Judge Turns Fashion Police

How low can you go?

Ohio judge says: "No crack on the streets . . . or in the courtroom!"

In Ohio, Lorain Municipal Court Judge Mark Mihok held Durrell Brooks in contempt of court on Thursday, June 14, because Brooks’ pants were riding so low, his underwear was showing.  The judge then sentenced him, pants and shoulders sagging, to jail for seventy-two hours.  Three whole days!

“I think he was a little shocked and upset,” Judge Mihok said.

Attending a hearing with a woman who was facing a traffic violation for a May car crash, Brooks waddled up to the bench to drop some wisdom on Judge Mihok that he, in fact, had insurance on the car Jackson (his girlfriend) was pushing.

Above the waist, please!

"I guess I will have to wear my pants like Urkel," said Durrell Brooks, who was NOT the defendant and only appeared in court to help a friend.

Mihok said when Brooks turned tail to waddle away, all he could see was drawers.  Believing he was witnessing a true fashion “oh, no he didn’t,” with true fashion police flair and exercising his judicial discretion, the judge Speedo-ly ordered Brooks arrested.

Mihok said the incident with Brooks was the third time in the past month he has sent a sorry sagger to jail for assuming problematic gear.  Two other sloppy slackers had been warned by court security to pull up their sleepy pants before entering the courtroom.  With their bloomers blooming and still on proud display like a Calvin Klein ad when they swished in, Mihok—in essence giving all droopy derelicts the finger—applied the long arm of the law and pointed them straight to jail.

Mihok said, every day court security has to put up with saggers scarcely wearing their pants.

“Some even come in in their jail outfits and put their jail pants low trying to show their friends and relatives that they’re a tough guy,” Mihok said.

He said the issue is not just a matter of decorum.  But he wants all those who come into his courtroom, whether juniors or seniors (from diapers to Depends and the brief in between) to feel safe—from ash.

Was the judge’s decision a low blow . . . or no?

Comments (4)

  1. Kim

    No. Who would want a boyfriend looking like a funky bum.

  2. Kurtis Estheim

    This is actually horrible. Girls can have their thongs riding up, booty shorts down, and not one man complains. But if a guy has an inch or two of boxers showing, that’s totally unacceptable? Am I the only one who thinks it’s [eff]ing insane to police how someone dresses? That judge should have been reprimanded hard for what he did.

    And, to my dearest sweet Kim, I didn’t realize that one person’s tastes in a partner should dictate the legal status of certain styles of clothing. If things only -I- found attractive were legal, you’d be long since locked up with the key melted down. Along with every female on the planet. But the GLORIOUS thing (and quite lucky for you!) is that’s /not/ how the world works (or rather, not how it is SUPPOSED to work).

    • Holliday Vann

      Kim? Which Kim?

    • So why not wear pajamas to work and lingerie to a funeral? You don’t think people need to respect court rooms? What if your doctor showed up in army fatigues with a scalpel? You cool with that? That’s what’s wrong with our country. No decorum. People don’t know how to behave (Prez-elect D. Trump?!!), even down to something as simple as attire. If dude’s going to the park or walking around his block sagging…then sag away!!!

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

CommentLuv badge