In a live broadcast yesterday, CNN’s In Session covered the sentencing of pedophile victim, Daniel Kovarbasich. This broadcast was a rare and welcome departure from the usual edited videos of such sensational trials. Because I happened to hear the last few minutes of the broadcast before TruTV’s usual programming kicked in, I was able to hear some important, shocking remarks from the judge, which it appears In Session has decided not to discuss in today’s analysis of the probation sentence.

I’m not surprised at this “tactful” omission by In Session’s anchors and reporters. The program has to rely on judges in most cases for permission to record trials. If they dare to criticize judges, they risk losing access to the courts. In fact, they do not dare criticize attorneys for either side in a trial, or they risk losing access to them, too.

Unfortunately, this “objective,” respectful treatment of both judges and other “officers of the court” prevents the citizenry from learning about the errors and abuses they are apt to commit.

In the early days of our nation, public trials were entirely in the open. Jurisdictions were still very small; citizens were aware when trials were underway and had direct access to the courtroom, where they could observe the entire proceedings.

Now, jurisdictions are often vast. Few citizens other than those directly involved in a trial (victims, families, friends, jurors) are aware of current cases; few citizens have access to the courtroom, unless trials are televised. 

When In Session switched formats from live trials to edited trials, we the people lost real access to the trials they cover.

Judge Burge

CNN’s Beth Karas characterized Judge James Burdge as scholarly in his approach to the law. Specifically, she pointed to the way the judge read the law to the courtroom to justify his sentence of five years’ parole. (Frankly, I think she was extremely clever to focus on this trait, instead of his outrageous remarks about the involuntary nature of pedophilia.)

While I agree with the judge’s sentence and with his feeling that Daniel Kovarbasich was “a victim,” I stand by the way my jaw dropped (involuntarily) when he said from the bench yesterday, that pedophilia is a “sexual preference,” which an adult “victim” is “stuck with” from birth, and we all ought to have empathy for this affliction.

What shocked me was less the stupidity of this remark than the way it showed the judge has no idea what the phrase “the rule of law, not of men” means. If the crime of sexual abuse by a pedophile is understandable and even constitutes a form of victimhood, then every crime is understandable and a form of victimhood. I guess he thinks we should feel sorry for every criminal.

• Sidebar: Judge Burge also said that more heterosexuals abuse children than homosexuals. Really? Has someone done a study of this? Or is this merely “in his experience,” (since he made a point of saying that he is heterosexual and feels sorry for homosexuals, who also have no choice in their sexual preferences). Is he speaking in terms of percentages, or raw numbers? If the latter, then I suppose he must be correct, since there are more heterosexuals than homosexuals. Of course, I’m not sure what he thinks of the case of Melissa Huckaby, the Sunday school teacher who raped and murdered little Sandra Cantu, or Johnny Gosch, whose family believes he was kidnapped by a pedophile sex ring.

Yes, pedophilia is a mental condition, which is involuntary—as involuntary as sanity, maturity, immaturity, schizophrenia, paranoia, sociopathy, psychopathy, and “lack of anger-management skills.”

Judge Burge ought not to have tried to mitigate the culpability of Daniel Kovarbasich’s victimizer in this way. It is inexcusable. It tells me that Burge may know the letter of the law, but he went to a pretty poor law school if he didn’t learn the function of law in society.