JCC Report: 'Clear and convincing evidence' to remove Gordon

Jun. 23—The state Judicial Conduct Commission had "clear and convincing evidence" that Julia Hawes Gordon had abused her position as Daviess family court judge when the commission voted to remove Gordon from the judgeship, the JCC's attorney argues in document filed Wednesday with the state Supreme Court.

On Wednesday, the JCC filed its response to Gordon's appeal to the state's highest court. Gordon is appealing her removal as family judge. In April, the JCC moved Gordon from the bench after a three-day hearing, where they examined evidence and heard testimony from Gordon and multiple witnesses.

The JCC found that Gordon used her position as judge to benefit her adult son, Dalton Gordon, in his criminal cases — specifically by contacting county attorney Claud Porter, District Judge Daniel "Nick" Burlew and Dalton's defense attorney, Clay Wilkey, to get favorable outcomes for Dalton's cases.

The JCC also ruled Gordon had violated judicial canons by creating and not removing conflicts of interest, such as appointing Wilkey and a partner in her husband's law firm as guardians ad litem, which are attorneys paid by the case in Family Court.

Commissioners ruled Gordon had retaliated against social workers and others in her courtroom who disagreed with her rulings and let office workers conduct drug tests on Family Court clients, which were mishandled. They also ruled Gordon had not been candid with the commission in her statements to the commission.

In her appeal, Gordon said the JCC decision was made using "frivolous, baseless, inflammatory, and at times even dangerous claims" against her. Gordon said throughout the process, and in her appeal, that the charges against her were brought by a disgruntled former court employee.

The response was filed by Jeffrey Mando, a Covington attorney who represented the JCC at the hearing.

The evidence against Gordon "painted a picture of a reckless judge with no regard for the grave impact her action had on the integrity and impartiality of the judiciary," Mando wrote.

The evidence showed "an extensive pattern of Judge Gordon exercising improper influence for both her own benefit and the benefit of her son, as well as a blatant disregard for acceptable standards of judicial practice," Mando wrote.

Regarding her son's cases, Mando argues commissioners heard testimony of at least three cases where Gordon "inappropriately inserted herself" into the process. In a March 2020 hearing, Burlew said during one of Dalton Gordon's hearings that Burlew had met with Julia Gordon for 45 minutes about the case the day before.

Gordon, Mando wrote, "engaged in ex parte communications with the presiding judge in one case, used her judicial position to gain favorable treatment for her son from various court and county officials, strong-armed Dalton's criminal defense attorney and destroyed potential evidence to protect her son."

Gordon had privately admonished by the JCC in 2018, "for her inappropriate involvement in Dalton's criminal cases," Mando wrote. When Dalton had new charges in 2020, Gordon "continued to exert her judicial influence over both the presiding judge and the Daviess County attorney to unilaterally determine the outcome of her son's criminal cases," Mando wrote.

At the JCC hearing in April, commissioners heard recordings between Gordon and Dalton while he was in jail, where she talked of removing images and items from his social media and phones. Gordon testified items were removed to protect her younger children, because Dalton sometimes used their phones.

"Regardless of her rationale for doing so, the fact remains that Judge Gordon deleted material from her son's social media accounts after he had been arrested and taken into custody," Mando wrote.

Mando wrote the commission heard evidence that Gordon had used her position to get special visits for her and her son while he was in jail, "which was not available to other inmates."

Also, by allowing Wilkey, and Andrew Johnson, a partner in her husband's law firm, to be guardians ad litem in her courtroom, Gordon "completely failed to appreciate and avoid the overt perception of favoritism," Mando wrote.

Gordon "repeatedly maintained she had 'no authority to hire or fire attorneys for (her) adult son' " during the hearing, Mando wrote, but that "counsel for the Commission introduced numerous exhibits demonstrating this was simply not true."

For example, in a recorded call while Dalton was in jail, Gordon tells Dalton she paid "thousands of dollars" to hire attorney Clay Wilkey for Dalton's defense, Mando wrote.

"(W)hen Judge Gordon presided over Wilkey's cases (when Wilkey was a guardian ad litem), she never disclosed to opposing counsel the conflict of interest presented by Wilkey's representation of her son," Mando wrote.

While some of the JCC's findings by themselves might not have led to Gordon being removed, the case "was not about one or two isolated instances of misconduct," but "'involved Judge Gordon's pattern of misconduct and her repeated exercise of poor judgement and her engagement in profoundly unwise action ... that continued for years'," Mondo quoted from the JCC's ruling.

Mando requested Supreme Court justices hold oral arguments in the appeal. The Supreme Court will determine later whether to hold oral arguments.

James Mayse, 270-691-7303, jmayse@messenger-inquirer.com, Twitter: @JamesMayse