Humboldt County Superior Court Judge Greg Kreis filed an answer yesterday to the ethics complaint lodged against him, offering a full-throated defense and denial of almost all the myriad of allegations brought forward by a state oversight agency.

In official response to the notice of proceedings brought forward by the Commission on Judicial Performance earlier this month, Kreis contends that many of the allegations contained within the 19 filed against him are based on lies or distortions, while other conduct was appropriate given the full context of the situation. Kreis charges that some of the more salacious allegations contained within the notice stem from his bitter divorce, while others come from two disgruntled former colleagues, one of whom blames him for being passed over for a promotion and the other who “made up these allegations” to bolster a wrongful termination lawsuit against the county.

The commission sent shockwaves through Kreis re-election campaign Feb. 7 when it filed the notice of proceedings, an incredibly rare step for the 11-person commission that fields more than 1,200 complaints annually in its mission to provide judicial oversight. The 35-page document alleges a smattering of misconduct, some of it illegal, both before and after he was appointed to the bench in 2017 by then-Gov. Jerry Brown, saying Kreis’ prior behavior is relevant because it “brings the judicial office into disrepute.”

Specifically, the complaint alleges: Kreis abused his authority by lying to cover up a workplace affair, leading to a court employee’s firing; that he repeatedly and habitually failed to disclose relationships with litigants in his courtroom and disqualify himself from handling their cases; that he sexually assaulted two women while in office, slapping or grabbing one’s buttocks after she told him not to, and putting his naked penis in the face of another while she was sleeping at a party before was appointed to the bench; that he regularly used cocaine before becoming a judge and drank while driving a car full of people around Eureka on one occasion after he was appointed; that he has been discourteous and inappropriate in court; and that he made antisemitic remarks while mocking a deputy public defender at a camping party in 2019, during which he also pushed the man into a lake.

In the 16-page answer to the notice filed Friday, Kreis’ attorney James Murphy is adamant about his client’s innocence of almost all the allegations, including each of the most serious charges.

In response to the charge that Kreis has habitually failed to disclose relationships and remove himself from cases being litigated by his friends, Murphy argues that none of the litany of cases mentioned in the commission’s filing warranted disclosure or recusal. In some cases, he says that’s because the litigants in question were not personal friends of the judge’s, but rather past colleagues with whom he is “friendly” but does not regularly socialize. In others, he says the matters before him in those cases were not contested but were ministerial, so there was no need for disclosures or recusals.

Murphy states that Kreis admits to having a romantic relationship with a Humboldt County Superior Court family law facilitator, but says the relationship started in July or August of 2021, well after it is alleged to have begun in the commission’s filing, and after the firing of the court employee said to have spread rumors about the relationship. Murphy contends that the employee was spreading false rumors at the time, which Kreis reported, and that she was fired for “her many other past actions,” as well as lying during the investigation.

“Indeed, [the employee’s] own union refused to represent her in connection with the termination due to her not too insignificant history,” Murphy writes.

As Kreis had denied it in a civil lawsuit brought against him and the county (which was dismissed as it pertained to the county and settled in January as it pertained to Kreis), Murphy denies that Kreis mocked former Deputy Public Defender Rory Kalin at a 2019 event or called him “Jewboy.” Murphy contends that no witnesses interviewed as a part of the civil case other than Kalin and his wife reported hearing Kreis say anything antisemitic, proffering that perhaps it was an “imagined statements” since Kalin was using “copious” amounts of cannabis during the event and “over-using prescribed medications.” Kreis did push Kalin into the lake at the event, Murphy writes, but says such conduct was “tradition” at the annual event and that Kreis helped him back onto the boat afterward and later apologized for possibly damaging Kalin’s phone, offering to replace it.

Responding to the sexual assault allegations, Murphy flatly denies one — that Kreis had put his penis in the face of a sleeping woman at a party before he became a judge, with Murphy calling the allegation “offensive” and “false” — while partially admitting the other with additional context. The notice of proceedings charged that Kreis “grabbed or slapped [a woman’s] buttocks without her consent after she’d explicitly told him not to touch her while at a friend’s home in November of 2018. Murphy writes that Kreis and his then-wife stopped by a former colleague's house on the night in question and stayed for just five or 10 minutes, noting the former colleague, his wife and their houseguests had been drinking. Upon leaving, Murphy writes that the former colleague gave Kreis a “‘man hug’ and lightly slapped his bottom, similar to a football player giving another player a ‘good game’ tap, and said goodbye.”

“Judge Kreis returned the slap,” Murphy writes.

“That then became a joke,” Murphy continues, saying others then took turns perpetuating the act until it came to the wife of the former colleague’s houseguest, who “had been laughing but said something like, ‘Not me,’ but was laughing so hard Judge Kreis thought she was joking. He then gave her a hug and a similar light slap. When he turned to leave, the judge saw that [the woman’s] face was now somewhat serious. He immediately apologized and told her that he thought she was kidding.”

Murphy writes that Kreis texted his former colleague to again apologize when he got home. “Obviously,” Murphy concludes, “Judge Kreis misread the situation and apologized for that.”

As to the allegation that he was driving with an open container of alcohol while touring guests around Eureka, Murphy denies that Kreis had an open container, saying the judge believes he “consumed one cocktail” before leaving his home, but was drinking ice tea in the car and was not aware of anyone else having an open container in the vehicle.

“It is believed that the ‘facts’ in this allegation from either the judge’s ex-wife or her friends,” Murphy writes. “Judge Kreis’ dissolution action was extremely contentious and there were numerous false allegations made against him including one involving this event.”

Murphy also writes that Kreis denies having “frequently used cocaine” before his appointment, saying “these false allegations” stem from a former colleague who blamed him for being passed over for a promotion and had been “his antagonist” ever since. In fact, Murphy writes, this former colleague’s behavior at work became so problematic Kreis was forced to threaten to fire her if it didn’t improve, with the employee on one occasion allegedly threatening to “make up a claim of sexual harassment” against Kreis if he fired her.

Murphy responds to the allegations that Kreis has been discourteous or inappropriate in court by denying most but conceding several, saying the judge meant no harm and was just trying to bring some “levity” to court in those instances.

With Kreis answer to the notice now filed, the commission will schedule the matter for a hearing before three “special masters” — judges selected by the California Supreme Court to preside over the hearing. The masters will then prepare a report of the hearing’s findings of fact and conclusions of law, which will then be presented to the commission’s 11 members — comprising two superior court judges, one appellate justice, two attorneys and six citizens variously appointed by the California Supreme Court, the governor, the speaker of the Assembly and the Senate Committee on Rules — for action. If the commission finds any or all of the counts are supported by a preponderance of evidence, it can vote to impose discipline ranging from a written reprimand to removing Kreis from office. In the commission’s nearly 65-year history it has publicly disciplined only two Humboldt County Superior Court judges.

While Kreis will have his proverbial day in court and see the allegations against him vetted, it almost assuredly will not come before the March 5 primary election, in which his campaign faces challenges from local attorney April Van Dyke and Deputy District Attorney Jessica Watson, who is running as a qualified write-in candidate.