Justice Gabriel and the "appalling" treatment of his accuser To Story It is difficult to share the complicated facts regarding the allegations made against Justice Gabriel. But, the surrounding circumstances raise legitimate questions. In the Masias-Brown Memo, the Justice was alleged to have used his influence to suppress harassment allegations made against him. Today, even the record of contemporaneous news reporting of the story is hard to locate. In this section, we provide the pieces that are still available. You decide if the way this allegation was handled supports or undermines the Memo's claim that the allegation was suppressed to protect the Justice. We start with the allegation made in the Memo's third bullet point: Link to news reporting about the Memo Full Text of Memo The allegation is that Masias, one of the authors of the Memo and former director of human resources for the Judicial Department, suppressed a misconduct allegation against Judge Gabriel to keep his Supreme Court application clean. Allegedly, Masias did this by silencing the accuser and paying her for a non-disclosure agreement The story broke identifying Justice Gabriel as the judge accused in the Memo on February 26, 2021. But that news report from the Denver Post seems to have been removed - and is now very hard to find. But, here is a link to the story -- as long as it lasts. To Story While it Lasts In 2023, the Judicial Department's lawyers (Investigations Law Group) declared that the allegations against Justice Gabriel were "unfounded." The Denver Post removed the original story about the alleged suppression and replaced it with a statement. Statement by Denver Post But was the allegation that Masias suppressed the misconduct claim to protect Justice Gabriel invalidated by the lawyer's report? ILG Report Link to ILG Report Important to Realize While the ILG investigators were selected by an independent panel, nonetheless, they were retained, paid, and controlled by the Judiciary . ILG did not interview the law clerk who accused Justice Gabriel. Neither did ILG interview Mindy Masias, the person who alleged that she suppressed the complaint. ILG approached both of them, but neither talked to ILG. The judicial department had paid each of them for agreements to remain silent. Masias, as director of Human Resources, received the harassment accusation on September 12th. HR immediately interviewed the accuser and a co-clerk. ILG Report, Page 21. Masias waited until September 15th to interview the judge. As a result, the interview was after the judge submitted his application for the Supreme Court on September 13th. ILG Report, Page 22. The interview of the accuser was recorded. The interview of the judge was not. ILG only had the judge's account of what was said. ILG Report, Page 21. Immediately after her accusation interview on September 12th, the accuser was sent home on "administrative leave" ILG Report, Page 21. Timeline of Judge's Application for Supreme Court vacancy Application Process Accuser sent away on admin leave On return, Accuser demoted, appalling treatment, signed to NDA Accuser's Experience Timeline No one could explain to ILG investigators why the accuser was placed on administrative leave. ILG Report, Page 21. The accuser was not brought back to work at the court from administrative leave until "a day or two" after the accused judge had completed the Supreme Court application process and been interviewed for the position. ILG Report, Page 22. After being allowed to return from administrative leave, the accuser was "penalized by putting her off in a corner." ILG Report, Page 23. The Judicial Branch's lawyer said she was "appalled" by the treatment of Justice Gabriel's accuser and called it "traumatizing." ILG Report, Page 23. The accuser would later assert she was the victim of retaliation. The Judicial Branch would settle this claim with the accuser. ILG Report, Page 22-23. The accuser would be paid for the rest of her term but not be required to work. As part of the deal, the Judicial Department required she sign a non-disclosure agreement. ILG Report, Pages 23-24. When interviewed by ILG, Justice Gabriel reportedly claimed that Masias had told him a few days into the accuser's administrative leave that she withdrew her accusations. ILG Report, Page 21. Bound by non-disclosure agreements, neither the accuser nor Masias is available to confirm (or deny) Justice Gabriel's version of events. The 2021 report by the Denver Post , has now been removed from parts of the internet. The body responsible for selecting nominees to fill Supreme Court vacancies never learned of the accusation Justice Gabriel was not successful in his first Supreme Court application, but he was appointed to a later vacancy. Was the Memo's original claim of covering this up to protect the judge "unfounded"?

Preparing for the Next Scandal: Valuable Insights from the 2019-2023 Judicial Corruption Scandal in Colorado. ColoradoJudges.org. Coverup allegations Supreme Court Boatright Our Content This website is a gathering point for information and materials from past judicial scandals - and suggestions for how to mitigate and prevent them in the future. Colorado has approximately 350 state court judges at any one time. Our collection of "cases & controversies" relates to a small, but important, segment of those judges. Our goal is to facilitate your access to the professional journalism available about your Colorado judges. Colorado has a strong tradition of a robust press corps that holds the powerful to account. We have superb media outlets like The Denver Post, The Denver Gazette, The Colorado Sun and Colorado Politics staffed by skilled professionals like David Migoya, Shelly Bradbury, and Michael Karlik who specialize in understanding and covering our judicial system. However, once a story runs, it can be hard to find unless you already know what you are looking for. We also have extensive legislative reports with important information that would otherwise gather dust in obscure archives. ColoradoJudges.org brings these well-researched and sourced materials together in one place that is easily accessible to members of the public. We include links to the stories cited through their original sources. As a result, you may sometimes have to access the original through a paywall. Who We Are ColoradoJudges.org does not solicit or accept funds or advertising. The curator and webmaster for ColoradoJudges.org is Alan Higbie. Email contact : info.colojudges.org@gmail.com He is a retired trial lawyer who practiced for 42 years in Colorado and Alaska. He served for 8 years on a local Colorado judicial performance commission, during which time he became familiar with the merit selection and retention process. The Masias Contract Scandal caught his attention. As he peeled back one layer after another, it, unfortunately, looked more and more as if the administration of our judicial system was corrupt. Alan Higbie is the author of "Preparing for the Next Scandal: Valuable Insights from the 2019-2023 Judicial Corruption Scandal." He took a special interest in the circumstances surrounding the flawed indictment of his former state legislator, Sen. Pete Lee. "Preparing for the Next Scandal - Valuable insights from the 2019-2023 Judicial Corruption Scandal" About ColoradoJudges.org Quality news about judges. Where you want it. When you want it. At ColoradoJudges.org, we believe transparent access to information about our court system is crucial to preserving the rule of law in a democracy. We are dedicated to helping the public access trustworthy and valuable information that can help you understand the legal system and make informed decisions. Be sure to see our Recent Developments page to Recent Developments