Attorney Ben Dusing spoke to LINK nky a day after the Kentucky Supreme Court issued a temporary suspension of his ability to practice law pending a “full psychological evaluation.”
The candidate for Kenton County family court judge said this will not affect his role in the race.
“I intend to do the thing I’m supposed to do, which is get this psychological evaluation,” he said Friday morning. “Attacks on my mental health to discredit me or separate me from my children is just something I’ve come to live with.”
Dusing said his prior psychological evaluations have found him to be mentally fit.
The Supreme Court decision brought a bit of relief, Dusing said.
“It’s a long saga and so it’s not unexpected and in many ways today I feel a little bit of relief,” he said. “Also disappointment. But I don’t think I’ve had a day where at the end of it I’ve ever felt more loved. I’ve been completely overwhelmed with outreaches.”
The suspension came after a three-month review of allegations that he threatened two Northern Kentucky attorneys and used amphetamines during a federal criminal trial in New York.
“The Commission has established probable cause to believe that Dusing’s conduct poses a substantial harm to his clients or to the public,” said the court’s 9-page ruling. “Dusing must, within 20 days of the date of the entry of this Opinion and Order, notify in writing all clients of his inability to provide further legal services.”
Dusing shocked Northern Kentucky’s legal community in November when he told two attorneys involved in his daughter’s custody case to “knock it the **** off” in a Facebook post, adding: “Give me a ****ing reason to blow your ***** up.” Dusing said the Facebook post was “political speech,” intended to draw attention to public corruption, not to threaten violence.
But Kenton County Family Court Judge Christopher Mehling called it a “direct threat” to his staff attorney Alice Keyes and Stephanie Dietz, who represented Dusing’s ex-fiancee in the custody case.
The Nov. 2 video post lasted less than nine minutes and was taken down within 24 hours. But it also caused Judge Mehling to withdraw from Dusing’s case and ask the commonwealth attorney to investigate.
“The video was quite disturbing,” Judge Mehling wrote in his recusal order. “This court’s staff attorney was with me on the bench at the time and was physically upset during and after the playing of this video. She became fearful for her life.”
Mehling’s order was attached as evidence in a petition for temporary suspension against Dusing, filed Nov. 12. Also attached was an affidavit by Michael Hild, who alleged misconduct against Dusing during a federal criminal trial in New York.
“Dusing’s lack of preparation, poor performance at my trial, visible consumption of prescription drugs with runs to the pharmacy by his staff, are cause for grave concern now that I understand those prescription bottles to have contained amphetamines,” Hild wrote in an affidavit in which he sought a new trial “In fact, I remember Mr. Dusing stating during the trial that he was ‘back in business’ after clutching a large prescription bottle that his paralegal just retrieved from the pharmacy for him.”
The suspension was effective today and remains in effect until the Supreme Court orders otherwise.
“The issue before us is not whether Dusing is, in fact, a threat to his clients or the public, or whether, in fact, he is mentally disabled or is addicted to intoxicants or drugs and has the mental fitness to continue to practice law,” wrote Chief Justice John Minton on behalf of the unanimous court. “The issue is whether the Commission has established ‘that probable cause exists to believe’ those facts exist. From the record before us, the Commission has presented enough information to establish probable cause for us to believe either that Dusing poses a substantial threat of harm to his clients or the public or that he is mentally disabled and lacks the mental fitness to continue to practice law.”
For his part, Dusing said Friday that this is what comes with the territory in his line of work.
“I made a decision to speak out about some things and have been very vocal about those things,” he said. “I feel like I did what anybody else would do which is to object to things that were objectionable and I had no idea that other felt as strongly about these issues as I did. I didn’t mean to start a revolution, but it appears I did.”
WCPO 9 investigative reporter Dan Monk contributed to this report.
