Home Subscribe Las Vegas Review-Journal
  Jobs Cars Homes Shopping Travel Weddings Golf Best of Las Vegas Photo   Search:

RECENT EDITIONS
Sat Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri

News
Apr. 10, 2008
Copyright © Las Vegas Review-Journal

Judge denies claim of abuse, declares he loved accuser

Response describes relationship as consensual

By DAVID KIHARA
REVIEW-JOURNAL

Family Court Judge Nicholas Del Vecchio is running for re-election.

Embattled Family Court Judge Nicholas Del Vecchio on Wednesday fired back at the woman who had accused him of sexually abusing her when she was a minor and later sexually harassing her as an adult, saying he tried to help the woman financially and was in love with her.

In February the special prosecutor for the Nevada Judicial Commission filed a complaint against Del Vecchio, accusing him of sexual misconduct and abuse of power, including coercing his accuser, a judicial assistant, into having a sexual relationship with him.

In a response filed Wednesday, Del Vecchio attorney Bruce Shapiro described his client's relationship with the woman, Rebeccah Murray, as consensual.

Del Vecchio hired Murray as his assistant because he wanted to help her with her legal career, the response states. It says their relationship grew beyond "just being friends" to the point where Del Vecchio wanted to marry her.


Most Popular Stories
  • MOUNT CHARLESTON: Four die in plane crash
  • Two couples died in crash
  • NORM: Steve Wynn goes for mega-yacht
  • FAMILY SERVICES: Three visits preceded boy's death
  • NORM: Kirshner works on big Vegas project
  • NORM: Playboy models in state spotlight
  • NORM: Curtain falling on Stage Deli
  • Body of diver who jumped off 90-foot Lake Mead cliff found
  • NORM: Elvis fan club will have star its way
  • NORM: Playboy 'coed': Dad's OK with it



    • That version of the relationship is vastly different from Murray's.

    She accused Del Vecchio of taking nude photos of her when she was between the ages of 14 and 16 and had her perform oral sex on him.

    When she later worked for him beginning in 2002, Del Vecchio allowed her to work an adjusted schedule on condition she have sex with him, the complaint with the Judicial Commission states.

    Del Vecchio, 51, also became hostile toward Murray and threatened to fire her when she tried to break off the relationship, the complaint states.

    Neither Del Vecchio nor Murray could be reached for comment late Wednesday. Attorneys representing Del Vecchio and Murray couldn't be reached Wednesday night because their offices were closed by the time Del Vecchio's response was released publicly.

    Del Vecchio, who was elected to the bench in 2000 after seven failed attempts, is running for re-election and faces a primary challenge in August 2008.

    Only the Judicial Discipline Commission has the authority to remove a sitting judge. It hasn't taken any action against Del Vecchio, and he remains on the bench.

    On Wednesday, Del Vecchio asked the commission to hold off going forward with Murray's complaint until a similar civil lawsuit against him in District Court is resolved.

    That suit, filed March 31 by Murray, accuses Del Vecchio of assault, invasion of privacy, inflicting emotional distress and other charges.

    In the complaint, she alleges Del Vecchio was hostile and abusive toward her when she refused to have sex with him. Del Vecchio also threatened to publicize "compromising" photos of her taken when she was young, the complaint states.

    Murray is asking for more than $50,000 in damages.

    Del Vecchio's relationship with Murray dates back more than 15 years. In 1991, Del Vecchio married Murray's mother, Imogene Serranto, but they divorced within a year. Del Vecchio later made inappropriate sexual remarks about Serranto when she was his law clerk in 2005, the Judicial Discipline Commission complaint states.

    Del Vecchio remained friends with Murray after the divorce. In May 2002, Del Vecchio hired Murray as his judicial executive assistant because he "wanted to give Rebeccah the opportunity for a meaningful career," his response stated.

    During that time, Del Vecchio provided Murray with financial support and she started law school. He claims she began to take advantage of him and broke off their relationship.

    In April 2004, Murray threatened Del Vecchio by saying she "had evidence and that if (she) wanted to (she) could take him down," his response states. It doesn't explain what the evidence is.

    In May 2006, Murray filed a complaint against Del Vecchio with the Clark County Office of Diversity accusing him of sexual harassment. The office investigates allegations of workplace sexual, racial and religious harassment.

    About two months later, the Office of Diversity concluded the judge's relationship with Murray was consensual and his conduct "did not rise to the level of sexual harassment under the law," his response states.

    Murray's civil lawsuit in District Court confirms the Office of Diversity's investigation found there wasn't evidence of sexual harassment. She states, however, that the county failed to thoroughly and fairly look into her allegations.

    The Judicial Discipline Commission complaint against Del Vecchio alleges a myriad of offenses. It states he called a Hispanic bailiff a "lazy Mexican," asked a bailiff who had a part time job with an airline to get him free airline tickets, and coerced staff to buy him free lunches.

