox is asking Lopez to recuse himself from the case.
Cox, a biological male who identifies as a woman, is facing a slew of charges in Arlington County for entering female locker rooms at local schools and recreation centers. Witnesses claim Cox, who still has a penis, would walk around naked for hours in front of young girls.
Recommended Stories
During Friday’s hearing, Cox argued Lopez should recuse himself, claiming there is a conflict of interest because Lopez previously presided over the criminal case in which Cox was convicted of possession of child pornography in a second or subsequent offense.
Cox also pointed to a bias over letters written to a judge while in prison that Lopez is now allowing as evidence in the trial.
Cox was imprisoned in 1991 for indecent exposure to children. While behind bars, Cox wrote a letter to a judge saying he received sexual gratification from being naked in front of females in public and had requested to be chemically castrated.
“While I’m jailed for just actively exposing myself, I don’t just underplay my actions. I think that what I did is shameful,” Cox wrote in the letter. “I only want to point out the fear and frustration that’s mine.”
“Were I not so afraid of physical contact with people, I’m sure I would have no problem in growing a normal relationship with a girl my age,” Cox wrote. “I don’t want to be a prisoner here. I can’t control it; it’s not my fault.”
Lopez had previously ruled those letters could not be shown to the jury during the child pornography trial earlier in February.
The judge outlined that the defendant has already admitted during pretrial motions hearings that “I’m just looking for help” and “I just want the jury to know how bad I feel.” The judge said two dynamics can exist at once: Cox can claim to be transgender, and Cox can receive sexual gratification by exposing himself in front of women.
Cox is now asking not only for the letters to be excluded from evidence, but for them to be expunged entirely.
The state argued Cox was notified that the statute of limitations to seek expungement of court records is two years, a deadline that has long since passed.
But Cox argues this is a violation of rights because Cox did not know the letter had been entered into the court record in the 1990s. Cox claims he only become aware of the letters during discovery in the February criminal trial.
The loitering charges themselves are still up in the air. In court documents obtained by the Washington Examiner, the state Court of Appeals said it did not want this case to become a larger constitutional question by effectively declaring Virginia’s loitering law unconstitutional simply because the statute does not specifically define the word “loitering.” Instead, the appeals court said Lopez can rely on the dictionary definition of loitering, along with precedent from previous cases, to determine whether the law applies.
APPEALS COURT REVIVES VIRGINIA LOCKER ROOM CASE AGAINST TRANSGENDER SEX OFFENDER RICHARD COX
But that ruling does not mean the appeals court decided Cox must face the loitering charges in trial. It only found that Lopez dismissed those charges using the wrong legal reasoning.
The issue of the loitering charges will be argued at a later date. But on Friday, Lopez ruled against Cox’s request for recusal, saying there was no legal basis for him to step aside.
" Conservative News Daily does not always share or support the views and opinions expressed here; they are just those of the writer."
*As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases
