athena mishelle roe, j.d. 1729 alamo avenue … alamo avenue colorado springs, co 80907 ... wire...
TRANSCRIPT
ATHENA MISHELLE ROE, J.D. 1729 ALAMO AVENUE
COLORADO SPRINGS, CO 80907 (719) 471-2737
[email protected] October 15, 2015 TO: Colorado Supreme Court c/o [email protected]; [email protected] RE: Colorado Rules of Professional Conduct Madam Chief Justice Rice and Esteemed and Honorable Justices of the Supreme Court: The following summary provides the Colorado Supreme Court with numerous public policy concerns regarding Attorney Regulation and Colorado Rules of Professional Conduct. My name is Athena Roe and I graduated from the University of Denver Sturm College of Law in 2007. I have authored jury instructions for Judge David Miller, worked as editor on the Transportation Law Journal, and currently work as a Consumer Advocate with families being destroyed by legal abuse. I know the Rules of Professional Conduct and can say that it is a travesty Attorney Regulation is not sanctioning bad lawyers or enforcing the Rules. My husband was Dr. Christopher Norman Tulin "Chris" a brilliant Texas Heart Institute Cardiologist who committed suicide as a result of bad attorneys. The case involved four Colorado Springs, Colorado attorneys who misrepresented facts and law to the Court and assisted in the conspiracy to commit and the commission of wire fraud. Chris was going to a Qui Tam law firm in New York to whistle blow the fraud. This is a very terse summary. After 18 months of intimidation, financial ruin, and legal abuse; Chris filed a "Grievance" with Attorney Regulation on July 14, 2013. (Exhibit 1 attached hereto) Attorney Regulation responded with a meaningless boiler plate letter saying that they could find no wrong doing. As our lives were destroyed by attorneys who breached federal and state laws and violated at least five rules of professional conduct, including their "oath of honesty" "candor to the tribunal" "conspiracy to commit wire fraud" "Medicare fraud" "wire fraud" and not to "delay or drag out litigation unnecessarily to churn fees" we had exhausted all avenues except more litigation to sue the attorneys. This abomination resulted in my husband committing suicide on July 22, 2013. Had Attorney Regulation sanctioned the perpetrators, and investigated the abuse and unethical conduct by these attorneys, my husband would be alive today. In summary, it will make little difference to change any rule if Attorney Regulation is doing nothing to help the citizens of the state keep bad lawyers from harming the public. Thank you. Respectfully submitted this 15th day of October, 2015. /s/Athena Mishelle Roe, J.D.
Madam Chief Justice Rice and members of the Colorado Supreme Court: Although the Colorado Rules of Professional Conduct set forth the substantive basis for attorney discipline, even mandatory ethics provisions remain notoriously underenforced. Professor David Luban, of Georgetown University Law Center, observed that, “given the current state of under‐enforcement, if one were to give realistic advice to aspiring lawyers about how to avoid attorney discipline, it would be this: "If you don't steal your clients' money, neglect their affairs, get convicted of a felony, engage in substance abuse, or get caught lying to a court, you have little to fear from the disciplinary system." 1 Out of 35,000 complaints that have been submitted, very few have resulted in any admonishment or sanction. In 2009, my complaint was one of them. I filed a complaint to the Office of Attorney Regulations that explained in great detail the unethical and scrupulous behavior of an attorney involved in my case and described the damages I suffered because of his actions. I was strongly encouraged to file my complaint by other attorneys who understood the situation. Within a few days of my filing, I was summarily dismissed and was told my complaint lacked merit. I believe my complaint was discarded because a concerned a very high‐powered Denver attorney and not because it lacked merit. In the past four years, my mother’s estate has been involved in probate court. The court assigned officials, including the Guardian, the Guardian ad litem and the conservator, who was also appointed trustee of my mother’s trust, all took adversarial positions toward me because I was defending my mother’ rights. She was taken from her home, and placed in a nursing home through social services. From the day she entered the home until the day she died, my mother was denied the right to thrive. She was immediately put under chemical restraints and was always barely coherent. She was denied proper nutrition, adequate water, and forced to eat her food from a drawer, her clothing always went missing and her room was unsanitary. When I objected to the improper treatment she was forced to endure, my mother was repaid with a blow to her for head with a blunt object, and was served with restraining order was ordered against me. Nearly all the petitions and motions that my attorneys filed on my behalf in efforts to countermeasure the injustices that were made against me, my petitions and motions were denied by the court. My rights were denied and my good character and name was destroyed. Through an agreement with my mother, a valid lease, and a family partnership, I had been operating a business on the Family/Trust property, since 1995, and for which I had paid my mother $1.4 million, which I was to inherit upon her death. The judges and attorneys, who were appointed as court officials, removed me as Trustee, invalidated the lease between my business and the family partnership, and evicted me from the property. They further willfully deprived me of my rights as sole beneficiary of my mother’s trust. After she died in May, 2013, I, through my attorneys, offered to pay the debt of my mother’s estate. Instead, the trustee gave me the cold‐shoulder and listed the trust property for sale. I made three serious offers to purchase the property, and again, the trustee and the court ignored my offers and sold the property to a business competitor. As a result, the real estate of my living trust is now landlocked, my business has suffered loss, and for the past two years, I have been forced to live without potable water. I believe the endless litigation against me and actions of the court appointed officials were a contrived effort to spend‐down my
1 See David Luban, Ethics and Malpractice, 12 MIss. C. L. REV. 151, 152 (1991) (making the "routine observation that the codes are drastically underenforced").
mother’s estate through their legal fees. I further believe that I faced retribution by the judges for my defense of my mother, my business and myself. When judges turn blind eyes to unethical conduct by court officials they are condoning it and the rules governing the conduct of court officials become meaningless. Judicial oversight is unconvincing and superficial, at best. The citizens of Colorado are not well served by the current Judicial Performance Commission process. Too often, judges are given “rubberstamp” approval unless charges of criminal or flagrantly unethical behavior are proved. The ethics rules are often at best aspirational and send the message that the self‐interested court appointed lawyer and court official faces minimal‐if any‐actual risk when disregarding ethics codes and their underlying principles.
