Toilet Cameras Involve Moral Turpitude
A two-year suspension should be imposed for an attorney’s moral turpitude conviction, according to a recent recommendation of the California State Bar Court Review Department.
On four separate occasions during a two-month period, respondent Mark Daniel Wenzel hid a small video camera in a unisex public restroom at Coffee Bean restaurants in Los Angeles. Each time, the camera was found by a patron or employee and turned over to the police, but not before it recorded individuals using the toilet. Wenzel was convicted of a misdemeanor violation of Penal Code section 647, subdivision (j)(1) (viewing into restroom by means of instrumentality), and the criminal court imposed a suspended sentence and probation with conditions…
After independently reviewing the record (Cal. Rules of Court, rule 9.12), we agree with the hearing judge that Wenzel’s conviction involves moral turpitude and that several aggravating circumstances are present. But we do not agree that the mitigation evidence establishes Wenzel is unlikely to commit further misconduct, particularly in light of his longstanding substance abuse problem. We note that he had a relapse involving methamphetamines in 2013, just two months before his disciplinary trial. Although the criminal court has punished Wenzel for his criminal acts, significant professional discipline is also warranted to protect the public and preserve the integrity of the legal profession. We recommend increasing Wenzel’s discipline to include a two-year suspension that is to continue until he proves his rehabilitation and fitness to practice law — a heavy burden that is necessary to address his egregious misconduct and ongoing substance abuse problem.
The opinion notes that the attorney is an “accomplished trial attorney” honored by the American Board of Trial Advocates for civility.
The facts are strange (and display a notable lack of civility) to say the least.
The attorney sat on the patio of the Coffee Bean while recording customers urinating and defecating. He also “taped himself having sex with his wife, and further taped his wife’s best friend entering [his] guest bedroom before she undressed outside the view of the camera.”
He “admitted he hid a pen video recorder on New Year’s eve 2011 in a guest bedroom in an effort to film his wife’s friend undressing.”
Video pen recorders were planted to capture the images. The devices were found by patrons and turned over to the police. The attorney was arrested on site after the third incident. A forensic search of his cell phone was conducted.
The attorney presented testimony that he suffers from type II bipolar disorder but the hearing judge rejected his expert’s opinion that the condition had caused the misconduct.
Notably, the Review Department refused to permit the medical mitigation to negate an element of the offense for which the attorney was convicted. (Mike Frisch)