McAleer suggests relationship between judge, employee not ‘sexual’

Peter McAleer, a spokesman for the New Jersey Judiciary, is now disputing whether the relationship between Superior Court Judge Jeffrey Jablonski and one of his employees is “sexual,” but the courts are refusing to answer questions about what that means.

“We did not use the word ‘sexual,’ and that is not what was reported by Judge Jablonski,” said McAleer.

But the judiciary has, since last Friday, declined to say how the Administrative Office of the Courts defines “sexual” and “dating,” as it relates to judges and their employees.

McAleer maintains that Jablonski followed court rules by disclosing a consensual adult relationship with a woman who works directly for him.  But McAleer and others steadfastly refuse to disclose when the relationship began and when it was reported – details that could independently confirm whether Jablonski moved quickly to report or did so after a suspicious amount of time.

“There’s no good reason why they shouldn’t tell that,” a sitting judge told the New Jersey Globe.  “It’s not wrong to wonder if someone is hiding something.  I’d want McAleer to say it if it were me, and I wasn’t hiding anything.  I hope (Jablonski) isn’t paying the price of their arrogance.”

After learning that Jablonski, the Hudson County Assignment Judge, was dating his employee, Chief Justice Stuart Rabner chose to elevate him to a seat on the appellate court rather than transfer him to another vicinage.

An email was sent to Glenn Grant, the acting administrative director of the courts, on December 27 and again on December 30 asking if judges use a specific form to report a personal relationship with a subordinate.  He has not replied.  And the judiciary has not responded to requests about whose vacant appellate court seat Jablonski filled and whether other candidates were considered.

The appearance that McAleer is trying, perhaps without success, to define “sexual” is troubling, the judge said.

“We’re 25 years beyond Bill Clinton and Monica Lewinsky,” the judge stated.  “Surely people know what the definition of sex is by now.”