NJ Superior Court judge says he did not know his 'inappropriate' TikToks were public
HACKENSACK — A state judge in Bergen County knows what music he likes, but not how to manage his TikTok account.
On Friday, Judge Gary N. Wilcox issued a 21-page verified answer to a five-page complaint filed against him by the Advisory Committee on Judicial Conduct on June 30. The complaint by Disciplinary Counsel Maureen Bauman charged Wilcox with violating three judicial conduct canons by posting some 40 videos of himself under an assumed name on TikTok, and lip-syncing questionable song lyrics in questionable attire and/or surroundings between March 2021 and April 2023.
The charges brought Wilcox, 59, national attention last month. Although Wilcox concedes his behavior was questionable and "inappropriate," he contends the whole affair could have been avoided if someone had contacted him when he allegedly was first recognized on TikTok in March 2021.
"Respondent admits to utilizing the platform, but does not consider himself an expert in its use and in customizing an account," Wilcox states in the document. "He did not know the significance of what 'public' meant in TikTok's posting context."
Wilcox believed "the setting allowed viewing beyond himself to include family, friends, and people who sought to connect with him whom he permitted.
"He never intended for the posting to be seen by the public at large," but only later changed the designation for his videos to "friends only" or "followers only."
Under the fictitious name Sal Tortorella, Wilcox posted videos playing background music or lip-syncing lyrics from songs such as "Get Down" by Nas, "Sure Thing" by Miguel and "Touch It" by Busta Rhymes.
The complaint states that in at least 11 of the videos, the lyrics or Wilcox's appearance "brought disrepute to the judiciary." He filmed himself in some of the videos in chambers or the courthouse, wearing judicial robes, or "partially dressed lying in bed."
The response asserts the videos were done on Wilcox's personal phone, on personal time, and intended for his personal use. The account has since been disbanded, and Wilcox says in the document that he has no intention of renewing the activity.
The response questions whether a member of the public filed the complaint, given the few followers Wilcox had on TikTok, and whether there was any substantial public impact from his videos before publicity from the July 1 complaint.
"We have no idea who filed the complaint," Robert Hille, Wilcox's attorney, said Saturday. "We do not think there was any underlying motive."
The complaint lists three violations of the Code of Judicial Conduct:
Canon 1, Rule 1.1, requires judges to observe high standards of conduct so that the integrity and independence of the Judiciary may be preserved.
Canon 2, Rule 2.1, requires judges to avoid impropriety and the appearance of impropriety and to act at all times in a manner that promotes public confidence in the integrity and impartiality of the Judiciary.
Canon 5, Rule 5. l(A), requires judges to conduct their extrajudicial activities in a manner that would not cast reasonable doubt on the judge's capacity to act impartially as a judge, demean the judicial office, or interfere with the proper performance of judicial duties.
In his response, Wilcox suggests any discipline "should not be greater than a reprimand."
This article originally appeared on NorthJersey.com: NJ Superior Court judge Gary Wilcox responds to TikTok complaint
