All the world watched as Judge Rosemarie Aquilina sentenced serial rapist Larry Nassar to 175 years in jail in the US last year. Ahead of her talk at the Malta Book Festival, the judge and author tells Herman Grech she uses the power of the bench as a healing power rather than as a means of punishment.

You’re the daughter of a doctor from Qrendi. You made it a point to mention you’re half-Maltese as you delivered your judgment. Why choose to emphasise your migrant roots?

It wasn’t something that I planned. I deeply identify with being Maltese. Maltese traditions have been embedded in my family life since I was born and I reinforce them with my own children. My father is a doctor and I have a great respect for the medical community.

The absolute abuse of power in this case struck a chord with me. I followed the law and plea agreement in sentencing, but it was not a decision I made lightly, which I wanted to clarify with some of the explanation I provided during sentencing, which included my Maltese roots and connection to the medical community.

When you were sentencing the former US gymnastics team doctor you chose to toss a copy of the letter he had written to you from his prison cell, and you informed him you had just signed his “death warrant”. The verdict was almost theatrical, sparking criticism by some quarters. Did you get carried away with the high-profile case or did you feel you needed to use such a case to deliver a strong message?

The letter toss was a reflexive reaction to what was written in it and to negating defendant’s continued desire to gain control of the courtroom and the sister-survivors.

The victims needed to feel safe, heard and believed. There were no theatrics, if you know me. My niece called me after she saw it and said: “Aunt Rose, I could see you doing that at the dinner table.”

The sister-survivors needed to understand, from me, that they are safe and that he will not prey on them, or anyone else, ever again. “I just signed your death warrant,” was a signifier to the victims that they were believed, they are safe, and they will heal stronger. It is also factually correct since my sentence, which was within the plea agreement he made, makes it impossible for him to be released should he outlive his Federal Sentence for any reason such as in the case of appeal if he was granted a lesser term, which has been since declined.

Over my years as a District Judge, and now a Circuit Judge, I’ve been assigned many high-profile cases. I am passionate about all cases, high profile or not. Each case is important. Crime has no borders, only rippling effects.

Many defendants do return and show me pay cheques or awards from their jobs

There are factors that must be considered in determining an appropriate sentence. Those include: the reformation of the offender; protection of society; disciplining of the wrongdoer; and deterrence of others from committing similar offences. I always deliver strong messages to predators.

Most defendants do get out of prison. For those defendants who can be rehabilitated, I also remind them they can do better, to not let the crime they committed define them, and I ask them to return and show me the great things they do once they are released and rehabilitated. Many defendants do return and show me pay cheques or awards from their jobs, healthy babies, artwork, music contracts, and so on. They often tell me I was the first person to tell them they matter and believe in them.

A survey by The Economist last year showed that Americans today are more sceptical about sexual harassment and there has actually been a small shift against the victims. Have initiatives like the #MeToo movement backfired?

No. These movements have created a much-needed dialogue and reporting has increased. This has made people feel uncomfortable and fearful that there will be false reporting. However, the numbers do not support this. While there is false reporting, the number of false reports has not increased based on any study I have seen.

There are many reasons victims do not report right away. #MeToo and #TimesUp need to be understood as ‘People’s Movements’, not ‘Women’s Movements’. These conversations must continue for there to be meaningful change.

How do you balance the strength of your message with empathy?

I talk with both sides of every case – victims and defendants and their families. I try to figure out how best justice is served. I tell them what I think and encourage them. I try to use the power of the bench as a healing power rather than as a punishing power. I am witness to the positive outcomes, meaningful changes, and the healing this brings.

When there is an obligation to speak about any injustice, judges cannot remain silent

Has being a woman been an asset or a liability in your job? What challenges did you face in establishing your reputation in what remains a male-dominated profession?

Being a woman who is willing to fight against injustice has been both a benefit and a detriment. Being a woman, especially when I began my career, was tough because women are not given the instant credibility that men are given. But, being a strong woman, a Maltese woman, I rarely sat quiet when I wanted to speak.

 I am constantly told that while I want change, others do not, and I am outnumbered.

I stand tall, tough, and use my voice and common sense. I will not be bullied or shamed into silence. I will speak as a judge and for those who need a voice. Like my heritage, I stand strong and independent and will not shy away from attack.

An appeals court in Malta recently allowed a man found guilty of sexually assaulting a woman as she walked home to get away with a suspended sentence. A gender-based violence commission held that whoever is convicted of such crimes should be given an effective jail term. Do you agree?

When the public views a sentence as one of no punishment, society loses faith in our justice system and those who offend will continue without fear of legal process. Walking alone, being drunk, high, wearing a short skirt, or being who you are in any capacity, is not an invitation to be raped, brutally assaulted, or victimised in any way. There must be appropriate punishment in each case, which gives voice to the victim and the community and deters others from such vile acts.

As to the case you cite, it is always difficult for a judge to comment on the case heard and sentenced by another judge because there are so many different factors and things that play into every case the public has no idea about. Generally speaking, however, there must be an effective sentence for protection of the public and the victim, deterrence, and rehabilitation of the defendant. Otherwise, confidence in our justice system and judiciary is eroded.

Malta has been in the international headlines for all the wrong reasons in the last few years. Top government officials were implicated in the Panama Papers and journalist Daphne Caruana Galizia was assassinated. No official has resigned or been indicted and the person/s who commissioned Caruana Galizia’s murder remains at large. The prosecution is facing scathing attacks for failing to bring the perpetrators to justice. Can the judiciary have a role to step in when this happens?

