Network News

X My Profile
View More Activity

Guilty verdict in judge-stalking case

A D.C. Superior court jury found a District woman guilty Tuesday of stalking a magistrate judge.

Taylar Nuevelle, 40, was convicted of stalking Judge Janet Albert after the two broke off a year-long relationship in 2008. Nuevelle also was convicted of burglary and unlawful entry. She faces a maximum sentence of 15 years in prison.

Nuevelle was ordered held until her April 7 sentencing.

The judge found her former companion unconscious in her attic, above her bedroom, with some food and an ice bucket she was using as a toilet, authorities said before the trial.

Investigators said Nuevelle had climbed into the attic through a door in Albert’s bedroom closet and had been there for almost 24 hours, listening to Albert’s telephone pleas to friends for help.

Rarely is a judge the victim and the center of a criminal case, but Albert, who was sworn in in 2003, took the witness stand last week and told the jury of a love affair gone awry that resulted in Nuevelle unleashing a furor of threatening phone calls and text messages, and eventually breaking into Albert’s three-bedroom Northwest Washington home. Several times, Albert testified, she feared for her safety and that of her 9-year-old son.

-- Keith L. Alexander

By Washington Post editors  |  February 2, 2010; 10:49 AM ET
Categories:  From the Courthouse , Keith L. Alexander , The District  
Save & Share:  Send E-mail   Facebook   Twitter   Digg   Yahoo Buzz   StumbleUpon   Technorati   Google Buzz   Previous: Pr. George's firefighters hurt battling blaze
Next: Did Cuccinelli break a rule in his Fairfax appearance after all?


The woman going to jail is kind of sad ... I wonder if she would have gotten any sentence or be held in jail until her sentencing if the victim were not a judge? It seems like a case of twisted emotions.

Posted by: gordonj1 | February 2, 2010 11:45 AM | Report abuse

Where is the judge's moral terpitude? Shouldn't that be questioned?

Posted by: TooManyPeople | February 2, 2010 12:21 PM | Report abuse

What moral turpitude would that be?

Posted by: johnsonhaslinger | February 2, 2010 12:38 PM | Report abuse

@ gordonj1: This case wasn't about something as fatuous as "twisted emotions". It was about very serious criminal behavior. Ms. Nuevelle would have been sentenced for stalking, harassing and breaking into anyone else's home too. And it was appropriate for the court to order Ms. Nuevelle held pending sentencing because she has a prior history of flight, kidnapping and passport fraud that wasn't covered in this article.

@ TooManyPeople: Incorrect use of the term "moral terpitude" Please learn what it means and how to spell it before slinging it about. I think you'll find it does not apply here.

Posted by: hype1 | February 2, 2010 1:08 PM | Report abuse

How can we expect this woman to get a fair trial when the victim is a judge?

Posted by: whatyoutalkinboutman | February 2, 2010 2:09 PM | Report abuse

@hype1: I didn't have the background of Ms. Nuevelle. I still consider it rather harsh treatment ... where did you get all of your information on her background from ... are you the judge's new girlfriend or something?

Posted by: gordonj1 | February 2, 2010 2:13 PM | Report abuse

A search of the the name reveals the unstable background of Ms. Nuevelle, as her actions in the past were extremely shocking to have snatched a child from the court childcare in the middle of custody hearing and disappear. This matter, sad as it may be, brings to life the chaos that many Judges overlook when dealing with custody cases. The high conflict cases involve often a cunning and manipulative person whom is controlling and unstable. This judges experienced exactly what Nuevelle's ex-husband and many other fathers go through and no one listens during the custody cases and these advocacy lawyers defend or further their false allegations of abuse against the innocent fathers and in this case, her lawyer further her false claims she wanted to get belongings ...playing the gender card in the past or "the pissing in the attic card today," based on the sensitivity to the DV issue. This case is a temporary victory for the judge and eternal vindication for the father of the child from many years ago. MORE judges have to stand up to the women who abuse the process, intimidate, and destroy the lives of others for their own gain or to inflict harm to gain custody. This woman was willing to destroy the judge in retailiation, just as she tried to do her ex. To all the judges,...the facts are before you most of the time and should opverride the politics of the advocacy groups who will pay the devil to get media attention. Where are they today??? This case would be different if the Judge was a man and no one would even listen but beleive the lies and decpetion of Nuevelle!

Posted by: EjusdemAG | February 2, 2010 3:04 PM | Report abuse

Candy is dandy, but liquor is quicker.

Posted by: mlombre69 | February 2, 2010 3:20 PM | Report abuse

Judge Janet Albert shouldn't be allowed to hide behind her position in the judicial system just to tag her former lover "out".

Has anyone checked to see how many others have been damaged by Judge Albert?

Bet there's a daisy chain of 'em all over the place.

Obviously not all homosexuals are well-wrapped ~ and shouldn't pretend they are.

Posted by: muawiyah | February 2, 2010 3:25 PM | Report abuse

OK, I'll bite.

I know the judge has a son, but any kind of homosexual has too many circuits crossed to be sitting on family cases.

Apparently the judge herself understands this, because she delayed going to the police about it. Any normal person being stalked by a felon shouldn't wait two seconds to get the law on their side.

Posted by: rustybud | February 2, 2010 3:36 PM | Report abuse

Let's be charitable ... at least Ms. Nuevelle provided a bucket for her excretions, rather than do it on the attic floor.

That's gotta count for something.

