“I often tell them, ‘Excuse me, so-and-so. Were you going to a basketball court, or a tennis court? Because you certainly don’t look appropriately dressed for a court of law,” Padro told The Post.

“I’m giving them an opportunity to prove that they merit another chance,” he said of his courtroom, where selected teens are offered closely monitored, non-jail programs.

“But one of the things I’m a stickler about is that they need to carry themselves appropriately, dress appropriately and learn how to address people properly,” he explained.

“It’s about respect.”

There is no question that defendants would do well to show respect, though some believe that disrespect to the court, despite pragmatic considerations, is a matter of right and political expression worth raising the ire of a judge. 

Justice Padro presides over a part for teens, 14 to 15-year-olds, who seem particularly fond of the saggy pants style.  It’s not surprising that he would be confronted with this style regularly, far more so than judges dealing with older defendants, many of whom have belts that fit properly.  And just to be clear, I can’t fault Justice Padro’s style-sense, either for himself (black is back) or the defendants appearing in front of him.

But what will he do about it?  The sign is one thing, imposing courtroom decorum if one takes the view that saggy pants, like those silly askew baseball caps, do not make up in chic what they lose in respect.  Yet, if a defendants was to refuse, then what?

He stood before Padro wearing jeans perched at such a distance from his waist that it would have been noticeable even if his briefs had not been a bracing shade of chartreuse.

Padro sent the boy back to the holding cells to recompose himself before hearing his case.

The effect is that respect for the judge’s fashion sensibilities is enforced by incarceration?  The use of the unusual verb “recompose” doesn’t shield the order from its meaning, that the young man wearing chartreuse boxers was sent into a jail cell and the court officers informed that he was not be brought back into the courtroom until no chartreuse was visible.

I’m no greater fan of chartreuse than Justice Padro.  I agree wholeheartedly that this style is inappropriate for the courtroom and likely to be seen as disrespectful.  It’s awful.  But it’s not a cause for incarceration.  Not in Riviera Beach, Florida.  Not at 100 Centre Street, Manhattan.

The fashion of youth has long tended toward rebeliousness and a need to assert individuality by looking exactly like every other youth in the peer group.  Remember leather motorcycle jackets in the 50s?  Or bell bottoms in the 60s?  There was no efficacy in bell bottoms.  At least leather jackets kept a person warm and prevented the skinning of elbows in a rumble.


(Just say “meh” to saggy pants Photo by Ed at Blawg Review)

This particular fashion trend, ironically an off-shoot of prison fashion that ought to be appreciated by a judge, has been around for a while now.  It’s present on the street.  It’s present in schools. And it should come as little surprise to judges that seriously ill-fitting pants are all some defendant’s own.  Yes, it’s an awful trend, but as much as older people may hate it, it’s not jail worthy.

Explain it to defendants.  Make them understand that sublimation of their personal choices to the propriety of serious situations, like their presence in a courtroom as a defendant, would benefit them.  In fact, help them to understand that it’s likely a wise idea to wear properly fitting pants to school, to job interviews, to work. 

Just don’t make a kid spend an extra minute in jail because his pants fall too far below his waist to suit conservative fashion sense.  Fashion is not a crime, no matter how much it makes one look like a fool.