    Del Vecchio's response says he hasn't been accused of any wrongdoing from the bench aside from making offensive comments and using poor judgment.

    Contact reporter David Kihara at dkihara@reviewjournal.com or 702-380-1039.



    Leave Your Comment 25 Reader Comments
    Terms & Conditions
    The following comments are provided by readers and are the sole responsiblity of the authors. The reviewjournal.com does not review comments before publication nor guarantee their accuracy. By publishing a comment here you agree to abide by the comment policy. If you see a comment that violates the policy, please notify the web editor.

    Some comments may not display immediately due to an automatic filter. These comments will be reviewed within 48 hours. Please do not submit a comment more than once.
    Current Word Count:

    maybe its true wrote on June 06, 2008 02:48 PM: This is a case of a position of power being used to control and exploit an underage girl into compromising situations. Anyone consider that he is a JUDGE! Someone who should know better! To blame the victim of a crime seems a little strange to me. Not that it is out of character with the way things are today. Monica Lewinsky was a whore and Bill Clinton was just a guy getting some on the side right? Does it matter to anyone that these people have a responsibility to act in the best interest of people like you and me. If you are having sex with a child you are a criminal! Remove this idiot and put him behind bars where he belongs before he destroys some other little girls life in the name of LOVE. All the sick pervert child molesters tell the same story. Anyone else would be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law. This guy had his friends in the same courthouse decide he was innocent. Doesnt sound like justice to me.


    Here Comes the Judge... wrote on April 11, 2008 12:30 PM: Psss - I have some nude pictures of Del Vecchio. Wanna buy them? Yuck!!! Kick this guy off the bench!!!


    Shawn wrote on April 10, 2008 11:42 PM: Dana:
    You have no idea how crooked the Family Court is especially Judge Sanchez's court. I have been dealing with m own case against Carol Menninger for some time. Did you know that when you go into family court that you are suppose to be sworn in and put under oath. Who has ever been under oath in family court.


    JOhn wrote on April 10, 2008 09:10 PM: You are wrong mamamia,

    This sounds like another s l u t who was cut off from the gravy train exacting revenge.


    Mamamia wrote on April 10, 2008 08:35 PM: Surprise, surprise! Not another "judgie wudgie" caught with his robe down! And this idiot expects to get re-elected again in August?

    Sounds to me like this pedophile needs to go to jail for a few decades. Not that the useless Committee on Judicial Discipline will do anything to hasten justice, but I know that what goes around comes around-sooner or later.


    Dana wrote on April 10, 2008 07:36 PM: They had no problem removing Halverson with out a trial. Kathy Hardcastle was probably afraid that Halverson might see how the corrupt court house really works.

    Del Vecchio must keep his mouth shut. Maybe, he is too busy in his own warped little world.


    moblyw wrote on April 10, 2008 06:44 PM: JUDGES MUST BE IMMUNE FROM PROSECUTION OR SOMETHING! MABE HE IS INNOCENT TOTALLY. WE WOULD HAVE TO HAVE A TRIAL TO FIND OUT WOULD'T WE. OR IF WE ARE POOR WE COULD SIGN A PLEA BARGAIN AND GO STRAIGHT TO PRISON. THEN THE KEY WOULD BE THROWN AWAY. FOREVER!


    Jane wrote on April 10, 2008 01:36 PM: This less than honorable Judge has been the monster in my divorce case too. His most recent judgements and orders favored my controlling, mentally abusive, alienating ex-husband only. I believe that he was paid off by my ex-husband's attorney's office. This payoff could of been through free lunches, sexual favors, campaign funds, or promises to hire him on as an attorney after he is "de-throned." The judicial system continues to have a bad name and reputation due to scum like Del Vecchio. How he can remain ruling on cases that affect families so deeply is beyond me. This man must have an ego bigger than this continent to think that he has any chance of being re-elected after all of this. How did he even get elected to begin with after the numerous failed attempts? ABSOLUTELY DESPICABLE!


    joe wrote on April 10, 2008 11:54 AM: Sounds like they're both sleaze bags. He was obviously using his position to gain sexual favors from an underage female and she obviously didn't mind performing these favors as long as she got what she wanted. Somewhere along the line they reached an impasse in the mutually beneficial relationship and it comes out in court.

    If her sensibilities were so offended why did she continue associating herself with this man after letting him take nude photos of her and having her perform oral sex when she was 14-16 years old? Neither have much room to talk from the looks of it.


    nvkorruption wrote on April 10, 2008 11:41 AM: Any one else would be arrested as a sex offender...consider warren jeffs and the problems there.

    There are sex offenders saying everyday they were in love with the victim. Why hasnt this guy been arrested?


    Read All Comments