Former Superior Court Judge Carlia Brady

Some state Supreme Court justices on Thursday pressed a lawyer for the Advisory Committee on Judicial Conduct on the exclusion of exculpatory evidence in the judicial discipline case of former Superior Court Judge Carlia Brady.

ACJC attorney Maureen Bauman was asked why the judge who issued an arrest warrant for Brady on charges that she failed to cooperate with the apprehension of her fugitive boyfriend in 2013 was not told that Brady left two voice mail messages with a Woodbridge police officer, seeking to discuss the boyfriend's whereabouts. Questions about the omission were raised as the justices weigh the proper measure of discipline for Brady, who was accused of harboring her then-boyfriend, Jason Prontnicki, when police were seeking to arrest him in connection with an armed robbery.

"Is it fair to say if Judge Ferencz knew there were two voice mails made by Judge Brady before issuing the arrest warrant, he certainly would have wanted to hear what those voice mails said," Justice Barry Albin said. His question referenced now-former Middlesex County Superior Court Judge Bradley Ferencz, who signed the warrant for Brady's arrest after a late-night visit to his home by two Woodbridge police officers.

"Even if he knew the exact contents of those voice mails, it didn't state that Mr. Prontnicki was at respondent's house. Nothing in those voice mails gave police any particularly relevant information," responded Bauman.

Albin said Brady didn't leave details in her voice mails because "she was expecting a callback. She said, please call me, here's my telephone number."

"How does the committee respond to this clear statement in the record that Captain [Brian] Murphy did not provide relevant and fulsome information to the judge to whom the application for the arrest warrant was being made," Justice Jaynee LaVecchia asked, referring to one of the Woodbridge officers.

"They considered the entirety of Captain Murphy's testimony. A little further on [in a transcript of an ACJC hearing], Captain Murphy explained how a lot of things were happening at the time and the complaint warrant is more a general piece of information as opposed to specifics. He further testified that he didn't interpret those voice messages to have a bearing on whether she would have been arrested or not," Bauman said.

"The record doesn't indicate, having spent almost an hour at Judge Ferencz's home, why that kind of information was not made known to the judge, so that then the judge could have evaluated it," LaVecchia said.

Albin asked Bauman about a memo in which Ferencz stated to his assignment judge that he felt he was misled by the officers.

Bauman responded that the memo was not entered into evidence in the case because it was withdrawn by Brady.

The 90-minute hearing also included a lengthy and technical discussion of the workings of the voice mail system at the Woodbridge Police Department by Bauman, who sought to rebut claims by Brady that officers in the department destroyed original copies of the two phone messages she left there and substituted them with versions that were altered.

The hearing into Brady's case comes after the close of her seven-year judicial career, which came to an end April 5. The ACJC has sought removal of the judge but the Supreme Court has indicated it will seek a penalty short of removal.

Brady was charged with official misconduct and hindering apprehension but she beat the charges after lengthy criminal proceedings. A separate civil rights suit by Brady against the Woodbridge Police Department is still pending. In the disciplinary proceedings, the case revolves around whether two phone messages left by Brady for an officer in the department fulfilled her obligation to notify the police when she learned of Prontnicki's whereabouts. The police notified Brady that Prontnicki was being sought for the armed robbery of a pharmacy when she went to the department to report that her car was missing.

Asked whether discipline was moot for a judge whose judicial term has ended, Administrative Office of the Courts spokeswoman MaryAnn Spoto said, "The Court has previously addressed pending disciplinary matters when a judge was no longer serving on the bench."