Several cases are still pending against Judge Guy Williams, and the future of his career remains uncertain.
As KRIS 6 News reported Friday, he was publicly reprimanded by the Texas State Commission on Judicial Conduct for incidents that happened both inside and outside the courtroom.
Williams‘ attorneys say they are dismayed with Friday’s ruling.
A panel of three judges upheld a decision by the Texas Ethics Commission in issued December 2018 to issue two public reprimands to Williams. Ultimately, that decision means he cannot serve as a visiting judge or collect retirement.
Lengthy court documents obtained by KRIS 6 News outline 13 charges against Williams that the State Commission on Judicial Conduct says violate ethical standards of both the Texas Constitution and the Code of Ethical Conduct.
These charges stem from various incidents over the past several years.
Williams allegedly inappropriately touched several female judges and other county employees at an event in August of 2017.
He has adamantly denied those allegations for more than a year.
Additionally, he was cited for his behavior and the way he handled multiple child custody cases in his court.
During a recent hearing, Williams explained that it was often his practice to “lay the hammer down” to defendants and their attorneys and that he thought he could “scare the bee-jee-bees out of people.”
A third incident outlined in the documents explained Williams made “disparaging” comments about the Nueces County District Attorney’s Office in open court.
Williams defended the statements he made about the DA’s office and argued he was frustrated because many cases from the DA’s office from 2014 to 2015 “wasted a lot of time in his court.”
One of Williams‘ attorneys said she had hoped the sanctions would be lowered to a warning or a private reprimand. She added this is a final action and that Williams cannot appeal this ruling.
Below is a full statement issued to KRIS 6 News by Guy Williams’ legal team:
“Obviously, this is not the result we were hoping for and/or expecting for our client based on the totality of the evidence presented at trial.
Before the Special Court of Review, which was comprised of three court of appeals justices, were two recommendations for public reprimands from the State Commission on Judicial conduct. The first Public Reprimand involved a single complaint made about a single hearing in a family law matter before Judge Williams in 2017. The matter involved two children with two different mothers in a consolidated family law case. One of the mothers complained to the State Commission on Judicial Conduct of a ruling Judge Williams made. We absolutely do not believe that Judge Williams’ ruling violated his judicial canons or the Texas Constitution and the dissenting Justice agrees with us. Unfortunately, the majority voted to uphold the public reprimand pertaining to this case.
The second Public Reprimand is comprised of four separate complaints. Three of the complaints are from three women who attended a party celebrating a common friend who had become a U.S. citizen and allege an unwanted touching. The fourth complaint is an anonymous one which complains that Judge Williams made comments in two unrelated criminal cases that allegedly disparage the former administration of the Nueces County District Attorney’s Office. While we certainly believe that the evidence presented at trial was insufficient to support the allegations made, or that Judge Williams’ presence at a party was judicial in nature, it is troubling that a lesser sanction such as a private reprimand or a public warning was not issued in place of a public reprimand.”
