top of page

The Masias Contract Affair

Mindy Masias was a high-ranking administrator in the Colorado judicial branch. She was terminated for financial misdealings and then given a two-million-dollar no-bid contract.

The judicial department's top administrator would later allege the contract was part of an effort to cover up allegations of judicial misconduct.

Years of investigations would follow. The Colorado Supreme Court would repeatedly be accused of obstructing them and would launch its own.  Some allegations would be confirmed. The judicial department's investigators would argue that some were unfounded.

After everything was said and done, the Masias contract was clearly improper but the investigations left responsibility for it muddy. The final result also seemed to confirm widespread and continuing efforts by the judicial branch to cover up allegations of misconduct that are made against judges.

Man in a Field

2019

Screenshot 2024-03-10 092659.png

"The seven Supreme Court Justices, including Chief Justice Coats, approved of Masias' contract, as well as its cancellation"

"[Controller Dukes resigned] out of disgust for this whole thing."

Screenshot 2024-03-10 131824.png

The investigation would start in July 2019, but the Justices and their lawyers would withhold the infamous Memo until February 2021 when the Denver Post first revealed its existence to the public.

Man in a Field

2020

Screenshot 2024-03-10 102542.png

The Masias contract "degrades the public trust" and "gives the appearance of impropriety and appears to be a violation of the Judicial Code of Conduct."

Man in a Field

The Auditor reached these 2020 conclusions without the Judiciary revealing the existence of the now infamous Memo, which had been known to the justices since 2019

Nine judicial department employees received buyouts totaling $518,000.

Screenshot 2024-03-10 104535.png
Screenshot 2024-03-10 104433.png
Man in a Field

2021

Screenshot 2024-03-10 112035.png

"Any other person present ... isn't talking.
Two have non-disclosure agreements"

Ethics Rule 2.10

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

As a result of this apparent violation of judicial ethics, an ethics complaint was filed.  

 

​

Eventually, the complaint was dismissed without a hearing.

Colorado Supreme Court Justices publicly stated at the outset of the investigation into the Masias Contract Affair:

"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."

Screenshot 2024-03-02 092744.png
Screenshot 2024-03-10 121504.png

"The Judicial Department has refused to release the memo [listing examples of alleged coverups]"

Screenshot 2024-03-02 092744.png
Screenshot 2024-03-10 144034.png

"Destruction of evidence, payoffs to keep harassment victims silent and repeated efforts to simply look the other way ... permeated ... Judicial ... for years."

Man in a Field

By the time the Justices decided to release the Memo to investigators in 2021, the Justices had been keeping it secret from investigators for about 1.5 years.

Screenshot 2024-03-10 145226.png

"These allegations must be investigated in full view of the public until trust in our judiciary is no longer in question," stated State Senate and House leaders

Screenshot 2024-03-02 092744.png
Screenshot 2024-03-10 150626.png
Screenshot 2024-03-10 150739.png

"If you didn't have these whistle-blowers and ... press ...,
where might this have landed?"                        

                                                                                 - quoting State Senate President Garcia

Man in a Field

"We [the Colorado Bar Association] urge the Colorado Judicial Department to be fully transparent and to take the necessary steps to redress these issues promptly, in order to maintain the public's faith in the administration of justice in Colorado."

February 11, 2021

Screenshot 2024-03-02 092744.png
Screenshot 2024-03-10 153406.png
Screenshot 2024-03-10 153546.png

One of these lawyers fighting to keep the secrets of the Memo would later be put on the court of appeals through a committee chaired by the Chief Justice, his client.

Screenshot 2024-03-10 160049.png

"The memo paints a picture of a broken system. Judges ... operated with impunity - which is rich coming from those we trust with doling out justice.
...
The memo itself was secret for almost two years."

Screenshot 2024-03-10 162742.png
Screenshot 2024-03-10 162447.png

"The [discipline commission] says it was in the dark about the claims of ... misbehavior and harassment from judges going ... uninvestigated."

Screenshot 2024-03-11 150806.png
Screenshot 2024-03-11 150920.png

But, once selected, the investigators would be directed and controlled by the Justices.

Screenshot 2024-03-11 155659.png

Later, behind closed doors, the Justices would overrule the committee and restrict the investigators, barring examination of some critical topics.

Man in a Field

The Constitution of Colorado assigns investigation of judge misconduct complaints to the Discipline Commission.

By assigning their own lawyers to investigate the allegations, the Justices replaced the Constitutional process with investigators they would control. 

Reporting over the coming years would reveal that, at the same time, the Justices and their people were blocking the Constitutional investigators.

Screenshot 2024-03-13 154124.png
Screenshot 2024-03-13 154137.png

"the most important question is ... whether the public can trust that the Judicial Department is taking this problem seriously"

Man in a Field

2022

"This ... is an epic clash ... a critical showdown of Constitutional authority."

Screenshot 2024-03-25 083349.png

Investigators agree goal of the contract was
to "keep Mindy happy"

Screenshot 2024-03-25 111129.png

"Judicial was in full control of the investigations."

Man in a Field

2023

Chief Justice Nathan "Ben" Coats was Publicly Censured for his Role in the Masias Contract Affair.

Read the details here: 

Shortly after the recommendation to publicly censure the former chief justice, the membership of the Discipline Commission was changed.

bottom of page