Search this site

Judge Jonathan Walker To Story To Story To Story Recommended for retention by voters To Evaluation

Tim Masters Judges Tim Masters was wrongfully convicted of murder. His flawed conviction was upheld by the Colorado Supreme Court but DNA evidence proved his innocence. After a decade in prison, he was released and his prosecutors were found to have acted unethically. By then, they were judges. The Masters case was widely reported in national and local media and many sources are available. The case even has its own Wikipedia entry and a TV documentary. Wikepedia Entry 48 Hours Episode Two prosecutors on the case, now elevated to judges, would be censured for unethical conduct. Reporting revealed that one had been secretly disciplined before the Masters case. We don't know if the Nominating Commission knew this when the lawyer was appointed as a judge. To Story Even with this history, the Performance Commission recommended that voters retain the two disgraced prosecutors as judges. To Column Local citizens organized a grassroots movement opposed to keeping the two censured prosecutors on the bench as judges. To Story Colorado voters would override the Performance Commission and oust the censured judges. Is this an example of judicial accountability working or voters overruling a broken system? To Story

Judge Andrew Armatas also known as "JudgeTouchy Feely" This judge's misbehavior was so well known in the judiciary that the staff had a nickname for him. Instead of stopping it, they protected the judge. When a staff member complained about the sexual harassment, she was fired in retaliation. The judiciary didn't even feel the need to hide their purpose in punishing her for complaining about the harassment. Even though they had to pay damages, did the judiciary consider the judge's sexual harassment to be unethical? Can you find any record of him being censured? To Story To Story To Evaluation

Judge Laurie Booras To Story To Evaluation

Judge Robert A. Rand Judge Rand's story is similar to others like Judges Woods, Chase, and Kiesnowski. His misbehavior was well known but accepted by the Judicial Department for years. Like the other judges with long histories of misbehavior, in his last evaluation, the Judicial Performance Commission recommended that voters retain Judge Rand. To Story To Story To Story To Story To Story To Story To Story Recommended for retention by the voters To Evaluation

Resources Speaking Out to Defend the Rule of Law Professor of philosophy Gerald Postema notes that everyone talks today about the "rule of law" but few seem to know what it is. He provides an engaging discussion of its meaning and importance. Prof. Postema also presents a compelling case for the necessity of holding people in power, like judges and our institutions charged with upholding law, accountable to the rule of law--a responsibility that is "almost sacred." Link to Prof. Postema's Article The Memo View the "Memo" that started it all. The "Memo" had been compiled by senior judicial department executives. They laid out instances of judicial misconduct which they alleged had been covered up in Colorado's Judiciary. Link to the Memo The Judicial Department's Version The Colorado Judiciary hired two law firms to investigate under its control. They were Robert Troyer ("RCT") and the Investigative Law Group ("ILG"). Primary accusers were not available to them and some topics were placed off-limits. Read their reports of the Judiciary's version of events: RCT's Report ILG's Report Judicial coverups as documented in this report: "Preparing for the Next Scandal: Valuable Insights from the 2019-2023 Judicial Corruption Scandal" To Report In January of 2024, the Colorado legislature held annual SMART Act hearings. At that time it heard a summary report on lessons from the Masias allegations and their handling. Judicial Integrity Project Report Colorado's longest-term advocate for reforming judicial accountability is the Judicial Integrity Project. Read its report to the legislature here. To Report Judicial Department Cooperation? Colorado's constitution vests the power to investigate judicial misconduct in the Judicial Discipline Commission. Did the Judicial Department cooperate with the official investigation by the Judicial Discipline Commission? Reports from the two entities highlight major controversies. Judicial Dept's Report Discipline Commission Report Appx 1 Appx 2 Designing Accountability into the Judicial Discipline System How can systems be designed to enhance judicial accountability? A former member of Colorado's Judicial Discipline Commission examines this topic in an article published in the American Judges Court Review . To Report Colorado Legislative Interim Committee on Judicial Discipline In 2022, Colorado's Legislative Interim Committee on Judicial Discipline held hearings to examine the judicial ethics accountability system. It considered legislative remedies. The Committee received many informative reports and proposals available here. To Materials Original Intent of Colorado's Merit Selection For the 40th anniversary, a justice of the Colorado Supreme Court wrote a history of the system and discussed its intent. Consider whether today's system is achieving its goals. To Article

Judge Grant Sullivan Judge Sullivan was an attorney representing the Judicial Department in the Masias contract affairs. After his involvement in the Masias contract affair, he was placed on the Colorado Court of Appeals. Go To Story Story Story "This ... is an epic clash ... a critical showdown of Constitutional authority." Story Story To Story