Judges have a separate role than that of the prosecutor and it is dangerous to mix the two roles. However, in our system anyone can ask for a grand jury. A judge can be the role of a grand jury and appoint a special prosecutor and defence attorney to present the merits of the case. In the event a grand jury is requested, the judges vote, and if there is merit to an issue brought, then a judge, chosen by internal lottery, can be assigned and empowered to conduct legal proceedings and investigate potential criminal conduct, and determine whether criminal charges should be brought. Physical evidence can be brought forth. In addition, any person of interest can be subpoenaed to testify. This process would certainly get at the issues that Malta has been facing and the issue whether or not a perpetrator should stand trial.

If you were a member of the Maltese judiciary you wouldn’t be able to give this interview. The Chief Justice even chastised the media recently for daring to ask questions. Should the judiciary remain operating in a glass house?

As a judge I am limited in what I can say, but I can speak out. I cannot speak about pending cases in front of me or in front of another judge. I am elected by the people and can through my work speak on their behalf. We do have a code of ethics; however, I do not lose my voice completely. If and when I lose my voice completely, or can’t listen to every victim, or lose my independence about how I handle the case in front of me – as long as I follow the law and remained fair and impartial – I will step down from the bench and lobby for those changes.

Judges have powerful voices and can effectuate change. We see first-hand the ugly things people do to each other and the need for changes in the law. The media should be in the courtroom, to inform the public, as they are in the legislature, and judges should be allowed to testify publicly before the legislature about needed change. I have testified many times and have been successful in being part of changing some laws.

Our system of justice can appear as one of injustice. Giving judges a voice helps to integrate the community they represent into the courtroom and develops trust, rather than doubt, in a process that seems secretive and demoralising to some.

Instead of justice, we, as judges, do an injustice by elevating ourselves above the people we represent. Judges are trained to be fair and impartial and know when to recuse ourselves when it may appear that we are not. When judges are too separated from the people, they can be too out of touch with the community they serve. When there is an obligation to speak about any injustice, judges cannot remain silent.

Many defendants tell me I was the first person to tell them they matter and believe in them

Sentencing in Malta is known to takes years. A Maltese man who admitted involvement in a drug trafficking case 14 years ago, but who has since reformed himself and become an inspiration to others, was recently jailed for three years. This cannot be right. 

Rehabilitation must be considered in sentencing. The question here is what is to be gained by incarcerating a man who has turned himself around and now helps others? It could be argued that incarceration is counter-productive to his rehabilitation. Often drug addicts go backwards and forwards many times throughout their recovery. They become a burden on our justice system, medical community, and community at large.

In this case, the benefit and the burden need to be considered. The fact that this defendant has rehabilitated himself, has self-imposed community service on himself by helping others, and is now a taxpayer and family man, is something that should stand to all others as an example of what is possible when an addict takes treatment seriously. Incarcerating such a man sends a rippling message that there is no reward, no justice, no common sense in the legal system.

Every case should stand on its own merit.  Justice must be served with a common-sense approach based on the law and the goals of punishment, deterrence, and rehabilitation.

How do you remain connected with your Maltese roots?

I associate with my Maltese family and friends. I subscribe to The Maltese Presence in North America e-Newsletter, I belong to Maltese groups on Facebook, including one where Maltese people share their recipes, which reminds me of cooking with my grandparents. I stay in contact with some of the Maltese families I grew up with and with whom I attended events at the Maltese Club and at church.

My family practices Maltese values. We eat meals together, we take care of each other, we pray together. We are all mindful of the eight Beatitudes (blessings) of the Maltese Cross as the Knights of Malta have simplified them and they are helpful reminders to me as I serve on the bench.

In our home we have a piece of Maltese limestone, Maltese maps, the Maltese Aquilina crest, Maltese lace of all kinds, Maltese glass from Gozo, and watercolours of Malta purchased from an artist in Valetta. We pass all of what we know on to our children to honor our roots, family values, independence, and the ability to make the world we live in a better place.

And, of course, my father taught us all his saying: “God is Good, God is Great, God is Maltese.”

Who is ‘Barracuda’ Aquilina?

1958: Born in Munich to a Maltese father and German mother.

1959: Moves to the US with her parents, stateless at the time, and became a naturalised citizen when she was 12 years old. 

1984: Gets her law degree from Thomas M. Cooley Law School in Michigan.

2008: A professor of law, she is elected as a Circuit Court Judge. She becomes the first female Judge Advocate General in the Michigan Army National Guard where she earned the nickname ‘Barracuda Aquilina’.

2013: Rules that Detroit's bankruptcy filing violated the state constitution, and sends an advisory memorandum to President Barack Obama.

2017: Releases her second crime novel Triple Cross Killer after her 2003 book Feel No Evil. 

2018: Judge Aquilina presides over the USA gymnastics sex abuse scandal case, allowing over 150 women and girls to present personal testimony on their abuse. 
Nominated one of 2018’s Glamour Women of the Year. 

Judge Aquilina has five children and two grandchildren.

Judge Rosemarie Aquilina will be interviewed by Times of Malta editor-in-chief Herman Grech on Thursday at the Malta Book Festival at the Mediterranean Conference Centre at 8pm. Entrance is free.