Judy Clabes: ‘Frat house judge’ lost seat on Family Court bench, now opens her law office in Newport

Dawn Gentry, the displaced Kenton County Family Court judge — dubbed by national media the ‘frat house’ judge — has opened a law office in Newport.

It has been just over a year since the state Judicial Conduct Commission made the unanimous (5-0) decision to remove Gentry from the bench, a decision later upheld by the Kentucky Supreme Court.

Her five-day hearing garnered media attention from around the world, based on outrageous and often salacious testimony about Gentry’s bad behavior from the bench and in her courthouse offices. Headlines similar to this one from The Sun dominated the coverage: “Gavel banging female ‘frat house’ judge — propositioned secretary for threesome and kept nude pics.” New York Post headline: “Frat house judge kicked off the bench.” “Animal House” antics, reported others.

Gentry’s Newport Law Office

The NKY public has been patiently waiting for more than a year for the next shoe to drop — a notice from the Kentucky Bar Association that Gentry’s law license has been revoked — or not. Along with several other high-profile and outrageous issues around local attorneys, that has not yet been forthcoming. The wheels of the Kentucky Bar Association’s own fraternity grind slowly — and in secret — from a foolish public whose confidence in the justice system is increasingly eroding.

* * * * *

Appointment, election, and sanction

Gentry was appointed to the bench in December 2016 by then-Gov. Matt Bevin and in November 2018 was elected to a full term on the bench. By January 2020, she had been suspended from the bench by the Judicial Conduct Commission and received full pay and benefits from that time through the hearing and the appeals process. The complaints and the response to this phase of the process can be read in full here.

The five voting members of the Commission on this case were Bar Member Hon. R. Michael Sullivan, Court of Appeals Member Jeff S. Taylor, Circuit Judge Member Eddy Coleman, District Judge Member David Bowles, and Citizen Member Dr. Joe E. Ellis. Also, in attendance during the hearing were alternate Court of Appeals Member Judge 4 Glenn E. Acree, alternate Circuit Court Judge Member Mitch Perry, alternate District Judge Member Karen Thomas, and alternate KBA member Carroll M. Redford, III. Citizen Member Janet L. Lively did not participate in the proceedings.

Dawn Gentry

The Commission found that Gentry violated numerous requirements of the Judicial Canons: (Read the full decision here.

• Failing to perform the duties of her judicial office fairly and impartially (Canon 2, Rule 2.2) and without bias or prejudice (Canon 2, Rule 2.3(A) and (B)).

• Engaging in conduct that would appear to a reasonable person to be coercive (Canon 3, Rule 3.1(D)).

• Failing to act at all times in a manner that promotes public confidence in the independence, integrity, and impartiality of the judiciary, and avoiding impropriety and the appearance of impropriety (Canon 1, Rule 1.2).

• Allowing social, political, financial, or other interests or relationships to influence her judicial conduct or judgment (Canon 2, Rule 2.4(B)).

• Failing to make administrative appointments on the basis of merit and avoiding nepotism, favoritism, and unnecessary appointments (Canon 2, Rule 2.13(A)).

• Failing to require her staff to act in a manner consistent with the judge’s obligations under the Code of Judicial Conduct (Canon 2, Rule 2.12(A)).

• Approving compensation of appointees beyond the fair value of services rendered (Canon 2, Rule 2.13(B)).

• Failing to disqualify herself in any proceeding where her impartiality might reasonably be questioned (Canon 2, Rule 2.11(A)).

• Failing to be patient, dignified, and courteous to those with whom the judge deals in an official capacity, and permitting similar conduct of others subject to her direction and control (Canon 2, Rule 2.8(B)).

• Failing to cooperate and be candid and honest with judicial disciplinary agencies (Canon 2, Rule 2.16(A)).

• Retaliating against a person known or suspected to have assisted or cooperated with an investigation of a judge (Canon 2, Rule 2.16(B)).

Specifically, the Commission ruled that Gentry retaliated against attorney Michael Hummel for not supporting her judicial campaign as much as she wanted, had staff work on her campaign during office hours, retaliated against school liaison officer Kelly Blevins for supporting her opponent in the election, required Meridith Smith to resign from an official panel to make way for non-lawyer and minister Stephen Penrose with whom she was having an affair (which included sex and raucous parties in her office), showed favoritism to certain attorneys, retaliated against an attorney who cooperated with the Commission and was herself not candid and honest with the Commission. (Note: The latter could add up to “perjury,” a criminal offense, and definitely calls for an investigation.)

In addition, the Commission found that Gentry authorized false timesheets and allowed the consumption of alcoholic beverages in the courthouse, made inappropriate sexual advances toward a female attorney, and hired and appointed staff not based on merit.

The order states that the case “did not involve one or two isolated occurrences but instead a pattern of misconduct and repeated exercise of extremely poor judgment — on and off the Bench”– that continued even after she was notified of complaints filed against her.

* * * * *

From an observer of the proceedings

Her Facebook post

A non-attorney source who attended each of the four days of the hearing in Campbell County and took copious notes shared insight with the NKyTribune. The informed source is not being identified because retribution from Gentry and her courthouse cronies is still a possibility:

“Attending the Gentry hearing was gut-wrenching. The hearing began with written admission of perjury in Jefferson County in January. It concluded on Friday with admission of perjury in Campbell County.