Silencing the Watchdogs: Colorado Commission on Judicial Discipline, the legislative investigators, and other critics. Press reports reveal that the Colorado Supreme Court obstructed and delayed the investigation of the judicial ethics watchdog through 2021 and 2022. An office of the Supreme Court was complicit in creating false evidence which was used to indict the chairman of the legislative committee investigating corruption at the Court. A judge later dismissed that indictment. As the delayed investigation neared its end, the press reported that the watchdog members faced intimidation tactics in the spring of 2023. Shortly after the commission disciplined the former chief justice, many of the watchdog's members were removed. The new commission members then fired the executive director who had been involved in disciplining the chief justice. To see how this story developed, follow the links provided below. Also, refer to the link to the "Transparency" section. Link to Transparency section Obstruction More Obstruction Membership Changed Threats Intimidation Opposition from Sen. Pete Lee Chief Justice Disciplined Public Censure of Chief Justice Director Removed More at Transparency

2022 System Reform SB 22-201 2023 Reform - Ombuds for Judiciary HB 23-1019 2024 Bipartisan Ballot Measure Passed by Legislature Constitution Amendment H Amendment H Story Story Story Story Story Story Story Story Story Story Story Story Story

"Members of the Colorado Supreme Court, directly and through its senior staff, made a series of decisions and took ... actions throughout 2021 and 2022 that limited the ability of the commission ... to do its constitutionally mandated work." To Story For an in-depth analysis of how the Colorado Supreme Court responded to revelations of scandal, look at judicial coverups as documented in "Preparing for the Next Scandal: Valuable Insights from the 2019-2023 Judicial Corruption Scandal." Preparing for the Next Scandal - Valuable insights from the 2019-2023 Judicial Corruption Scandal To Story To Story To Story "What can you do with a redacted report? It was a setup from the start." To Story To Story February 2021 "we need to ensure that any allegation of wrongdoing is fully investigated and if wrongdoing is found, that there is full accountability regardless of anyone's position." - Chief Justice Brian Boatright, 2/4/2021 August 2022 To Story Feb. 2021 "Today, we met as a court and viewed the memo for the first time ." - Colorado Supreme Court 2/8/2021 June 2022 To Story "The memo itself was secret for almost two years, until ... Ryan blew the whistle" To Story In 2020, the State Auditor found an "appearance of impropriety" in contracting with Masias. To Story It did so without the now infamous Memo, withheld from the Auditor until 2021 February 2021 "nobody wants these investigations to go forward more than I do ... My promise ... to all of Colorado ... We're going to get this right." - Chief Justice Brian Boatright 2/16/2021 To Story August 2022 Feb. 2021 "we are retaining the services of an outside investigator to conduct an independent review of all of the allegations mentioned in the memo ." - Colo. Supreme Court 2/8/2021 July 2022 "[Memo Item 5] 'Current pending EEOC complaint against two justice [of the supreme court]' [Judiciary's Investigator] ILG was instructed not to investigate this matter" - Chief Justice Boatright 7/11/2022 To Story February 2021 "I am committed to getting to the truth of the allegations that have damaged the public's perception of our critically important work." -Chief Justice Brian Boatright 2/18/2021 August 2022 To Story To Story To Story To Story To Story "Every woman that [brings forward mistreatment] -- they've all been laid off, written up, disciplined, pushed out, moved over ..." To Story "I didn't want to create a paper trail for the chief [justice], so I'll trust you'll know the best way to keep him informed." To Story Justices Boatright, Marquez, and Berkenkotter are on the 2024 ballot for retention. The performance commission recommends they be retained by voters--without ever addressing their obstruction and deceptions reported above. To Evaluations

Judge Ross Buchanan "Even when a judge breaks the rules, we can't know about it -- even though they supposedly work for us in an open government." Story "The panel inadvertently revealed [that Judge Buchanan] last year was the subject of a private reprimand" Story More Commentary Story Recommended for retention by voters To Evaluation

Retaliation against staff for reporting judicial misconduct Despite the "Toxic Culture" of silence described in the ILG and RCT reports, certain incidents have eventually emerged into public view. These are cases where judicial department staff endured retaliation for speaking up about judicial misconduct. Follow the links to read the news reports about them. Fired for Reporting Judge "Touchy Feely" To Story Manager forced out for raising the judge's abuse of alcohol To Story Targeted on suspicion of talking about a judge's affair To Story