Remember Alex Kozinski, the 9th Circuit Court Judge who's been forced to recuse himself from an obscenity trial because of BESTIALITY PORN POSTED ON HIS WEBSITE? What a wacky story, right? Hah! That maroon! Yes well it turns out it's actually a depressing tale of outright journalistic malfeasance that could impact an important first amendment case, but whatever. The Judge, Alex Kozinski, has already declared a mistrial, and all that's left is for his wife to pen angry letters to blogs. It's all the L.A. Times' fault!

"The fact is, Alex is not into porn - he is into funny - and sometimes funny has a sexual character," the judge's wife said. She faulted the newspaper for using "graphic descriptions that make the material sound like hard-core porn when, in fact, it is more accurately described as raunchy humor."

This is true. The obscene images may be found here, uncensored (NSFW if you work at the L.A. Times). It's a collection of ancient internet macros—so old they rely on the "Priceless" joke—that might be considered titillating to a sheltered 13-year-old.

But this is actually a more important point, and one that seems to maybe demonstrate malice on the part of the Times in their coverage:

Ms. Tiffany noted that her husband did not have a Web site with a graphical interface, but rather a file server that was not secured. "What excuse is there for timing the story with surgical precision so as to do maximum damage to the judicial process?" she asked.

The Times spokesperson called their story "fair and accurate," because she wouldn't have been able to stifle her laughter if she'd said "balanced" outright.

So—now Kozinski, a dude whose appreciation for borderline R-rated juvenile humor might've made him a decent barometer for what the "community" might reasonably find acceptable, will not be presiding over that obscenity case against the extreme porn dude. The case is basically the front in the current Justice Department's War on Pornography, so we hope none of you like jerking off.