Hearing for judge accused of helping man sought by ICE escape begins Monday

Matthew Medsger, Boston Herald on Jun 8, 2025

By clicking submit, I authorize Arcamax and its affiliates to: (1) use, sell, and share my information for marketing purposes, including cross-context behavioral advertising, as described in our Privacy Policy , (2) add to information that I provide with other information like interests inferred from web page views, or data lawfully obtained from data brokers, such as past purchase or location data, or publicly available data, (3) contact me or enable others to contact me by email or other means with offers for different types of goods and services, and (4) retain my information while I am engaging with marketing messages that I receive and for a reasonable amount of time thereafter. I understand I can opt out at any time through an email that I receive, or by clicking here

Half-a-decade after she was charged with several serious federal crimes, a Massachusetts judge will finally have her day in court — sort of.

In a case bearing striking similarity to a more recent arrest of a judge from Wisconsin, former Newton District Court Judge Shelley Joseph will appear for a Massachusetts Commission on Judicial Conduct hearing on Monday, over allegations she willfully helped a man wanted by Immigrations and Customs Enforcement in evading federal authorities.

A court assigned hearing officer will examine the courthouse scene of the alleged crime which ultimately led to a judicial complaint against the Bay State judge, before the hearing gets underway over whether she violated the rules of conduct for jurists.

According to a “Formal Charges” document filed by the Commission, the judge “engaged in willful judicial misconduct that brought the judicial office into disrepute, as well as conduct prejudicial to the administration of justice and unbecoming a judicial officer” in 2018 when allegedly helped a man named Jose Medina-Perez avoid apprehension over a deportation order, and subsequently when she failed to be fully honest with fellow judges investigating her conduct.

The commission alleges that during a hearing on an unrelated criminal matter the judge held an “unrecorded conference” with Medina-Perez’s defense attorney and a prosecutor who had they had indicated no intention of holding him in state custody.

During this off-the-record sidebar, the judge allegedly made inquiries which could give “a reasonable observer the impression that she sought to assist defense counsel in identifying a means for the defendant to avoid ICE.”

“Defense counsel informed Judge Joseph that, if she permitted him to return to the downstairs lockup area with the defendant and the interpreter, he thought his client could be released through the rear sally-port exit of the courthouse,” the charging document alleges.

But according to a response offered by the judge, no such permission was granted. Instead, she alleges, the defense attorney in question misled federal prosecutors looking for someone to blame over the incident.

In her response to the commission’s charges, Joseph suggests that the defense attorney made an arrangement with court staff to help Medina-Perez avoid ICE custody. The judge contends that a suggestion she made to hold him for another day was offered so that his attorney could discern if he were actually the person sought by ICE, after state prosecutors admitted they’d likely mistaken him for a man wanted on a DUI charge out of Pennsylvania.

When allowing Medina-Perez to go to the court’s holding area after his release from state custody, Joseph contends she thought she was simply giving the attorney space to speak with his client through an interpreter and to retrieve some belongings. Everything that’s come after, she said, was the result of bad publicity not sought by her or the court.

The federal charges levied against her in 2019 for allegedly obstructing federal agents and later perjuring herself were dismissed in 2022, after Judge Joseph agreed to submit to the scrutiny of the Commission and the Biden Administration concluded that the case would best be addressed “by state judicial oversight, rather than federal criminal prosecution.”

The case holds remarkable resemblance to a more recent matter out of Wisconsin, where federal prosecutors have alleged Milwaukee County Circuit Judge Hannah Dugan helped a man wanted by ICE briefly avoid capture by allowing him to exit her court via a door not normally used by the public.

Federal prosecutors, in April, charged Dugan with obstruction and concealing an individual to prevent arrest, and a grand jury later indicted her on those charges. Dugan has pleaded not guilty and put forward a defense of “judicial immunity.”

Judge Joseph’s hearing is scheduled to begin at 7:30 a.m. with a “view” by the appointed Hearing Officer of the Newton District Court where the alleged incident occurred and a hearing to be held afterwards at the Suffolk County Courthouse.

_______