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

Cases & Controversies Finding: Sexual Harasser Sexual Assault Colorado's merit selection system has faced a series of public controversies and scandals surrounding its operation. Some have questioned the system's ability to cope with allegations of judicial misconduct, obstruction, and undue influence. Most cases remain wrapped in secrecy, but a limited number of examples make it into the public discussion. Here are some of those. These provide insights and generate questions that could be useful to anyone concerned with assuring Colorado's judicial system is free from misconduct and corruption. This collection of "cases and controversies" is presented to illustrate how Colorado's system of judicial selection, retention, and discipline operates. Masias Contract Affair Tim Masters Incident Unknown Judge Judge Grant Sullivan Unidentified Judges Judge Natalie Chase Judge Ross Buchanan Judge Mark Thompson Judge Ryan Kamada Judge John Scipione Judge Debra Gunkel Judge Robert A. Rand Judge Brett Woods Judge Robert Kiesnowski Judge Jonathan Walker Judge Anne Woods Unnamed Judge - Private Discipline Judge Andrew Armatas Justices of Colo. Sup. Court Justices Gabriel & Hart Justice Richard Gabriel Judge Laurie Booras Chief Justice Brian Boatright Judge Peter Michaelson Judge Lance Timbreza

As chairman of a special legislative committee, Sen. Pete Lee was actively calling for major judicial reforms due to the Masias Contract Scandal. Follow the news stories. See how this judicial reformer was silenced by false evidence from an office of the Colorado Supreme Court . . . and no one has yet been held accountable . To Story To Story To Story To Story To Story To Story To Story

Judge Mark D. Thompson Chief Judge Thompson had trouble controlling his temper. He pulled an assault rifle on a family member. When the incident made the media, the Judicial Department suspended the Chief Judge. To prove his repentance, Judge Thompson victimized lawyers in his courtroom as soon as he got back, wielding his authority instead of a rifle. To Story To Story To Story To Story To Story To Story Recommended for retention by the voters To Evaluation

Opinions and Reforms The scandals within the Colorado Judicial Department sparked extensive commentary by many thought leaders. Here are links to representative samples: Opinion Samples These scandals also generated many proposals for reform. Follow this link to see a sample of those proposals: Reform Proposals The scandals also prompted constitutional battles in the Colorado legislature. In turn, these resulted in proposed legislative reforms. These will be presented to Colorado voters in 2024. Here are those proposals and their background stories. Legislative Story

Amendment H was placed on the 2024 ballot by the state General Assembly. It was an integral part of a package to reform Colorado's judicial discipline system. The legislation arose out of a judicial corruptiuon scandal which took place between 2019 and 2023. Some reforms were implemented by way of amendments to state stautes. Other fixes required changes to the Colorado Constitution. While still other reforms are being made by changes to the Rule for the Colorado Commission foe Judicial Discipline. Here is what was changed by Amendment H. Proposition H passed overwhelmingly at the November 4, 2024 general election. 73% voters voted in favor of passage and amended Colorado Constitution, Art. VI, Sect. 23 amended process by which judges may be disciplined and removed. Prop. H required re-writing of the rules for Colo. Comm. on Judicial Discipline. Changes are currently being made to the rules governing how judges are disciplined. We have a section below regarding the Rulemaking Committee and its progress. Amendment H - Official analysis Amendment H - Text Amend H Amendment H Prop. H required re-writing of the Rules of the Colo. Comm. on Judicial Discipline. March 19, 2025 a rulemaking committee was established and announced the beginning of its rulemaking process. On July 29, 2025 the Rulemaking Committee announced the first of its amended and new rules, i.e. Rules 3.6 (establishing a Code of Conduct for Adjudicative Board Members, 34 regarding Temporary Suspension),and 37(e) (regarding with Stipulated Resolution of Formal Proceedings). On September 10, 2025 the Rulemaking Committee announced interim Rules 35 (Resolution of Informal Proceedings or Other Actions) and 36 (Resolution of Formal Proceedings) As is customary with the rulemaking process, notice was given that the committee would accept comments from the public about the proposed rule changes. As of the October 3, 2025 hearing on public comments the committee had received comments from at least two individuals. One comment came from David Dean Smith. Available at this link: Another series of comments came from Christopher S.P. Gregory, Esq. Mr. Gregory’s comments, although received by the committee do not appear to have been included in the written record. They are available below: His comments also relate to a Request for Evaluation he has previously made to the Colorado Commission on Judicial Discipline. Mr. Gregory is an attorney who formerly served as Executive Director of the Colorado Commission on Judicial Discipline. Mr. Gregory’s comments consist of a series of objections and requests. He states that the composition of the rulemaking committee itself is merely a perpetuation of a 6-year pattern of corruption within the Colorado Judicial Department which produced the Masias Contract Affair and Judicial Scandal of 2019-2023. Specifically he calls for: the formation of a conflict-free special adjudicative special tribunal; an independent investigation by a special assistant attorney general; a legislative referral to conflict-free counsel; the dissolution the current rulemaking committee; and, that there be a comprehensive revision of the Rules for the Colorado Commission on Judicial Discipline. Comment of David Dean Smith Link to Rulemaking Committee CCJD New Judicial Discipline Rule-Making Committee Forms Comment by Gregory 2025-08-25 Comment by Gregory 2025-09-12 Comment by Gregory 2025-09-12a Rulemaking Committee Links to Public Comments on Rules Colorado media outlets urged voters to vote YES in favor of Amendment H. Link to Editorial Link to Guest Opinion Link to Editorial Link to Endorsement Link to Endorsement Link to Denver Post story

The "Toxic" Culture Depended on Non-disclosure Agreements and Payoffs at the Colorado Judiciary Both the RCT and ILG investigation reports described at length the toxic culture at the Colorado judiciary and how employees were bullied and bribed into silence about misconduct. Press interviews add to the picture of a culture that condones misconduct by silencing complainants at every turn. Read about it below. The RCT report describes the Judicial Department's practice of silencing complainants at pages 38-40. RCT Report The ILG report describes the Judicial Department's workplace culture, at pages 76 et seq. ILG Report Story Story *But note that the State Auditor and RCT reports revealed that the Judicial Department manipulated its accounting so that payments would not be shown. To Story RCT's Report

Merit Selection System Theory & Practice In the 1960's, Colorado citizens amended the state constitution to do away with political elections as the system for selecting our judges and holding them accountable to the rule of law. We replaced elections with the "Merit Selection System," also known as the Missouri Plan. Our Merit Selection System has three components of accountability for judges, the Nomination Commissions, the Performance Commissions, and the Discipline Commission. Sixty years later, the question for Colorado citizens is how well our system of accountability for judges is working. We want a system that gives Colorado excellent judges. Nominating Commissions Start Now Performance Commissions Start Now Discipline Commission Start Now