BRISTOW, Okla. — A jury in Oklahoma will have to wait a little longer to hear the case against a former judge accused of using a sex toy on the bench.

The indecent exposure trial of retired district judge Donald Thompson was postponed Wednesday, after lawyers for the defendant filed a motion to replace the special judge appointed to preside over the case.

The state court of criminal appeals will also hear a separate defense request to dismiss a misdemeanor count alleging that the disgraced judge kept images on a computer in chambers of a couple engaging in oral sex.

In addition to one count of misuse of a state computer stemming from the pornographic images, Thompson is also charged with four counts of indecent exposure based on statements from his court reporter alleging that she saw him use a device called a "penis pump" during four trials in 2002 and 2003.

Lisa Foster, Thompson's court reporter for 18 years, also testified in a preliminary hearing that she witnessed her former boss shave his scrotum with a disposable razor on the bench in open court.

Story continues

Thompson does not deny the existence of the penis pump. He claims it was simply a gag gift that sat unused on the bench.

Wednesday's postponement marked the latest delay in what has shaped up to be the most anticipated and sensational trial to hit Creek County, a ranching community of about 67,000 that borders on Tulsa County.

The trial was moved to Bristow from the neighboring town of Sapulpa, about 20 miles south on U.S. Route 66, to remove the jury from the same courthouse where the incidents allegedly occurred.

But the trip 30 minutes down the road failed to diminish the hometown defendant's high profile in the area, where he and his wife raised three boys and where he served as chief district judge for 23 years, a fact which was underscored by two days of often tedious jury selection.

Almost all the panelists questioned said they had heard of the case, and among them, many were also personally familiar with the defendant or his family.

Of the 14 panelists who were finally seated, a female alternate said Thompson was her landlord at one time. The same woman also said that she attended his mother's funeral because her own mother had been friends with the Thompson family.

Another female panelist said she cared for Thompson's mother in a nursing home and yet another still said she believed that Thompson had presided over her divorce. All of them insisted, however, that their ties to the defendant would not affect their ability to hear the case impartially.

Those who made the final cut returned to court Wednesday for opening statements, only to find out that they were dismissed until Monday. Special Judge C. Allen McCall did not tell them, however, that they may find a different judge in his seat when they return Monday for the contentious proceedings.

If lawyers for Thompson have it their way, McCall will be replaced by another judge based on the argument that the specially appointed judge has violated the same statute of misuse of a state computer for which the defendant is on trial.

The pleading stems from statements that McCall made in court Tuesday where he admitted that he had personal information stored on his computer in chambers.

Defense lawyer Clark Brewster seized upon the statement as evidence that McCall had an obvious bias for having potentially violated "the very same statute that defendant Thompson is charged with violating." Brewster insisted that his request to recuse McCall was not a personal attack on him, but rather, an attempt to highlight the "unconstitutionality" of the statute.

"The only reason the prosecution sought [the charge] was to bring in character assassination, because their case is so pitifully weak," Brewster said of the computer evidence outside of court.

In previous pretrial motions, Brewster sought to dismiss the computer charge based on the premise that they were unrelated to the indecent exposure counts and were more prejudicial than probative. When that effort failed, Brewster filed a motion to sever the charge so that it could be tried at a later date.

McCall denied both motions, prompting Brewster to proceed to the state court of criminal appeals.

"We don't want to have to go this route," Brewster said Tuesday afternoon in an apparent appeal to McCall to reconsider his ruling. "We are ready to go to trial." Outside the courthouse Wednesday, special prosecutor Richard Smothermon brushed off the notion of the viability of the defense motions and labeled them yet another "ridiculous" delay tactic.

"For someone who says he's ready to go before a jury, they've continuously delayed, and they've just wasted 12 people's time," Smothermon said. "They're just postponing the inevitable, but at some point, they're going to run out of time."