A judge in St. Charles County who agreed to resign after photographs revealed him wearing an Elvis Presley costume in the courtroom is now asking for a do-over from Missouri’s Supreme Court — and defending his decision to dress as the King of Rock 'n' Roll.
In a legal filing on Monday, lawyers for Judge Matthew Thornhill claim the state’s disciplinary commission broke a confidentiality agreement when it released the now-viral photographs of Thornhill wearing the Elvis outfit.
Elvis-related complaints weren’t the only charges made against Thornhill. The state’s Commission on Retirement, Removal and Discipline of Judges accused him of violating the Supreme Court’s rules when he mentioned his political affiliation and campaigned for judge from the bench. Another charge detailed Thornhill’s attempt to involve himself directly in an adoption case.
But it was the photos and details that showed Thornhill’s apparent love for Elvis that drew international headlines. The court filings also described how “on occasion" Thornhill allowed litigants and defendants to be sworn in by “playing Elvis Presley music from his phone.”
In Monday’s filing with the court, Thornhill appeared to draw a distinction between his Elvis-related actions and the other cases of misconduct.
"Judge Thornhill admitted and acknowledged misjudgment in certain situations alleged in the Amended Notice,” the filing stated, “but [he] explained that he believed some of the conduct charged – such as donning an Elvis sunglasses and wig while reading his Halloween docket, allowing litigants to decide whether a gavel or music to go on the record during minor name changes, and even discussing campaign signs when litigants initiated those conversations – were intended to build trust.”
Thornhill’s “misjudgments,” the filing continued, included placing “a religious tract on a lawyer’s car on the way into work.”
In his previous admission to the court on Nov. 12, Thornhill described the remaining two counts against him as “a mistake and improper” and “a mistake and failure on my part to maintain proper order and decorum.”
As part of the disciplinary proceedings, Thornhill acknowledged that the allegations against him “are substantially accurate.” Of the Elvis costume and references, he said, “It was my intention in the matters … to add levity at times when I thought it would help relax litigants.”
The agreement ended with Thornhill agreeing to a six-month suspension that would allow him to return to the bench for another 18 months before a forced retirement.
Thornhill made that agreement before he became an object of national news interest and online mockery. The photos of him dressed as Elvis were included as exhibits in a Nov. 14 “Findings of Fact” document, which detailed the complaints brought to the disciplinary commission.
Now, Thornhill wants to revisit the terms of his punishment. In Monday’s filing, his attorneys noted that “The Commission and Judge Thornhill agreed that … the Commission would keep the existence of the resignation confidential.”
The release of the photos, the filing continued, has tainted the agreement and should make it “void and unenforceable.”
Thornhill “suffered public, irreparable harm to his reputation” as a result of the news coverage of the case, the filing continued. His lawyers asked the court to throw out the previous agreement and to instead reach a resolution that would reduce the six-month suspension to 60 days.
“Judge Thornhill recognizes and admits that he has made mistakes,” the filing stated. “Despite the ongoing harm to himself and his family as well as the considerable additional harm due to the Commission’s breach of the parties’ agreement … he has tried to perform his judicial responsibilities in a reasonable and ethical manner.”
Although Thornhill is now seeking to undo the agreement he reached earlier this month with the commission, the deal was never binding. Under state law, disciplinary decisions must be approved by the Missouri Supreme Court.
Thornhill’s latest request to the court does not mention the terms of his planned resignation. Questions sent to Thornhill’s attorneys seeking clarification about whether he would try to remain a judge were not answered by publication.
The latest legal salvo from Thornhill doesn’t just defend his conduct but goes on the attack. His attorneys blame commission Director Jeffrey Benoist for submitting the photos for publication through the state’s online court filing system, violating the alleged confidentiality agreement. It was Benoist, according to Thornhill, who asked him “to put his Elvis sunglasses and wig back on so that Mr. Benoist could take a photograph.” That photograph was one of three included as evidence in the disciplinary proceedings.
On Wednesday morning, Eddy Justice, the chair of the disciplinary commission said, “I can't comment on the material facts of the case, but I can say a response will be forthcoming to the motion.”
On Monday’s St. Louis on the Air, the case of Thornhill’s resignation and his Elvis-related behavior were subjects of discussion on the November edition of the Legal Roundtable.
“Being in front of a judge is not a circumstance where you really want a lot of levity,” said attorney David Roland. “I've never had a judge wear a costume when I was in front of them. But I can say that if that ever happened, I would have some pause whether the judge was taking the matters or their role as seriously as I would like them to do.”
To hear the full conversation about this case and others with the Legal Roundtable — including an update on the criminal charges filed after a police SUV collided with St. Louis bar Bar:PM — listen to “St. Louis on the Air” on Apple Podcasts, Spotify or YouTube, or click the play button below.
“St. Louis on the Air” brings you the stories of St. Louis and the people who live, work and create in our region. The show is produced by Miya Norfleet, Emily Woodbury, Danny Wicentowski, Elaine Cha and Alex Heuer. The production intern is Darrious Varner. The audio engineer is Aaron Doerr.
