Evidence seized from federal judge's NY home in son's secret sex-tape case

[brooklynite]

Source: Gothamist

Authorities searched a senior federal judge’s home as part of a Manhattan criminal investigation that led to felony charges earlier this month against his 49-year-old son, who is accused of surreptitiously recording women engaged in sexual acts in his Upper East Side residence.

Investigators seized three hard drives as well as a black binder and three spindles holding more than 150 DVDs from the home of Senior U.S. District Judge Thomas McAvoy in the Binghamton area of New York’s Southern Tier — evidence that is now being used in a 29-count indictment handed down against his son, Daniel McAvoy, according to court records obtained by Gothamist.

The judge, first appointed to the federal bench in 1986 by then-President Ronald Reagan, has not been accused of any wrongdoing. A Manhattan grand jury indicted his son on September 7th, accusing Daniel McAvoy of illegally surveilling women as they disrobed or participated in sexual activity without knowing he had cameras rolling in his current and former apartments.

Judge McAvoy, through his judicial assistant, referred a request for comment on the case to Isabelle Kirshner, his son’s Manhattan-based attorney. Kirshner declined to speak.

Read more: https://gothamist.com/news/evidence-seized-from-federal-judges-ny-home-in-sons-secret-sex-tape-case

[Farmer-Rick]

1. Sounds like the judge was watching them too

A Raygun appointed judge helping his pervert son hide evidence or perhaps encouraging him to illegally obtain those DVDs.

[Baitball Blogger]

3. +1

[mountain grammy]

5. That's my take.

[IronLionZion]

2. Republicans are perverts

who don't believe in consent

[ToxMarz]

4. The judge hasn't been accused of any wrongdoing (*yet)

But it sure appears as though he's been doing some wrong!

[Hugh_Lebowski]

6. Sometimes grown kids store things at their folk's houses

Where the folks don't necessarily know what's in the boxes.

Even if it was the case where the son shared his vids with his dad (ewwww!) I'm not entirely sure you could charge the Judge with anything. I don't know that there's any law against *possession* of a surreptitious sex video as long as the victim is of age (and of course you didn't take it yourself).

[LiberalArkie]

7. Son being 49 and dad may have the same taste.

[FakeNoose]

8. Maybe the judge thought he could hide the porn and save his son from getting caught?

I don't know. Seems stupid, but these judges think they're beyond reproach.

[iluvtennis]

9. Let's see if this judge comes out and claims they raided his house and he wants a Special Master

to review the seized evidence to verify that the investigators have the right to it.

[MOMFUDSKI]

10. Tree -

meet apple.