Ethics and Criminal Investigation: Insights into Hamilton County Magistrate Aaron AJ Johnson's -- Press Release Published

Hamilton County judicial Candidate Aaron Johnson investigatged for his past crimes?

It is not often that we report a press release verbatim but his one warrants full disclosure:

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASEDate: April 16, 2026

Today Federal and State Complaints, Calling for Criminal Investigation of Aaron J. Johnson

Indianapolis - Attorney and public advocate Doug Bernacchi announced today that he has formally filed complaints and requests for investigation with federal and state authorities relating to what he asserts were serious acts of misconduct in connection with his prior disciplinary matter.

Bernacchi submitted the filing below to the Federal Bureau of Investigation (Indianapolis Field Office), the Indiana Commission on Judicial Qualifications, and the Office of the United States Attorney for the Southern District of Indiana. The complaints seek investigation into alleged misconduct by Hamilton County Magistrate Judge Aaron Johnson.

Bernacchi's RFI:

I recently reviewed the following Indiana media reports:

https://www.hoosierenquirer.com/post/aaron-aj-johnson-resignation-hamilton-county-superior-court

https://www.hoosierenquirer.com/post/hamilton-co-superior-ct-4-race-for-judge-brings-renewed-scrutiny-to-magistrate-johnson-s-unethical

These reports raise serious concerns that I can confirm, regarding the conduct and professional fitness of Aaron J. Johnson, who previously served as counsel to the Indiana Supreme Court Attorney Disciplinary Commission -- now serving as a magistrate judge and (as bold as Eric Swalwell) a judicial candidate in your state.  He has unclean hands and must be investigated and removed from all positions of judicial and legal power.  He was criminal in my experience, and I will be filing companion complaints with the FBI, and new US Attorney for the Southern District of Indiana.  It has been too long.  And every officer of the court as the duty to correct the errors of perjury.

The Commission does not review legal error or disputes about the merits of a judge's decision. My complaint is not a substitute for appeal. This matter arrises to the level of reason for absolute and serious judicial discipline.  It is not barred being fraud.

Based on my direct experience in a disciplinary matter involving Mr. Johnson, I respectfully request a formal investigation into the following issues:

1. Alleged Misconduct in Disciplinary Proceedings

Mr. Johnson engaged in conduct that appeared inconsistent with the ethical obligations required of a lawyer representing the Disciplinary Commission. Specifically:

He relied upon, or permitted the use of, testimony that he knew or should have known was perjury. He failed to take corrective action when such testimony was presented.

When these issues were reportedly under investigation by the Lake County Sheriff, there appeared to be efforts to avoid scrutiny rather than ensure transparency.

2. Denial of Due Process

During the proceedings:

AJ denied me a meaningful hearing on the merits.

I was not permitted to present witnesses, including those necessary to rebut disputed or allegedly false testimony.

I was not allowed to reinstate my not guilty plea after a plea discussion that was never formally accepted or adjudicated by a court.

3. Improper Use of Coercive Tactics.

Mr. Johnson utilized my signature on a plea-related document as a basis to threaten immediate arrest for perjury, despite the absence of any judicial determination regarding the plea. This conduct resembled what is known as an illegal “perjury trap,” raising serious ethical and constitutional concerns, particularly where no formal hearing or ruling had occurred.

4. Inconsistent and Misleading Representations

Mr. Johnson represented to me that incompetence would not be alleged.

However, in a subsequent amended Verified Complaint, he introduced claims of incompetence.

This inconsistency raises concerns regarding candor, fairness, and prosecutorial conduct.

5. Witness and Third-Party Interference

Mr. Johnson contacted a former client of mine, Barbara Major of Porter County, Indiana, and allegedly encouraged her to file an additional complaint against me, including making inflammatory and unfounded characterizations.

6. Procedural Irregularities

At the hearing:

Mr. Johnson indicated he did not understand a basic procedural issue (separation of witnesses).

The hearing officer denied separation of witnesses.

Despite this, I was not permitted to present any witnesses in my defense.

Conclusion

The conduct described above, if substantiated, raises serious concerns about:

Ethical compliance

Due process protections

Fitness for judicial office

Given Magistrate Johnson’s current judicial role and candidacy for higher judicial office, these issues warrant immediate and thorough review. mI respectfully request that the appropriate authority investigate these matters and take any action deemed necessary to preserve the integrity of the legal profession and judiciary. 

######

HE Commentary

Bernacchi delivers Candidate Johnson an April surprise citing HE articles in his complaint, above. Bernacchi alleges that the conduct at issue includes fraud, perjury, obstruction of justice, and the improper use of what has been described in legal discourse as a “perjury trap,” which he contends was used to coerce statements and ultimately frame him in disciplinary proceedings.

“These filings are not made lightly,” Bernacchi said when reached for comment “They are based on a documented record of conduct that I believe warrants full and independent investigation by appropriate authorities. The rule of law requires accountability—especially for those entrusted to uphold it. He used perjury as a state ethics proscuter and now is asking the voters of Hamilton County to trust him? 'Don't!' ”

Allegations of Due Process Violations

HE has published many articles about this injustice; yet there has been correction.

Bernacchi, who practiced law for 28 years, maintains that his suspension was the result of a fundamentally flawed process that denied him core constitutional protections, including the right to a fair hearing and the opportunity to challenge evidence presented against him.

He further asserts that efforts to investigate the underlying conduct were obstructed, raising broader concerns about transparency and oversight within judicial and disciplinary systems.

A Call for Reform: “Doug’s Law”

In response to his experience, Bernacchi continues to advocate for structural reform through his proposal known as “Doug’s Law.” The initiative would require mandatory, nonbinding mediation prior to the filing of attorney ethics complaints or malpractice actions.

The proposed reform is intended to:

• Promote early resolution of disputes

• Reduce the risk of retaliatory or unsupported complaints

• Provide a fair and balanced process for both clients and attorneys

• Strengthen public confidence in the legal system

Broader Implications

Bernacchi emphasized that his case reflects systemic vulnerabilities that may affect attorneys across the country, particularly those without the institutional backing of large firms.

“When due process is compromised, it affects not just one lawyer, but the integrity of the entire system,” Bernacchi said. “Accountability and reform are essential to restoring trust.”

About In Re Doug Bernacchi

Between 12015-2016 when Bernacchi ran for judge in St. Joseph County Circuit Court, Bernacchi was wrongly disciplaned by Johnson who got a notch on his belt in rigged justice case. Doug Bernacchi was an attorney born in LaPorte Indiana, author, and public advocate focused on legal ethics reform. A graduate of Georgetown University’s School of Foreign Service, with an MBA from the University of Notre Dame and a JD from Loyola University Chicago, he has served as a municipal attorney for Michiana Shores Indiana for a decade, an ethics educator tapped as an honest broker, and fromer CME floor trader, and community leader. He currently resides in Darien, Connecticut, where he is an elected member of the Town's Legislative Body from the 5th District, and serves on the powerful Budget & Finance Committee. He works as an optician in retirement.