Chief Justice Brian Boatright Chief Justice Boatright led the judiciary's response to the series of scandals erupting over the last several years. Media reports indicate years of obstruction by the court and by Justice Boatright individually. Like many of the examples of misbehaving judges on this site, Justice Boatright has been recommended for retention by the performance commission without addressing the misconduct reported below. Follow this link to Justice Boatright's 2024 Judicial Performance Commission recommendation: This linked report details how Justice Boatright obstructed and delayed the referral of alleged wrongdoers to prosecutors. This coverup prevented prosecutors from charging them. In turn, Justice Boatright's personal involvement was shielded from being exposed. Read the report here (especially pages 9-10 and 20) : This section contains other reports of his misbehavior that were omitted from the 2024 evaluation. Boatright - Judicial Performance Evaluation.pdf Preparing for the Next Scandal - Valuable insights from the 2019-2023 Judicial Corruption Boatright misconduct "The people of Colorado deserve a judiciary that they know is being held accountable ... regardless of title or position." - Chief Justice Boatright, 2/16/2021 To Story To Story "the chief justice ... quietly met in a Denver parking garage ... to discuss the ... press for information in the [Commission's] inquiry." The chief justice said he "doesn't want to give it easily." 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 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 To Story "Members of the Colorado Supreme Court, directly and through its senior staff, made a series of decisions and took a series of actions throughout 2021 and 2022 that limited the ability of the commission ... to do its constitutionally mandated work." Link to Story To Story Code of Judicial Conduct Rule 2.10 (A) "A judge shall not make any public statement that might reasonably be expected to affect the outcome or impair the fairness of a matter pending or impending in any court or make any nonpublic statement that might substantially interfere with a fair trial or hearing. " Just as the Masias Contract Affair was coming into public view, the justices of the Colorado Supreme Court issued the following public statement: "The notion that former Chief Justice Coats and his counsel Andrew Rottman -- both dedicated public servants -- would ever authorize the use of state resources to silence a blackmailer is simply false." Ethics complaint filed against Justice Boatright At the very outset of the scandal, the Supreme Court justices demonstrated that they had prejudged the facts of the case - despite their position as ultimate deciders of the controversy - and the strong liklihood of their personal involvement in the matter. Consequently, at least one person (a retired chief judge) filed an ethics complaint with the Colorado Commission on Judicial Discipline. Link to the Ethics Complaint The discipline commission dismissed the complaint in 2024. They gave no real explanation. To Commentary

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 Debra Gunkel To Story To Story Recommended for retention by voters To Review

Masias Contract Whistleblowers During the Masias contract investigations, a group of potential whistleblower witnesses were under threat of criminal prosecution. They never spoke to RCT or ILG investigators. Just as the statute of limitations was running, they were referred to the Denver District Attorney to be charged. However, the Judicial Department held back large portions of the investigative files, such that the DA could not investigate or prosecute. Read about it here: To Story "If you didn't have these whistle-blowers and ... press ..., where might this have landed?" - quoting State Senate President Garcia Story

Evaluating Judges: Performance Commissions Each judge faces a vote of the public on whether they should be retained in office 2 years after being appointed and at regular intervals after that (4, 6, 8, or 10 years depending on the court). Colorado created performance commissions to help voters decide whether to keep the judge on the bench. The commission evaluates the information available to it and reports its recommendations to the voters in the bluebook. In theory, the commissions provide accountability that is independent of influence by the judiciary or outside politics. Does the system below do that? Review the Cases & Controversies examples of judicial misconduct. Can you find one where a judicial performance commission warned voters about a misbehaving judge? Cases & Controversies The members of the Judicial Performance Commissions are lawyers and nonlawyers as well as members of each major political party. The state supreme court influences the selection of members. Also, each commission meets privately with the chief judge of the district at the start of their work. Reports After reviewing the information available to it, the Performance Commission prepares a report summarizing the judge's performance. And it provides its recommendation to Colorado voters on whether the judge meets performance guidelines and should stay on the bench. The report and recommendation is published to voters in the voter's guide ("bluebook"). How effective are Performance Commission evaluations? Go To Story Story As this is written and an election approaches, we voters in Colorado have no idea ho w these investigations came out. As you cast your vote for or against a judge, do you wonder if the judge was investigated? Was that judge cleared or did they break the law they are supposed to be applying to others? Why doesn't the bluebook tell you? Regarding the high ratings given to Colorado judges . . . "In ... Lake Woebegon, all the children were above average --- statistically impossible." To Commentary Jon Caldara, Columnist Go To Story Go To Story "Did you vote to retain the judge [disciplined last year] who promoted extensive drinking among court staff, which led to a sexual relationship with a staff member?" Expose the records of Colorado's judges , Gazette Commentary by Chris Forsyth, October 28, 2020 Go To Story Go To Story In 2023, the Discipline Commission reported that it had taken "corrective action" against 250 judges throughout its history. How many of these "corrections" were known to the Performance Commissions for its review or by voters when they cast their votes? 2022 Annual Report, Colorado Commission on Judicial Discipline at 21-22. Go To Report Tim Masters was wrongfully convicted of murder in Fort Collins, Colorado. Two prosecutors in the case would ultimately be disciplined for misconduct. While the allegations of misconduct were pending, the two passed Nominating Commission vetting to become judges. They were then endorsed by the Performance Commission for retention. However, voters overruled the Nominating Commission and Performance Commission recommendations, removing both from office. Was this the system working or its failings being overcome by the voters? Learn More For more information about the process, visit the Performance Commission's website Performance Commission Website

