Judge Kent pleads guilty, quits to avoid 'embarrassing' trial Judge Kent accepts plea deal, retires

Trial 'would have been long, embarrassing and difficult for all involved,' defense attorney says

U.S. District Court Judge Samuel B. Kent is shown with his wife, Sarah, in May. He was charged with trying to cover up sexual assaults on two female employees. U.S. District Court Judge Samuel B. Kent is shown with his wife, Sarah, in May. He was charged with trying to cover up sexual assaults on two female employees. Photo: Mayra Beltran, Chronicle Photo: Mayra Beltran, Chronicle Image 1 of / 3 Caption Close Judge Kent pleads guilty, quits to avoid 'embarrassing' trial 1 / 3 Back to Gallery

U.S. District Judge Samuel Kent pleaded guilty to one count of obstruction of justice Monday, avoiding a potentially humiliating trial on that charge and five others accusing him of sexually abusing two female employees.

“A trial would have been long, embarrassing and difficult for all involved,” said Dick DeGuerin, Kent’s attorney. “Judge Kent believes that this settlement is in the best interest of all involved.”

Kent faces up to 20 years in prison. Prosecutors have requested he be sentenced to three years in prison, but the judge is not bound by that recommendation.

Kent was scheduled for a jury trial Monday. Instead, he entered the plea and DeGuerin announced that Kent “retired” from the bench, a status that could allow him to continue to be paid for life. Since the 59-year-old Kent is not old enough to retire, he’d likely have to be certified fully disabled to have his retirement approved. In court, Kent said he’s been treated for diabetes and psychiatric and psychological problems for the past three years.

Kent was appointed for life in 1990 and can be removed from the payroll by congressional impeachment or by his own resignation, which is not the same as the retirement he claimed.

Few federal judges ever go to trial, but Kent’s would have been the first in which a federal judge was accused of sexual charges. In court papers, Kent not only admitted he lied to a judicial panel investigating him but also that he had non-consensual sexual contact with two female court employees between 2003 and 2007.

Gag order kept in place

In the courtroom Monday, Kent, who normally speaks in loud, clear tones, all but whispered his guilty plea at the bench. The court reporter leaned in and strained to hear what he said.

In most pleas in the Houston federal courthouse, defendants are made to state their crimes, but neither Kent nor prosecutor Peter Ainsworth stated the facts of the crime publicly.

The filed papers stated that as part of the investigation into a complaint by one of the women, Kent obstructed justice by lying about his relationship with the second woman to investigators for a judicial committee.

The plea deal includes that prosecutors will dismiss the other five charges still pending against Kent.

Senior U.S. Judge Roger Vinson, the Florida judge overseeing Kent’s case, imposed a gag order on the lawyers and witnesses and kept it in place Monday. Gag orders are designed to protect the rights of defendants from public prejudice before trial.

The two women Kent is accused of abusing each stood in front of the courthouse Monday morning while their lawyers briefly spoke to the press. Judge Vinson’s gag order prevented them from saying much.

“I just think this is a tremendously big day for Cathy,” Rusty Hardin said of Cathy McBroom, Kent’s former Galveston case manager whose complaint started the judicial investigation that led to the criminal case. “She’s a woman who had the courage to come forward.”

“I’m very happy that this part of the process is over,” said McBroom. “I feel extremely relieved.” She said she looks forward to Kent’s sentencing, set in May. Federal law requires judges to consider the victims’ input in sentencing.

Terry Yates spoke to reporters with his client, Donna Wilkerson. She is the current secretary for Kent, although they have not been working together since charges related to her allegations were added to the case.

“She can be a beacon of hope for other people in this situation,” Yates said of Wilkerson, who made no comment herself.

Arthur Hellman, a legal expert in judicial discipline, said he hopes this case is a “wake-up call” for the federal judiciary, which generally doesn’t zealously root out misconduct among colleagues.

“Even the gag order here is consistent with the general approach of the judiciary in disciplining federal judges. There is a real resistance to disclosure,” Hellman said.

The judicial council reprimanded Kent in September 2007. But after the obstruction charge was added to the indictment in January, the council said it would reopen its judicial misconduct investigation.

It is possible Congress could seek to impeach Kent because of his felony plea.

mary.flood@chron.com

lise.olsen@chron.com