Judge Julie Field (8th District Court/Larimer County Justice Center Courtroom 3A) threw me out of a public (custody) hearing because of something someone else did in the courtroom: They gasped when the judge ordered a grandfather to give his daughter and grandson’s address in open court. This was after the grandfather testified under oath that the “father” of his grandson had repeatedly threatened the life of his daughter and grandson. The judge ordered the man to answer the question and half a dozen people gasped in disbelief. “Officers! Clear the courtroom!” said Judge Field. Thankfully, despite a $25 per day contempt charge handed down by the judge the grandfather refused to supply the address.

If only that was the worst. The grandfather hadn’t even been subpoenaed and was forced out of the audience to testify by the petitioner’s attorney and judge. Then the judge refused ALL of the Respondents witnesses who had been properly served.

The judge also ordered the Respondent to give names of clients and how much they paid the Respondent in her line of work. (Respondent’s profession is that of Investigative Journalist). The Respondent successfully argued that she was bound by confidentiality and the Judge did relent on that one, but only after threatening the Respondent with Jail for contempt on that and the “address issue”. The Respondent finally wrote the coveted address on a piece of paper and handed it to the Judge. In my humble opinion, if ANYTHING happens to that Respondent, the JUDGE will be guilty as an accomplice, in reality even if she is protected “legally”. Then the JUDGE issued an order that the Respondent was not to leave Larimer County indefinitely, putting the Petitioner in a position of not being able to WORK, as her job regularly requires travel outside the county. The Respondent has never threatened in any way, shape or form that she would leave the county with her son. In fact she has emphatically stated that she intends to stay and fight for her son and against the unimaginable DISJUSTICE that Larimer County (where a prominent attorney has gone on record saying he charges double to work in that county due to pervasive corruption) has wrought against her and her son.

The case is question is 11DR444 in Larimer County (8th District) if you want to check it out. But good luck getting a transcript. One person was quoted $150 per page for a written transcript and denied an audio version. This is AFTER the Judge ordered all phones and recording devices turned off at the beginning of trial assuring any and all spectators they could easily obtain transcripts or the audio transcript. This was before she threw everyone out. However, its a good bet that there won’t be anything in the record about the four Larimer County Sheriff’s Deputies that “attended” the Respondent (intimidation under the Color of Law - hmmmmph!) whilst onlookers were forbidden access to the courtroom.**

Judge Julie Kunce Field. And she’s a mother herself. Go figure.

** - As a compare and contrast: I recently attended a sentencing hearing in Denver County Court. There were all manner of “lowlife” types there at that sentencing mill more than a dozen scruffy looking people (get over it). For the first hour there was one Denver Sheriff’s Deputy in the Courtroom. But in Larimer County they needed FOUR to guard a petite woman who I doubt weighs even 1 and a quarter.

I get a funny taste in my throat every single time I “say the pledge”. Especially that part about Liberty and Justice for All.

Can the executive simply refuse to comply?

If so, what recourse does the legislature have?

Is it appropriate for the legislature to go to the Supremes at this point?

What happens if the executive destroys the docs or refuses to obey the Supreme Court ruling, assuming they rule that the WH must turn over the documents?

If the WH stonewalls the SC and the Leg, is impeachment the last recourse?

Just wonderin’

I lived on Princeton Ave in Steamboat Springs across from a convicted drug dealer who was president of the city council.
http://www.exploresteamboat.com/news/2009/sep/30/candidates_divided_financing_issue/

I was criminally prosecuted because I complained that the Bennetts built extra buildings that violated the zoning. City and county officials tried to pass off a detached two story 2000 sq foot plus building with heating and plumbing that parked only two vehicles as a two car attached garage. They allowed a civilian Jane Bennett to sign a police summons and complaint that can only be signed by a police officer who actually witnesses a crime in progress. There was no crime in progress and she wasn’t a police officer. The police report shows only that I complained about zoning violations while I was standing on the street in front of my home and she was with 4 men at a distance. There was no warrant, no probable cause hearing, and no prosecutor’s signature. Jane Bennett claimed under oath that I went on her property and scared her construction workers but their testimony under oath was that they only saw me on my own property or coming and going and that they weren’t scared of me. The prosecutor violated state law by dismissing the prosecution without an oral hearing, which I requested. Then she issued a public statement that Jane Bennett was my victim but a trial was too expensive. The prosecutors’ husband was a real estate speculator and Bennett helped him get a permit for a new ski area which he tried to sell in the WSJ classified for $20 million, a big profit.

The Routt County judge James Garrecht issued a restraining order on me without a statutory basis. He claimed in court that he was doing it because there was a pending criminal prosecution and that it would go away when the criminal prosecution ended but then he refused to take it away. Jane Bennett followed me around town asking the police to arrest me whenever she could get near me. She filed a police report saying that she followed me trying to take my picture to prove I was near her and therefore I should be arrested. Her lawyer Randall Klauzer agreed with Judge Garrecht that I molested Jane Bennett even though she stated under penalty of perjury that there was no offensive touching, I hadn’t been following her around town, and it had been years since I had called her.

I was also forced to give up my rights to Princeton Ave, as an adjoining property owner, and to sell the Bennetts’ land for $1 under threat of criminal prosecution in municipal court, with the judge reporting to the city council, because my employee trimmed without a trimming permit, even though the city never ever issued a trimming permit to anyone and didn’t have a trimming permit form. The assistant city attorney sent threatening letters.

I complained to OARC about these events and they thought the lawyers acted perfectly fine.

The Denver Post reports that District Judge Robert Hyatt tossed
the lawsuit Wednesday before it could go to trial. He disagreed
with the argument that a law cutting the increases nullifies the
contract with the Colorado Public Employees Retirement Association.

Wyatt ruled the retirees have a contractual right to their
pension, but not to a specific formula for cost-of-living raises.
Last year, the Legislature passed a bill aimed at ensuring the
pension fund’s long-term solvency by reducing the increases,
expected to be 3.5 percent last year. Budget officials had warned
that without changes, the plan would go broke in 20 years.
The pension programs covers more than 400,000 public employees.

http://www.denverpost.com/breakingnews/ci_18380410

Clear the Bench Colorado, should be advocating an Amendment to the State Constitution that gives the Citizens of Colorado a real choice, and that is simply electing the people we want as judges, or continue under a Judicial Dictatorship.