Posted by: kinkysr | February 2, 2010 3:50 PM | Report abuse

@kinkysr: Word!

Posted by: gordonj1 | February 2, 2010 4:36 PM | Report abuse

@ whatyoutalkinboutman: The sheer volume of physical evidence against Ms. Nuevelle was overwhelming. It included Ms. Neuvelle's own phone records, voice mails, and e-mail records along with eye witness accounts. We sometimes like to think that anyone dares who go up against a judge can't get a fair trial. Not so. Judges are just people and they don't live on pedestals. The justice system should work for them too. Ms. Nuevelle woman really did get a fair trial.

Look at it this way: how hard was it for a judge whose whole career has been about helping battered women and protecting abused/neglected children to admit that she herself had become the victim of stalking and harassment? Part of that harassment campaign was filing bogus judicial ethics complaints. So now not only is her whole personal life is out there for public consumption and salacious commentary, but she must also defend her career against bogus complaints.

From the comments I'm reading it's Judge Albert who's not getting a fair trial in the court of public opinion.

Posted by: hype1 | February 2, 2010 4:57 PM | Report abuse

@ gordonj1: Sorry, I won't stoop to your level.

Posted by: hype1 | February 2, 2010 5:01 PM | Report abuse

Someone wrote that she has been always helping women in trouble !!! red flag...
How many poor innocent men have had their children taken away by a known MAN HATER.
How come male homo"s dont mind females but lesbians just HATE men ?? dunno..
I would NOT trust this judge on a family court EVER.I think HYPE 1 is the new girlfriend, the way her comments read...its all about the judge.

Posted by: captgrumpy | February 2, 2010 5:17 PM | Report abuse

@ whatyoutalkinboutman: hype1 is right. This woman was counting on people seeing her as a poor little victim going against a big bad bully of a judge.

Posted by: goaway41 | February 2, 2010 5:19 PM | Report abuse

captgrumpy's comments are hateful and idiotic. I suggest a new moniker: captdimwit.

Posted by: kroll | February 2, 2010 5:28 PM | Report abuse

@ catgrumpy Maybe you and your butt boy gordonj1 can work it out.

Posted by: hype1 | February 2, 2010 6:07 PM | Report abuse

According to ABC 7, apparently Nuevelle fired her first attorney, and hired or seduced her second lawyer to represent her. What is going on at the All Souls Church, Unitarian?

"Nuevelle's lawyer, who is also her new lover, left court without her."

Apparently, the new lawyer and defendant were committee members at their church. All things said, the jury today actually saved the new lawyer and lover a nightmare down the road!

Posted by: EjusdemAG | February 2, 2010 9:01 PM | Report abuse

the judge seems to be having sex with women that appear before her...isn't that a conflict?

Posted by: SofaKingCool2009 | February 2, 2010 10:20 PM | Report abuse

SofaKingCool2009 ~ sounds like it.

This judge seems to me to be pretty much in the same category as the judge who sued the dry cleaners for $50,000 for his supposedly lost britches.

If we had "FORCED GAY MARRIAGE" none of this would have happened. It'd been far, far worse!

Posted by: muawiyah | February 2, 2010 10:28 PM | Report abuse

@captgrumpy is right to ask the question, "How many poor innocent men have had their children taken away by a known MAN HATER?"

In Prince Georges County one has heard great snicker and banter about a Judge with liberal proclivities who is brutal towards men who appear before her in alleged DV or custody cases. I heard of very case where this Judge completely destroyed this man and his children without even hearing the facts but ruled based on her own prejudices for the mother who never raised the kids.

Can we have these types of Judges being the judicial fact finders where the best interest of children are concerned? The worst thing is, many of the lawyers who prey upon men know which Judges swing in what directions and hanker to get cases before these Judges.

Should someone be monitoring the memberships of judges in certain groups to ensure they are not biased by gender or orientation?

Should we question the advocacy groups that make political contributions to Judges or DA's that are gender or sexual orientation based?

In many cases the "WON" organization and many other DV advocacy groups would be stealing the media sound bites, if the Judges ex-lover was a man. However, today they are silent, so silent I can hear the snow falling. This should be a victory for the stalking law they advocated for,... except it was actually intended for use againist men in custody cases or divorce proceedings to give women the upper hand.

Isn't there new movements that say children who witness such DV mess are victims too or is that only between men and women cases? Where is social services now?

Who knew a Judge and her lover would be caught in the net or web they have woven.

Posted by: EjusdemAG | February 3, 2010 3:52 AM | Report abuse

An embarassing Sapphic spat that need not be publicized.

Posted by: Calabrese99 | February 3, 2010 7:09 AM | Report abuse

Wow! I am absolutely amazed at some of the absurd comments here. Blaming the victim is a known sociological fault in our society asserted by those lacking the character strength to face reality. In other words, blaming the judge for these events is about the person making the comment, not about the character of the judge. This judge was stalked, harassed and threatened by a criminal some of you are defending. I suggest you go to Wikipedia and read about victim blaming.

@captgrumpy, I am sorry that you feel abused as a man by our judicial system. I have seen women be abused, as well. So, do you believe that only men should be on the bench? Or, is every women that rules against a man an evil lesbian by default? Just curious about your logic. Careful how you respond. You prejudice against women (or, is it fear of lesbians) is already showing.

Posted by: Danno1313 | February 3, 2010 12:44 PM | Report abuse

The comments to this entry are closed.

RSS Feed
Subscribe to The Post

© 2010 The Washington Post Company