Judge Joseph Slaven, currently under formal JTC investigation on 14 counts of alleged misconduct, has claimed in his public response that his communications and conduct were surveilled by court officials including Chief Judge Victoria Shackelford. That claim is now part of the public record. Clutch Justice is publicly challenging Slaven to produce documented evidence of the surveillance claim — and has offered to publish it in full. If the claim is substantiated, it demands independent investigation. If it is not, that too belongs in the public accountability record of a judge under investigation.
The Claim and What It Would Require
In his official answer to JTC Formal Complaint No. 108, Judge Joseph Slaven claims he was surveilled — that his communications and judicial conduct were monitored by court officials, specifically Chief Judge Victoria Shackelford and the court administrator, through the court’s camera system. Slaven positions himself as a victim of institutional retaliation in a case that stems from his own admitted misconduct.
If the surveillance claim is true, it is not a small matter. Surveilling a judge through court infrastructure would require use of taxpayer resources, coordination among court officials, and likely involve oversight bodies and law enforcement. It would be a serious institutional misconduct concern in its own right — and one the public deserves to know about.
If Slaven has documented evidence of unauthorized surveillance, it would exist in some form: emails or directives authorizing camera monitoring of his conduct; intercepted communications or surveillance logs; correspondence between Shackelford and the court administrator about monitoring him; or reports to oversight bodies. Evidence of this kind is the kind of thing that, if it exists and is credible, would support an independent investigation into those responsible. It is also the kind of thing that, if it does not exist or is not credible, tells the public something important about how Slaven is conducting his own defense against a 14-count misconduct complaint.
The Alternative Explanation
If Slaven cannot produce documented evidence of the surveillance claim, the alternative explanation for the claim’s appearance in his response is straightforward: it is a defensive strategy designed to shift narrative attention from admitted misconduct to a counterclaim about victimization. The tactic is recognizable in adversarial legal proceedings. It is also recognizable as something that does the public no favors when it appears in the response of a sitting judge to a formal misconduct investigation — particularly one who has already admitted undisclosed recordings of the Chief Judge, a friend’s judicial campaign, and sustained unprofessional conduct in the same document.
The Michigan Judicial Tenure Commission’s process is largely invisible to the public. Evidence submitted to the JTC by Slaven about alleged surveillance will not be publicly disclosed unless the JTC chooses to address it in proceedings that may take years. Vague allegations supported only by private JTC filings serve two purposes: they create a narrative of victimization available for public consumption, and they insulate the underlying claim from independent scrutiny.
A Challenge to Judge Slaven: Put Up or Shut Up
If Judge Slaven has documented evidence that he was subjected to unauthorized surveillance by Chief Judge Shackelford or the court administrator, Clutch Justice is offering to publish it in full. Evidence of that kind would serve the public interest. It would support an independent investigation. It would be journalism.
Judge Slaven: if documented evidence of unauthorized surveillance exists — emails, directives, logs, correspondence — submit it to Clutch Justice. It will be published in full. The offer stands. Evidence can be submitted to hello@clutchjustice.com.
If the evidence does not materialize, the public record will reflect that a sitting judge facing 14 counts of formal misconduct made a serious claim about institutional retaliation in his official JTC response and was unable to document it when offered a public platform to do so. That too is accountability.
The people of Michigan — every litigant, every attorney, every court employee who relies on reason and restraint from the person wielding the gavel — deserve more than vague allegations from a judge under investigation. They deserve either documented evidence or its public absence.
Rita Williams, Judge Slaven Claims He Was Spied On. Let’s See the Evidence., Clutch Justice (June 25, 2025), https://clutchjustice.com/2025/06/25/judge-slaven-claims-he-was-spied-on-lets-see-the-evidence/.
Williams, R. (2025, June 25). Judge Slaven claims he was spied on. Let’s see the evidence. Clutch Justice. https://clutchjustice.com/2025/06/25/judge-slaven-claims-he-was-spied-on-lets-see-the-evidence/
Williams, Rita. “Judge Slaven Claims He Was Spied On. Let’s See the Evidence.” Clutch Justice, 25 June 2025, clutchjustice.com/2025/06/25/judge-slaven-claims-he-was-spied-on-lets-see-the-evidence/.
Williams, Rita. “Judge Slaven Claims He Was Spied On. Let’s See the Evidence.” Clutch Justice, June 25, 2025. https://clutchjustice.com/2025/06/25/judge-slaven-claims-he-was-spied-on-lets-see-the-evidence/.