“The favoritism for lawyer friends in the courtroom was proven with testimony and specifics. One was that Gentry actually kept business cards of some of her closest lawyer friends in her courtroom. She could hand them out at will. Children and families have suffered lifelong consequences because her decisions were based on what her lawyer friends wanted not what the social workers and qualified professionals recommended.

“The falsification of timesheets was extensive. Taxpayers were paying her salary while on a regular basis she would leave the courthouse for hours. Frequently she would be seen leaving for lunch with Mr. Penrose wearing workout attire. The timesheets did not reflect this.

“In closing arguments, Gentry’s counsel admitted and stated that his client was a terrible politician, which confirmed the first two charges, the coercion to participate in her judicial campaign and retaliation for failure to support her judicial campaign. He then stated that she was a terrible boss. Her retaliation against school employees, social workers, and liaisons was alarming. Steve Penrose actually attempted to intimidate (a local school superintendent who wouldn’t abide by Gentry’s “mandates.”).

“Here was an unethical, immoral lawyer–judge using the power of the bench for personal gratification. Testimony and evidence showed that alcohol was being consumed in her suite in the courthouse. The judicial conduct code prohibits alcohol in the chambers. Dawn Gentry admitted to having a sexual relationship with her case specialist. She is a disgrace as a judge and a lawyer. She took an oath as a lawyer and then as a judge. Her perjury is far more egregious than a regular citizen’s and deserves to be investigated. It is a criminal offense for everyone carrying a fine and jail time as a consequence. Yet, she is still practicing law. Her only consequence has been that we the taxpayers are not paying her salary. She is an embarrassment to all judges, lawyers, and the citizens of the Commonwealth of Kentucky.”

* * * * *

Comic relief

Testimony during the hearing itself was filled with courthouse intrigue, examples of campaigning from the bench, real retributions for non-support of the Judge’s election (retributions that did impact the lives of already-broken families and their children — another piece of testimony that deserves closer investigation), political cronyism — and a generous dose of sex.

Gentry hired her lover, now an ex-minister of a Bromley church, who conveniently played the guitar as well. She fired another member of her staff to make room for him, and he was apparently given broad authority over the management of her office. There was plenty of testimony about loud music and raucous partying going on in her office in the Kenton County Courthouse, which disturbed others working nearby.

Give the Judicial Nominating Committee points for judicial demeanor for hearing this testimony about certain photos of private parts being exchanged between Gentry and Penrose. He texted her photos of his penis. She texted him, through a phone accessible to her daughter, photos of her vagina. Her explanation for the intimate photo was that it was a mistake because it was meant for her doctor because she was having problems with hemorrhoids.

Apparently, Gentry needs either a crash course on telling the truth and/or refresher on anatomy lessons.

You really couldn’t make this stuff up.

* * * * *

The Kentucky Bar Association

The solutions to the issue of attorney conduct are in the Court’s lane. Specifically, the next step in Dawn Gentry’s fate is apparently now in the Kentucky Bar Association’s hands — or not, because we don’t know and can’t find out.

Please understand that the NKyTribune does not expect every complaint against a member of the bar to be public. Can you imagine the havoc clients and other mischief-makers unhappy with lawyers or judgments or legitimate process can wreak on the system? In addition, a body determining someone’s ultimate livelihood or proper sanction should be deliberate and judicious in making a judgment. Even if it can feel as if the foxes are in charge of the fox house. Or fraternity house.

But in the Gentry’s case, the very public hearing and public record speaks volumes — and is rife with examples of abuse of the system, the moral turpitude unacceptable for members of the bar, and generally the kinds of behaviors that erode confidence in the justice system.

Isn’t a year long enough for a resolution?

When the NKyTribune contacted the Kentucky Bar Association, copying its executive director, officers, and the two representatives on the board from Northern Kentucky, this was the official response from Shannon Roberts, director of communications/assistant director of administration (her email is sroberts@kybar.org if you care to weigh in):

The Kentucky Bar Association’s disciplinary proceedings are confidential under Supreme Court Rule 3.150 and the association is prohibited from disclosing the existence or nonexistence of any disciplinary proceedings prior to a recommendation of public discipline.
 

Click here for a copy of the Kentucky Supreme Court Rule 3.150 regarding access to disciplinary information.

One of the two representatives from NKY also responded:

Thank you for the email. Individual Bar Governors are prohibited from speaking for the KBA. Also, to maintain the absolute impartiality of the Board, I generally recuse myself from matters involving attorneys practicing in my hometown, so I am probably the last person at the Bar who would be able to assist you. Have you contacted the Office of Bar Counsel?

This response is amazing. Recuse yourself? Where then is the Northern Kentucky public represented if this board member does not speak up?

In the end, we — the public — have no choice but to wait interminably for a judgment — or no judgment.

This gives you, the public, some idea of why so many very public and outrageous behaviors of local attorneys remain unresolved.

How are we supposed to maintain faith in and respect for the justice system?

The last word

Leaving the last word to the Judicial Conduct Commission — with the suggestion that this should apply to attorneys as well, shouldn’t it?

“As the Kentucky Code of Judicial Conduct provides in its Preamble, SCR 4.300, ‘Judges should maintain the dignity of judicial office at all times, and avoid both impropriety and the appearance of impropriety in their professional and personal lives.

“Respondent failed in essentially every respect of this fundamental rule applicable to all judges.”

Read the NKyTribune’s stories about Dawn Gentry here.

Judy Clabes is editor and publisher of the NKyTribune.