‘Like a tyrant’: Indiana judge accused of unfair, innappropriate treatment gets permanent ban

(WXIN/WTTV) — A Howard County judge accused of unfair treatment, including using a “game or jail” tactic and cursing out defendants, has been permanently banned from the Indiana judicial system.

Matthew J. Elkin, a judge in Howard Superior Court 1, was asked to resign from his position this week and received a lifetime ban. This was made official on Thursday in a discipline filing by the Indiana Supreme Court.

The filing states that Elkin has been found guilty of judicial misconduct for several reasons, including:

• Failing to disqualify himself from presiding over matters in which he previously represented a party
• Making injudicious comments toward problem-solving court (“PSC”) participants,
• Favoring certain litigants while degrading others,
• Inadequately supervising employees, and
• Possibly misusing court funds.

Elkin was previously charged in March with nine counts of judicial misconduct. The Indiana Supreme Court has now found him guilty on all charges.

Failure to disqualify

Elkin has been a Howard County judge since January 2023, presiding over cases in both drug court and re-entry court. Dubbed “problem-solving courts” or PSCs, these specific posts are designed to help defendants address addiction issues and reintegration needs.

Before becoming a judge, Elkin served primarily as a public defender in both drug and re-entry court and gave general legal advice to participants. However, upon becoming a judge, Elkin did not recuse himself from hearing cases in which he was previously involved.

Documents filed against Elkin state that he then presided over several cases involving participants that he had previously represented as defense counsel. Officials believe he did this at least 11 times after he was first alerted to an inquiry into his alleged misconduct.

“Game or Jail”

While serving as a judge, Elkin reportedly used unusual and inappropriate tactics when it came to addressing issues within the court. One was a ruse that Elkin had dubbed “Game or Jail,” according to court documents.

In one case of “Game or Jail,” Elkin reportedly had a re-entry court participant handcuffed despite not being in custody or accused of any violations. Elkin then told the person that if they lied, they would be put in jail.

However, this was merely a scare tactic to get information and was not legal.

“Smack the s**t out of you”

Elkin reportedly once told a domestic violence survivor that “women don’t leave” abusive relationships because their brains enjoy the physical pain, comparing victims to Tom Brady. A transcript of what Elkin said can be seen below:

Elkin reportedly went on to say that the woman “doesn’t deserve a chance” to receive justice and referred to her as “property.”

“You don’t deserve this chance. I know what’s wrong with you and I know how to fix it,” he said. “You’re not even my property yet. Do you know that you’re the Department of Correction’s property for 98 days?”

“Demeaned and ridiculed participants”

The Supreme Court filing goes on to say that Elkin continuously “demeaned and ridiculed” participants in his court. Other accusations against Elkin include:

• Using a plastic bag to imitate adult diapers while reading a participant’s write-up
• Holding up a sign that read “I’m watching you d**b*ss” to a defendant
• Requiring that a participant’s record state he “sexually violated himself with a vape”
• Telling a participant he was “making s**t up in his brain” during a hearing
• Discussing participants’ medical conditions on record and requiring STD testing
• Using the word “stupid” to describe people’s intelligence rather than their actions
• Calling a person “the one-third of the one percent of worst people in the planet.”

While this all occurred while Elkin was officially acting as a judge, his misconduct reportedly continued off the bench as well.

Harassing defendants, stalking coworkers

In addition to harassing participants in court, Elkin reportedly continued the misconduct in his offices. Once, in October 2023, he reportedly met with a PSC participant at his former law office and “disparaged and disclosed confidential information about other participants.”

Additionally, he reportedly disparaged members of his own PSC team. At other times, Elkin allegedly claimed his team members were “moles” and that he had them followed outside of the courtroom.

Special treatment for some

While Elkin allegedly treated some defendants with blatant disrespect, he reportedly gave others unfairly favorable treatment.

“Even his seemingly well-intended acts unfairly favored some PSC participants over others,” the Supreme Court wrote.

In one case, Elkin reportedly let a participant who needed housing stay in a rental home owned by his wife. Elkin is alleged to have helped clean out and paint the home, even going so far as not to charge the participant any rent for the first few months.

In another case, after issuing an arrest warrant for a participant who violated Drug Court rules, Elkin reportedly helped the suspect move his vehicle to a safe place and coordinated the safe recovery of his belongings from an apartment. Similarly, he once allegedly allowed a suspect to be escorted to and from a medical facility for treatment before taking her into custody.

Finally, Elkin is accused of offering free rides to at least six drug court participants whom he favored. He also once urged a defendant to speak with his wife about a wedding dress gift certificate valued at $8,000.

While the Indiana Supreme Court dubbed these actions well-intentioned, they said they violated court rules regarding treatment of participants. Furthermore, these actions do not appear favorable when juxtaposed with his unfair treatment of other participants.

Conclusion, aftermath

Court officials went on to say that “a presiding judge’s demeanor has an outsized impact” on PSC participants due to the way the courts are structured. Furthermore, they said Elkin understood this and still “wielded his position of power like a tyrant” through intimidation.

In total, Elkin was found to have broken at least eight judicial rules, including:

• Acting in a way that promotes public confidence in the judicial system
• No presiding over cases that you have a personal or extrajudicial connection to
• Uphold and apply the law and perform all duties fairly and impartially
• Requiring order and decorum during court proceedings

In conclusion, the Indiana Supreme Court opted to permanently ban Elkin from all judicial service and require him to resign and leave office no later than Sept. 30. He will, however, retain his law license.