Odd Story of Judge and Defendant Gaming Together

A Circuit Court Judge for the 30th Circuit in Virginia has vacated his seat following a tale of a 2009 car crash following a night of videogames with a former defendant who had appeared before him in court.

TriCities.com carries the story of Circuit Judge Joseph Carico (pictured behind the bench) who crashed his SUV into a tree on November 21, 2009. Passenger Jeremy Hubbard was hurt in the crash, which happened after a night playing Halo 3 on the Xbox 360 and sports games on the Wii, the Judge’s “preferred gaming system,” according to Hubbard.

Hubbard’s and Carico’s paths had crossed in court as a result of a drug case against the former, in which the latter “had signed multiple orders revoking Hubbard’s bond and jailing him on the drug conviction and on a larceny case.” Carico also “signed three separate orders sentencing Hubbard to community service.”

Hubbard claimed that in 2008 Carico “happened” to stop into a Bonanza restaurant he was working in and the two started talking about games. “We just started talking about video games and he started talking about the X-Box 360,” Hubbard said.

The two “had many” videogame matches following their original meeting, and “At one point, they even considered forming a competition team that was to include some of Hubbard’s neighbors.”

The two have reportedly “lost touch” following the accident.

A notice on Virginia Lawyers Weekly states that Carico will not be sitting on the bench “until further notice.”

Image from the TimesNews

Tweet about this on TwitterShare on FacebookShare on Google+Share on RedditEmail this to someone


  1. 0
    Oreo says:

    It seems shady that the judge has just dropped off the radar, if the article can be trusted, but this seems like it may be a case of the judge reaching out to this guy and helping him to straighten out his life.

  2. 0
    Thad says:

    Odd indeed.  Hard to make a call on the ethics of this — it’s not like they were hanging out before or during the time the defendant was before the judge; THAT would be an obvious conflict of interest.

Leave a Reply