lf1

New Jersey Judge John Tomasello refuses restraining order for victim of convicted pedophile and bigamist William Jordan

NJ Judge John Tomasello

NJ Judge John Tomasello

By Joyce M. Short

BURLINGTON COUNTY, NJ — Although New Jersey revamped their sexual assault laws in 2012, yesterday Family Court Judge John Tomasello proved those changes could be easily undermined by a judge who’s a misogynist dinosaur.

Mishcelle Lewis, of Florence Township, New Jersey, had petitioned the court for a restraining order against convicted bigamist and child molester, William Allen Jordan. Jordan currently awaits trial on charges of sexual coercion, theft by deception, and impersonating a government official. He is currently housed in a special protective section of the Burlington County jail designated for sexual predators. His case history includes failure to register as a sex offender.

Lewis was represented by Stanley Gregory, who minced no words laying out the facts. Lewis met Jordan in January, 2013 on a dating website. They corresponded, met several times and began a sexual relationship on April 26, 2013. He lied about his name, his age, his marital history, claimed to be adopted, educated in the UK, had no children, owned a house worth $700K, worked for the British Ministry of Defense, and a myriad of other facts. Nothing was the truth. He failed to disclose that he was a convicted child molester and bigamist. He defrauded Ms. Lewis of approximately $4,000. Lewis was clear that she would not have had sexual intercourse with Jordan if she had known the facts. She also indicated that she made an attempt to secure information on Google, but nothing came up until she ultimately learned his accurate name.

Although the bail in Jordan’s criminal case contains a “no contact” provision, Ms. Lewis wanted the added insurance that a perpetual restraining order would provide to her and her children. She was concerned about the possibility of future contact by a child molester who should have been prohibited from establishing initial contact under Megan’s Law. The British authorities deported Jordan from the UK after he served his sentence, but no notice made its way to Megan’s List.

The attorney representing Jordan, Karen Thek, stated early on that Jordan would invoke his fifth amendment rights and not testify. So the hearing was brief with only the claims of Ms. Lewis before the judge.

Although New Jersey law states clearly that the behavior of the accused is on trial, not the behavior of the victim, Judge Tomasello turned the proceedings into a condemnation of Lewis’s behavior, faulting her for a “deficiency in gullibility” because she “relied on his representations,” as if fraud was not a serious crime. He even made light of her predicament by saying “every fraternity boy would go to jail” if he upheld her claim, and he failed to acknowledge the specific section of law which Gregory quoted. Although Jordan had concealed convictions for bigamy and sexual molestation of a minor, Tomasello harped on his not being “wealthy” or having a “nice car” as not being worthy of the protection Lewis sought. She had made no reference whatsoever to Jordan’s wealth or his possession of an automobile. In fact, she later indicated that he had no car during portions of their relationship.

Judge Tomasello revealed much about his own personal beliefs in what he said today. He obviously feels, like so many others, that sex by deception by frat boys is perfectly okay. So much so that he’d deliberately fail to protect a woman with children from further contact by a sex offender in order to enable sex as an entitlement and a commodity behavior. How can society hope to stop this abhorrent mindset if our judges can’t be counted on to protect a victim’s right to self determination over their intimate sexual sanctity

This same mindset is thought to have motivated Elliot Rodger into unspeakable carnage recently in Santa Barbara CA, where 6 innocent victims were killed and 8 more were injured because he was unable to obtain the sexual relations he felt entitled to.  Yes, he was emotionally disturbed. Yes, he should not have had access to the weapons that enabled his rampage. But sex as an entitlement is rampart in our society, and Judge Tomasello just demonstrated why.

Surely, our Judges should concern themselves with protection against defrauding people of sex. Knowing consent is at the heart of all valid and legal interaction in all other interpersonal relationships. Why does a judge turn a deaf ear toward the deliberate undermining of knowing consent when a person’s sexual sanctity is compromised, particularly in an enlightened state where affirmative permission must be granted for sexual intercourse to be legal, and no affirmative permission can exist without the presence of knowing consent.

Editor’s note:

Judge John Tomasello had retired from the New Jersey Courts but was recalled on February 3, 2014, to serve for two years or until further notice. For more about him, see:

Judge releases sex case suspect, on CourierPostOnline.com.

RobeProbe.com ratings of judges

Step down from the stand in Gloucester County Family Courts, disrobe petition on Change.org.


Posted in: Uncategorized

9 Comments on "New Jersey Judge John Tomasello refuses restraining order for victim of convicted pedophile and bigamist William Jordan"

Trackback | Comments RSS Feed

  1. LisaH says:

    Based on my dealings with judges all over the country, male and female, old or not, this is the prevailing victim-blaming that has permeated judicial thinking. If everyone knew what goes on in our judicial system each and every day, they would realize that an enormous number of us do NOT live in a “free” society. It is truly shameful how many judges I have seen who are themselves arguably sociopathic.



    Report this comment

  2. Jan7 says:

    After going through a divorce with a sociopath I no longer have respect for our court system what so ever. The lawyers are the vultures of our society who pray on victims of abuse dragging out the divorce intentionally to line their pockets and the Judges allow the sociopath to drag the divorce on and subject the victims to continual court sessions because they are clueless that the abuser is still controlling the victims for sheer fun.

    Makes you wonder about the Supreme Court and their decisions.

