Calling The Backpage Defendants What They Are: Abhorrent

Today we are taking a quick moment to update our readers about some of the more recent events surrounding the upcoming trial of the key players in the Backpage sex trafficking syndicate.

Only days ago a federal appeals court on rejected a request by the former operators of Backpage, James Larkin and Michael Lacey, to prevent a judge from presiding over their trial because of statements made by the judge’s husband, Arizona Attorney General Mark Brnovich, about the now-shuttered classified ad site.

Indeed, the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals has now definitively concluded that Judge Susan Brnovich made no clear error in rejecting the recusal request made by Backpage founders Michael Lacey, James Larkin and other former site managers, who argued that letting her remain on the case, scheduled to go to trial Aug. 23, could lead people to question the court’s impartiality.

Our readers will recall how the unscrupulous former operators of Backpage had previously criticized statements made in a human trafficking booklet published by Arizona Attorney General Mark Brnovich’s office, which describes the ad site as a place where sex is frequently purchased. Their lawyers said the attorney general has invited members of the public to visit websites that contain inflammatory information about Backpage and its operators and that the attorney general has publicly claimed that the site facilitated sex trafficking.

Crucially however, as the court pointed out, the case against the former Backpage operators is being prosecuted by the U.S. Justice Department, and not the Arizona Attorney General’s Office.

Brnovich spokeswoman Katie Conner said the attorney general wasn’t going to comment on the ruling, but said she believes “ it ’ s abhorrent that the defendants in this case insinuate a woman can ’ t speak and think for herself.”

In rejecting the recusal request five months ago, Judge Brnovich wrote she will remain impartial and said no informed, reasonable person would question her ability to be just and fair based on her marriage. She wrote the attorney general didn’t make any derogatory comments about those who are charged in the case.

In fact, as Judge Brnovich pointed out, defense lawyers waited more than 17 months to try to take her off the case even though the attorneys knew the judge was married to the attorney general when she was assigned it.

Prosecutors said it was anachronistic to suggest an experienced judge is unable to impartially preside over a case because of her husband’s views. They also said the bid to recuse the judge only came after she made adverse rulings against them, including decisions in which she refused to dismiss charges.

Tony Ortega Backpage apologist

It seems the word ‘abhorrent’ gets used frequently of Backpage, its principle actors and its most vocal apologist, Tony Ortega.

Is it really any wonder why such a word seems so applicable? After all when it comes to those who been involved in promoting, protecting and propagandizing on behalf of Backpage there really is no better word than ‘abhorrent’.