ARLINGTON, Virginia — The trial for Richard Cox, a registered sex offender, is set to start on Monday. Cox is facing charges related to entering female locker rooms and allegedly touching himself in front of children. The biological male was able to enter the facilities by claiming to be transgender.
Richard Cox appeared before Judge Daniel T. Lopez in Virginia’s 17th Judicial Circuit Court for a motions hearing on Friday to decide whether the arrest was lawful, whether to suppress evidence from the seizure of Cox’s cellphone, and if media cameras would be allowed in court during the trial.
Cox has filed a motion for self-representation, meaning both Cox and the court-appointed attorney presented arguments, and questioned the officers during the proceedings. Oftentimes leading the Judge to scold Cox for not following procedure, and looks of bewilderment from those testifying.
Arrested ‘for being a sex offender near children’: Lawful or not?
The defense wanted to deem Cox’s arrest as unlawful in order to throw out evidence obtained from Cox’s cellphone during the arrest.
The Commonwealth presented body camera footage from the two officers who detained Cox at the Barcroft Recreation Center on Dec. 6, 2024. Testimony from one of the officers on scene revealed detectives already had Cox on their radar following numerous complaints from recreation centers and pools across Northern Virginia regarding Cox walking around nude for hours in female locker rooms in the presence of children.
On the day of the arrest, officers arrived at the center at 6:00 p.m. Body camera footage shows they waited over an hour for Cox to exit the female locker room. One of the officers, who is a ten-year police veteran, said it was taking so long for Cox to exit the locker room, the officer was able to go back to his patrol cruiser and eat a burrito.
Barcroft Rec Center employees were posted outside the locker room to prevent other females from entering. While the two police officers waited for Cox to exit, employees entered the locker room several times to check on Cox, and found him in “various stages of undress,” whether in the bathroom stall or in the shower.
Once all the females had exited the locker room and Cox had failed to exit for over an hour, officers entered the locker room to present him with a ban notice from the Rec Center. Body cam footage shows they found Cox standing naked in the shower, without the water running. Cox then proceeded to give the officers a fake name when they asked Cox to identify himself.
The body cam footage showed Cox then took another 10 minutes to get dressed while officers waited in the locker room. Once fully dressed, officers cuffed Cox and said they would detain the defendant for more questioning.
ARLINGTON COUNTY OFFICIALS TELL PEOPLE TO CALL 911 IF THEY SEE ICE
Officers testified they believed they had a right to detain Cox due to Ms. Jordan, who identified herself as the person who oversees all the Arlington Rec Centers, wanting to ban Cox due to the defendant’s status as a sex offender and proximity to children. She went over how she understands Arlington County has a policy of allowing people to use the bathroom in which they identify with.
“I don’t want to ban him for being transgender, but for being a sex offender near children,” Ms. Jordan said in the video presented at the hearing.
Cox wants cellphone evidence, including child pornography, deleted
The Commonwealth is hoping to use evidence from Cox’s cellphone, which allegedly shows Cox in possession of child pornography and screenshots of schedules for recreation centers across northern Virginia, where Cox allegedly highlighted children’s classes.
One of the arguments Cox made during the motions hearing on Friday, was there was no way the officers could have known Cox was aware the rec center held children’s classes, meaning they could not arrest him for being within 100 feet of a child under 13.
One officer testified to seeing “hundreds” of children in classes in the hour he was at the Barcroft Rec Center waiting for Cox to exit the female locker room.
Officers said they took Cox’s phone because it is standard procedure to search a suspect and catalog all their possessions in a clear plastic bag when they are being transported. One, for the safety of the officer, and second, for the safety of the suspect. If a suspect were to injure themselves while in the backseat of a police car, the officers would be liable.
At one point in the hearing, Cox asked the police officer, “Who told you to confiscate my phone?”
“Nobody instructed me to do my job properly,” the officer responded.
The court did find there was sufficient probable cause to arrest Cox for giving false information and for committing a felony at a county facility by being a registered sex offender less than 100 feet from children. The judge did say the loitering charge would be for a jury to decide.
FAIRFAX COUNTY SPENDS MILLIONS OF TAXPAYER DOLLARS TO FIGHT FEDERAL AND STATE TRANSGENDER MANDATES
Irate judge denies camera access in court
The judge denied camera access due to testimony from minors. The Sinclair media group had sent a letter, not a formal motion, asking to allow a camera in the court to live-stream the trial. Judge Lopez said other news outlets could file official motions to request cellphone, laptop, and camera access, but he would deny them.
The Commonwealth said they had no opinion on cameras being allowed in court. The defense, however, said they wished for the judge to ban cameras in court due to the case involving sexual assault charges and case being used for political purposes in the latest election in Virginia.
The judge denied access due to the sensitive nature of the case and the involvement of testimony from two minors. The court determined this restriction is necessary to ensure a fair and safe trial for the victims and jurors, particularly given the high-profile nature of the case during the Virginia gubernatorial election.
One noticeable difference is how Judge Lopez addressed Cox. Previous court appearances had been derailed by Cox insisting to be called by preferred pronouns of she/her. Cox, who is a biological male, had scolded Judge Lopez for not using preferred pronouns the first time they appeared together. Judge Lopez profusely apologized, and they agreed on “Ms. Cox.”
On Friday’s motions hearing, the judge, witnesses, and the prosecutors all were referring to Cox by biological pronouns of he/him, “the defendant,” and “Mr. Cox.”
Several times, Judge Lopez scolded Cox for interrupting the judge, asking editorialized questions to witnesses, and speaking over the public defender, Michael Cash.
“I said I was going to treat you like a lawyer, you do not speak when I am speaking,” Judge Lopez said. “Do you see Mr. Cash’s co-council badgering him? You need to sit there and be quiet.”
VIRGINIA LOCKER ROOM SUSPECT SCOLDS JUDGE FOR NOT USING PREFERRED PRONOUNS, AND JUDGE APOLOGIZES
The defense had hoped the motions hearing would have either thrown out the case or led to a continuation. Both of which the judge denied due to the motion hearing rulings.
The trial will proceed with jury selection starting Monday. Cox faces 44 charges in Arlington, including indecent exposure, indecent liberties with a child, and possession of child pornography. Cox’s charges have been split, and a second trial will start in April on a to-be-determined date.