Transparency February 2021 August 2022 Compare "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, February 4, 2021 To Story "The people of Colorado deserve a judiciary that they know is being held accountable ... regardless of title or position." Chief Justice Boatright, February 16, 2021 To Story "If you didn't have these whistle-blowers and ... press ..., where might this have landed?" - quoting State Senate President Garcia Story To Story To Story Secret Revealed One Cost To Story To Story To Story "We urge the Colorado Judicial Department to be fully transparent" -- Statement of the Colorado Bar Association, February 11, 2021 To Story Compare February 2021 "Today, we met as a court and viewed the memo for the first time ." - official statement by Colorado Supreme Court -February 8, 2021 (emphasis supplied) June 2022 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, which had been withheld from the Auditor until 2021. To Story "Colorado's Judicial branch is the 'black ops' of government." To Story To the Editorial "The memo itself was secret for almost two years, until ... Ryan blew the whistle" To Story To Story February 2021 Compare August 2022 "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 2/16/21 To Story To Story February 2021 Compare July 2022 "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, February 2, 2021 "[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, July 11, 2022 To Story February 2021 August 2022 "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 February 18, 2021 To Story Compare To Story To Story To Story "[Settled] lawsuit ... alleges officials failed to investigate and then retaliated against a judicial assistant who reported that a judge sexually assaulted ... her." "Executive director calls lack of records matching recent revelations 'puzzling.'" To Law Week To Story "Every woman that [brings forward mistreatment] -- they've all been laid off, written up, disciplined, pushed out, moved over ..." To Story "Supreme Court Justice Richard Gabriel faced sexual harassment accusation while a candidate for Colorado's high court--Agreement with accuser kept the issue from tainting his chances, memo says" This was the headline in the Denver Post on 2/26/2021. The detailed original story is now difficult to find. It was replaced with a statement that the charges were later determined to be "unfounded." This refers to the report of the Judicial Dept.'s lawyers, ILG. Is the unavailability of the original detailed story a reflection of transparency or the power of the Justice to suppress the story? After a careful review of the Memo's accusation, the original story, and the objective facts stated by ILG: Was the allegation founded or unfounded? Was the harassment claim suppressed? Was the removal of the story consistent or inconsistent with the original accusation in the Memo? Learn More View Story While it Lasts To Story "given the climate of fear and intimidation that had been created ... employees never voiced their concerns." 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 To Story To Story To Story To Story To Story "[the investigator] found ... employees 'broadly feared' retaliation for filing misconduct complaints" To Story To Story "Judicial controlled the ... [investigation] contracts" To Story "What can you do with a redacted report? It was a setup from the start." To Story

Judge Laurie Booras To Story To Evaluation

Judge Ryan Kamada To Document Story Story Story

Hear from a Victim of a Judge's Sexual Harassment In August of 2022, a committee of the Colorado legislature was investigating the judiciary. The Colorado Coalition Against Sexual Assault (CCASA) presented written testimony from a young survivor of sexual harassment by a judge. Fearing retaliation, she remained anonymous. Her story of being victimized by the system after she reported being victimized by the judge explains why. You can read her testimony by following the link below: Her Testimony To News Story - Denver Gazette

Financial Disclosures Colorado judges, like other public office holders, are required to make annual public disclosures about their financial interests. This is to allow accountability on conflicts of interest. Failing to file these disclosures is a crime. In 2023, reporters revealed that large numbers of judges, maybe over 100, were not filing the required disclosures. The discipline commission started investigations of these reports and, as of the date of this writing, the public has heard nothing more. How is a voter to make an informed decision about a judge in this system? How to find a judge's financial disclosure: Follow this link to the Colorado Secretary of State's website - fill out this online form: https://www.coloradosos.gov/pubs/elections/CampaignFinance/requestCopy.html Story Judges the Gazette reported as failing to file. Is your judge on the list? Are you about to vote for a judge on the list? Has the judge faced any accountability for breaking the disclosure law? Did a legitimate investigation clear the judge of wrongdoing? To Story Story As this is written and an election approaches, we voters in Colorado have no idea ho w these investigations came out. Story Story Story "Two different district court judges - each with four years of missing disclosures ... - sit on judicial discipline commissions whose job it is to punish jurists for their misconduct." Denver Gazette, August 10, 2023 Story Story Story Story

How do we hold judges accountable? What mechanisms for accountability are available? Can we do a better job of holding our judges accountable? Perhaps a Request for Evaluation (RFE) made to the Colorado Commission on Judicial Discipline regarding judges' misconduct? Public scrutiny by investigative journalists and opinion columnists? The recent Masias Contract scandal (2019-2023) exposed Colorado's judicial system to scrutiny - and revealed flaws. Our haphazard efforts at accountability encountered dogged resistance from an entrenched bureaucracy that resisted. Colorado Supreme Court Justice Hart told an audience, "Hold us accountable." But are the judges being held accountable? As you read through the examples in press reports of cases that the judiciary obstructed, the victims that were re-victimized by the judiciary, those that lost their jobs or were threatened, ask yourself if you can find any reports of someone in the judiciary being held accountable for this obstruction or this abuse of regular people trying to do the right thing. At the same time, the scandal provided an opportunity to learn how our judicial administration operates and lessons for future scandals. Here is an analysis of accountability for this scandal and the investigation: "Preparing for the Next Scandal - Valuable insights from the 2019-2023 Judicial Corruption Scandal" Request for Evaluation (RFE) with the Colorado Commission on Judicial Conduct This is an example of an attempt to hold judges accountable by filing a formal Request for Evaluation (RFE) with the Colorado Commission on Judicial Conduct. As stated in the RFE, the allegations arise out of the Masias Contract Affair and resulting judical scandal of 2019-2023. The RFE is well-documented. Request for Evaluation 2024-10-20 Anonymous RFE 2024-10-20 Appendices to Anonymous RFE