Comments on: Applicants for Colorado Supreme Court vacancy down to final 3: Marquez, Prince, Russel are potential picks to replace Mullarkey http://www.clearthebenchcolorado.org/2010/08/26/applicants-for-colorado-supreme-court-vacancy-down-to-final-3-marquez-prince-russel-are-potential-picks-to-replace-mullarkey/ Returning accountability to our judicial system... Mon, 21 May 2012 22:38:23 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.7.1 hourly 1 By: CTBC Director http://www.clearthebenchcolorado.org/2010/08/26/applicants-for-colorado-supreme-court-vacancy-down-to-final-3-marquez-prince-russel-are-potential-picks-to-replace-mullarkey/comment-page-1/#comment-9348 CTBC Director Sun, 05 Sep 2010 03:22:56 +0000 http://www.clearthebenchcolorado.org/?p=6401#comment-9348 Actually, I don't think that the Supreme Court Nominating Commission interviewed all 31 applicants - but, since the commission refuses to share even the most basic information about the number of applicants interviewed, the questions asked, the nature of the responses, or any discussion on the applicants/interviewees - we'll never know. The lack of transparency and accountability in the process is one of the fatal flaws of the system, and undermines the confidence of citizens in the courts... Actually, I don’t think that the Supreme Court Nominating Commission interviewed all 31 applicants - but, since the commission refuses to share even the most basic information about the number of applicants interviewed, the questions asked, the nature of the responses, or any discussion on the applicants/interviewees - we’ll never know.

The lack of transparency and accountability in the process is one of the fatal flaws of the system, and undermines the confidence of citizens in the courts…

]]> By: Mark Sievers http://www.clearthebenchcolorado.org/2010/08/26/applicants-for-colorado-supreme-court-vacancy-down-to-final-3-marquez-prince-russel-are-potential-picks-to-replace-mullarkey/comment-page-1/#comment-9334 Mark Sievers Sat, 04 Sep 2010 21:19:46 +0000 http://www.clearthebenchcolorado.org/?p=6401#comment-9334 Consider what the numbers reveal. If there were 31 applicants and the Judicial Nominating Committee interviewed them for 10 hours a day for 2 days, that translates into interviews that are only 38 minutes long --assuming: (1) the Committee takes no meal or bathroom breaks; and (2) the Committee does not discuss the merits of any applicant. Let's say the Nominating Committee works 12 hours a day for 2 days, no time allocated for bathroom, meals or discussion. That's a 45 minute interview per applicant. There are 15 members of the Supreme Court Nominating Commission. If each Commission member asks a question, that means 2-3 minutes per applicant per member. Hopefully, the Commission members have read the applications, letters of recommendation and comments from the public BEFORE the interviews. Consider what the numbers reveal.

If there were 31 applicants and the Judicial Nominating Committee interviewed them for 10 hours a day for 2 days, that translates into interviews that are only 38 minutes long –assuming: (1) the Committee takes no meal or bathroom breaks; and (2) the Committee does not discuss the merits of any applicant.

Let’s say the Nominating Committee works 12 hours a day for 2 days, no time allocated for bathroom, meals or discussion. That’s a 45 minute interview per applicant.

There are 15 members of the Supreme Court Nominating Commission. If each Commission member asks a question, that means 2-3 minutes per applicant per member. Hopefully, the Commission members have read the applications, letters of recommendation and comments from the public BEFORE the interviews.

]]>