Table of Contents
Attorney Andrew Herman walked into what should have been a routine scheduling conference for his disciplinary hearing, but the moment he pulled out his camera, the entire proceeding took a confrontational turn. The judge immediately demanded he stop recording, claiming the session couldn't be filmed despite Herman's insistence that the proceedings were open to the public. What followed was a masterclass in legal maneuvering that left court officials scrambling and raises serious questions about who really controls Oklahoma's justice system.
The Recording Dispute That Started Everything
Herman came prepared with legal arguments, noting that he had "60 something people" watching his livestream when court officials moved the hearing to a room that "cannot be recorded." The judge insisted they had a court reporter and didn't need Herman's recording, but Herman stood his ground, citing public access rules. The tension in the room was palpable as Herman told the judge he could "order the officer to take my phone from me" if necessary, but he wasn't backing down voluntarily.
The judge's frustration was evident as Herman continued recording, but this was just the opening move in what would become a much larger confrontation about jurisdiction and authority.
Legal Bombshells That Changed the Game
Herman didn't just argue about recording rights. He dropped a motion to dismiss based on Oklahoma's Citizen Participation Act, requiring the court to stay all proceedings until the motion was resolved. But his most devastating move came when he formally requested the judge's recusal under Rule 15, citing concerns about the judge's "demeanor" that he had captured on video.
When the judge acknowledged that Rule 15 applied, Herman immediately pounced, informing the court that all rulings were now stayed until the recusal motion was "fully adjudicated." The judge had walked directly into a legal trap, and Herman made sure everyone in the room understood the implications.
The Mysterious Signal That Summoned Police
As the heated exchange continued, something unusual happened that Herman's camera captured in real time. When Herman announced he was leaving, he noticed something that stopped him cold: a gesture from someone in the courtroom that appeared to summon law enforcement. Herman directly challenged this, asking when "the Oklahoma Bar Association" gained "the power to order the sheriff's department to do something."
The implications were staggering. If Herman's observation was accurate, it suggested coordination between the bar association and law enforcement that went far beyond normal court security procedures.
The Police Escort That Raised More Questions
A police officer appeared and began following Herman out of the building, leading to an awkward exchange about whether Herman was being ordered to leave or simply escorted. The officer seemed uncertain about his role, deflecting Herman's direct questions about who had authority to remove him from the building. When Herman asked if the officer was "taking orders from that lady right there," referring to someone from the bar association, the response was telling silence.
The officer's behavior suggested he may have been acting on instructions that weren't entirely clear, even to him.
What the Video Reveals About Power and Accountability
Herman's footage captures something rarely seen: the real-time breakdown of official composure when someone knows exactly how to use the system's own rules against it. The judge's increasing hostility, combined with the apparent coordination between the bar association and law enforcement, paints a picture of institutional relationships that operate outside normal legal channels.
But the most revealing moment may be what happens after Herman thinks he's safely outside the building, when he realizes the full scope of what his camera has documented.
Watch the complete confrontation unfold and see exactly what gesture summoned the police in the full video above.
