Judge reprimanded for false 'elder abuse' claim on Facebook in spat over guardianship case
An Ohio judge has received a public reprimand for inaccurately asserting on Facebook that an elderly woman was removed from her home because of its “deplorable conditions” and her son’s failure to take care of her. (Image from Shutterstock)
An Ohio judge has received a public reprimand for inaccurately asserting on Facebook that an elderly woman was removed from her home because of its “deplorable conditions” and her son’s failure to take care of her.
Judge Ralph Edward Winkler of the Hamilton County Probate Court in Ohio had made the comments in defense of a magistrate, and he took down the messages “within a couple hours of posting,” according to an Aug. 21 Ohio Supreme Court decision summarized by Court News Ohio.
“Don’t try to blame my court or [a magistrate colleague] for your shortcomings as a son,” Winkler had written.
He later apologized for the statements.
In reality, a guardian had moved the woman to a memory care unit in an assisted living facility on the belief that she would be better off with the activities and supervision there. And photos depicting the home in poor condition were taken when the guardian sought permission to sell the home. The woman had already moved to the facility at that time.
Judge Ralph Edward Winkler of the Hamilton County Probate Court in Ohio. (Photo from the Hamilton County Probate Court website)
Winkler did not intentionally make false statements, but he commented without reviewing the record or refreshing his memory, according to findings by the Ohio Board of Professional Conduct. The Ohio Supreme Court adopted the findings and agreed with the parties that a public reprimand was appropriate.
Winkler became involved in the guardianship case in the fall 2015, when he appointed an attorney to be the elderly woman’s successor guardian. After that, the woman’s son and daughter sent many letters and emails accusing the guardian of misconduct and complaining about the guardianship process. In one instance, Winkler ruled against the son on a motion to set aside a magistrate’s order.
Winkler made the comments about the son in October 2022 on a Facebook page titled “Hamilton County Probate Court, Judge Ralph Winkler.” Winkler commented in response to comments by the son that criticized a particular magistrate.
Winkler wrote: “You’re just mad because we had to intercede and take care of your mother when you did not. You were living in your mother[’]s house in deplorable conditions. I am glad a nice neighbor called senior services and we got your mother into a safe, clean and healthy care facility. God only knows what would have happened to her if a good Samaritan neighbor had not reported this elder abuse. The home photos in evidence don’t lie. Anyone in the public can look at them as they are part of your mother’s case file.”
After the son posted a response, Winkler replied: “You lost your case because you were wrong. You interviewed this poor woman with dementia with leading and suggestive questions to try to prove you weren’t wrong. However, you were wrong for not taking care of your mother. When you did make it to court you often reeked of alcohol. Plus, you also missed many hearings for unknown reasons. Don’t try to blame my court or [the magistrate] for your shortcomings as a son. I am glad your neighbor reported this to the authorities. Your mother could have died or suffered needlessly if my court didn’t help her.”
Winkler stipulated that his statements about the woman being removed from her home because of poor living conditions were incorrect and unsupported by the record. Winkler also admitted that a neighbor had not called senior services, the elderly woman was not a victim of elder abuse, and there was no evidence of a lack of care by a family member.
It is unknown whether anyone besides the son saw Winkler’s comments before he took them down. Afterward, Winkler “promptly” gave control of the Facebook page to two staff members, so that “he would no longer have the ability to post things on his own,” the state supreme court said.
Winkler’s comments were made years after a court administrator responded to a media inquiry about the case. Winkler had authorized the court administrator to speak. The official wrongly said in January 2019 that the woman was removed from her home because of “a squalid, unsafe living environment,” and the son was not properly caring for her.
The reporter sought a response from the son, who shared the comment with his sister. She wrote a letter complaining that the statement was inaccurate more than a year later, but the judge did not see it.
“Beyond being personally hurtful” to the son and daughter, the state supreme court said, “there can be no doubt that those inaccurate statements served to further erode [their] already-dim confidence in the integrity, impartiality and legitimacy of the court.”
Winkler did not have prior discipline, he did not act with dishonest or selfish motive, he was cooperative in the disciplinary proceedings, and he accepted responsibility for his conduct, the Ohio Supreme Court noted. He also submitted 26 letters attesting to his good character and reputation.
The case is Ohio State Bar Association v. Winkler.
