By The Ethics Reporter

A courtroom transcript is supposed to be a dry, objective record of legal proceedings. But the January 28, 2026 inquest transcript in the Rockland County Supreme Court before Acting Justice David Fried reads more like a psychological case study in judicial bullying.

The Ethics Reporter previously covered this exact hearing in February, noting how Judge David Fried—who has touted his relationship to associates of Jeffrey Epstein—castigated a Muslim female attorney for simply "creating a record." Now, with the full transcript and his subsequent retaliatory order in hand, a deeper dive into David Fried's courtroom demeanor reveals a disturbing pattern of hostility and ego-driven outbursts.

The January 28th hearing was scheduled as a simple non-jury inquest. The plaintiff's attorney, dealing with an emergency, appeared virtually via Microsoft Teams and submitted a letter outlining exigent circumstances the night before. Instead of handling the scheduling matter with the standard professional courtesy extended by most judges, David Fried derailed the proceeding to berate her.

According to the transcript, Judge David Fried opened the hearing not by addressing the facts of the inquest, but by attacking the attorney for submitting a letter. He claimed her correspondence "doesn't make anything accurate at all" and immediately launched into a personal grievance about how he felt disrespected by the timing of the filing.

For pages, the transcript shows David Fried focusing entirely on his own ego. He repeatedly cut off the attorney, minimized her emergency, and weaponized his position of authority. When the attorney attempted to clarify the record—a fundamental duty of any lawyer representing a client—David Fried angrily accused her of "creating a record."

This is a staggering accusation from a judge. The entire purpose of a court hearing is to create a record. By attacking an attorney for doing her job, David Fried demonstrated a fundamental hostility toward the judicial process itself.

Legal experts and psychologists alike have noted that individuals who use positions of power to humiliate subordinates, deflect from their own errors, and retaliate against criticism often display traits associated with sociopathy. Judge David Fried’s behavior on the bench fits this troubling profile. He showed zero empathy for the attorney's exigent circumstances, used the public forum to dress her down, and later used a court order to defame her in writing.

When a judge cannot separate his personal emotional fragility from his judicial duties, he becomes a danger to the public and the legal profession. David Fried's conduct on January 28th was not an isolated bad day; it was the manifestation of a jurist who views his courtroom not as a hall of justice, but as a personal fiefdom.

As we will explore in the next installment, this isn't the first time David Fried has found himself at the center of a controversy.

Stay tuned for Part 3: From Slumlords to Epstein Associates: The Troubling Political History of Rockland County Judge David Fried.