    The only way to get these courts to issue more restraining orders is to start suing the Judges and the County Courts if the abuser hurts a victims emotional, mentally or physically after a restraining order is denied then and only then will these people take abuse and the victims tremendous fear seriously. I hope the best for Ms Lewis and her children.



    Report this comment

  3. jm_short says:

    Tomasello clearly showed his psychopathic leanings! It was as if he was deliberately protecting the rights of “frat boys” to violate women, as if their behavior was harmless fun and acceptable. Leads one to ponder how he conducted himself back in the day!

    Mr. Gregory argued that specific law governing this issue was written for this type of circumstance, and clearly demonatrated that concept to the judge. But Tomasello was closed to protecting the victim. He either did not understand the law, or is as cold hearted as the psychopaths he often passes judgement on.

    He serves as a callous reminder that psychopaths often become judges, politicians, and officers, or make other career choices that fuel their need for power. His decision was atrocious.

    Joyce



    Report this comment

  4. Bally says:

    Joyce, I was just about to write that he is a psychopath and/or has conned women into sex with him. The outcome is he doesn’t see anything wrong with it. If he is a judge does that mean he cannot be challenged over his decision? No recourse for Mischelle?



    Report this comment

    • onebody says:

      Thank you for posting this. It validates what I experienced in attempting to get a restraining order. The judge in my case also was previously retired and then returned to ‘help out’. She was retired for a reason – her mind was gone. It was a completely down-the-rabbit-hole type of experience. She even ruled that I had to pay all court costs even though that was against the law. But since the law was written that way, there was no way for me to appeal the ruling. Seriously messed up.



      Report this comment

  5. jm_short says:

    Bally-

    LoveFraud readers can make a big difference!

    Mischele’s recourse could be an appeal. She has 45 days to decide on that issue.

    But I believe a greater purpose would be served by LoveFraud readers joining me in writing to the Presiding Judge in Family Court in Burlington County and expressing outrage at Judge Tomasello’s conduct. At least it would make the Judge in the upcoming criminal trial aware that judicial, misogynist misconduct toward this or any victim is unacceptable to the public.

    An internet search on Tomasello will make you wonder why he was chosen for recall. He was clearly a misogynist in the past, and could not possibly be expected to bring anything new to the bench. He is seated for a 2 year stint and is likely to cause havoc with a great many families in that time frame.

    Letters can be sent to Presiding Judge, John L. Call Jr., Family Court, 49 Rancocus Rd, Mt. Holly, NJ 08060, and preferably with a cc to Chief Justice Stuart Rabner, who signed the order recalling Tomasello to serve. His address is Chief Justice Stuart Rabner, Justice Complex, PO Box 970, Trenton, NJ 08625.

    Here’s mine:

    Dear Judge Call,

    I sat with great discomfort listening to Judge Tomasello’s mocking contempt for the victim in the request of Mishcele Lewis for a restraining order against William Allen Jordan on June 5th. I can’t imagine a better example of a victim being victimized in a court proceeding.

    Tomasello failed to recognize how the law applies to this woman who was defrauded into a sexual relationship, and even an engagement for marriage, by a convicted pedophile who previously had sexually molested the 13 year old child of another lover. Ms. Lewis also has a thirteen year old daughter.

    Instead of addressing the protection that is warranted, Judge Tomasello derided Ms. Lewis’s “gullibility.” He accused her of being disappointed that Jordan wasn’t “wealthy with a fancy car,” despite that Ms. Lewis never once concerned herself, or mentioned concern over those issues.

    But even worse than his contemptuous attitude was his decided refusal to address the law because in doing so, in his opinion, “every frat boy” would be at fault when they defrauded women for sex. Judge Tomasello was totally oblivious to the fact that frat boys are committing sexual assault when they defraud people of sex. He could have done something to help put an end to the behavior that defiles countless victims. Instead, he treated it as if the behavior was an acceptable joke.

    Tomasello’s decision leaves one to ponder how many women he has defrauded for sex, and the morality, or lack of it, that he has passed down to his own children.

    Society expects Judges who adjudicate decisions in Family Court to uphold the law and provide protection for victims. Instead, Judge Tomasello proved himself to be a mysogonist dynosaur who cannot possibly make decisions without reflecting his warped mindset. While the actions of the accused should have been on trial, instead, Tomasello chose to try the victim, in direct contrast to the spirit and letter of the law.

    Tomasello should be removed from the bench in New Jersey. His failure to recognize the harm in defrauding a woman for sex makes him a pivotal part of the problem instead of the solution.

    Sincerely Yours,
    Joyce M. Short
    Author, “Carnal Abuse by Deceit, How a Predator’s Lies Became Rape”



    Report this comment

    • AnnettePK says:

      It’s a great letter, but if you haven’t sent it yet, you might consider omitting the sentence speculating about Tomasello having defrauded women for sex and teaching immorality to his children. These are logical conclusions, but since they are not proven facts they may be viewed as slanderous accusations and a personal attack, and may detract from the other points in the letter. I think the letter is powerful without the speculation, which probably comes to most people’s mind autonomously even if you don’t mention it.



      Report this comment

  6. Bally says:

    Joyce, your letter has significant impact.

    Do LF readers have to be American/living in America to write letters of complaint to support Mishcele?

    What type of values does America want its citizens to have and how is Tomasello’s decision supporting this?



    Report this comment

  7. Nicoles Law says:

    What restraining order are we talking about in New Jersey? Nicole’s Law? If so I can maybe help…..



    Report this comment

Post a Comment

You must be logged in to post a comment.