1
ryan, christopher
From: Lulu Fleming <[email protected]>Sent: Thursday, October 15, 2015 1:58 PMTo: ryan, christopher; stevens, cherylSubject: Comments concerning Court's request for suggested Professional Conduct Rule Changes
Colorado Supreme Court c/o Mr. Christopher Ryan, Head Clerk October 15, 2015 RE: Comments concerning Court's request for suggested Professional Conduct Rule Changes
Madam Chief Justice Rice and members of the Colorado Supreme Court:
I don't believe it makes any difference what rules are put in place governing attorney conduct as long as Judges tacitly endorse unethical conduct by court officials, and meaningful oversight is nonexistent in the judicial review process.
Individuals who feel victimized in Court proceedings discover they have no real recourse, and face serious repercussions and malicious retribution for any effort to pursue a just outcome in any other way. I am familiar with several families who have been denied further contact with family members under Court supervision by unscrupulous Guardians, threatened or served with specious, baseless restraining orders, exorbitant contempt of court citations, seen family members neglected and abused by institutions holding them, and been forced to have no contact with family members in custodial "care" who are systematically drugged, deprived of food, water, medical care and basic human rights, sometimes showing clear evidence of physical abuse, ultimately culminating in death, all while attorneys appointed as Court officials use the resources taken under color of law from those families to pursue court actions against them, should those families seek redress of grievances in Court.
Given these circumstances, and numerous families who have sought redress by filing complaints through the Office of Attorney Regulation and Judicial Discipline Commission, only to discover those complaints go ignored, or summarily rebuffed have convinced me Attorney Rules of Professional Conduct is, as presently enforced, merely a sham behind which hides widespread institutional corruption. Out of 35,000 complaints submitted, only very few result in any reprimand, or sanction, and the Judicial Performance Commission process, which excludes input from every pro se litigant I have met, appears biased and rigged to reward those who are hand picked according to guidelines designed to exclude a majority (51%), the pro se litigants.
Meanwhile, the Judiciary writes rules excluding themselves from C.O.R.A. and further obscuring from public view the mechanisms governing their behavior, and sandwiches public comment with shills from their own team to make it appear they act justly and with due deliberation, changes the dates for public comments capriciously, inconveniencing those who do wish to comment, and the individual responsible to whom those comments are to be addressed is out of the office on the last day those comments may be submitted.
Respectfully submitted this 15th day of October, 2015, Luanne Fleming and Robin Austin 18901 East Hawaii Drive, Aurora CO, 80017 [email protected] 303‐204‐1333
1
ryan, christopher
From: Lulu Fleming <[email protected]>Sent: Thursday, October 15, 2015 11:30 AMTo: stevens, cheryl; ryan, christopherSubject: Complaints for Attorney Regulations due Oct 15, 2015
Official Complaint due October 15, 2015 Attorney Regulations. Please except this complaint for Vivian Delgado. The deadline was moved by 5 days. Introduction: It appears sending in complaints to attorney regulations does no good. I first came involved with Denver Probate in 2008 following the death of my father Jimmie Delgado. I had no idea it would change my life, my family and my perception about Justice in the United States. I am very fearful of the direction our country has taken in their administration of state courts where it seems anything goes, where no one is responsible and where control has no place. I have been witness to fictitious paper work, a doctor's diagnosis, fake POA's, hearings, petitions, and court orders that were repetitious, set personal agendas and were promoting lies (about who I am) and legal expenses all for the benefit of the PR Frank Baysore and his attorney Spencer Crona. I was never given any respect nor was Jimmie Delgado's Will. I never had time to grieve either parent's death because of the forceful nature of numerous court officials, lawyers, etc. and more specifically the latest PR and his attorney that was allowed by the Court. I am in support of the other families who have suffered emotionally from their family loss, and pray for their emotional, mental, physical and spiritual well being. I like everyone else also pray that the powers that be hear our concerns and help us make sense of how we were all financially used to make greedy Court officials wealthier in insatiable thirst for money at any human expense. Vivian Delgado, daughter of Jimmie and Alice Delgado, Victims of Denver Probate Court In my brief legal complaints for Assistant Regulations Counsel, Colorado Supreme Court "Luain T. Hensel." Vivian Delgado Dear All, Here is my succinct response: In 2008-2009 I wrote a complaint letter to Luain T Hensel, Office of the Attorney Regulations regarding Aaron Evans an attorney from the Benson and Case Law Firm of Denver who was found triple dipping from the Estate of Jimmie Delgado 08PR673 and from the Conservatorship of Alice Delgado 08PR1009 now identified as Case # 2011PR837/Denver Probate. Ms. Hensel determined that since the Court of Jean Stewart had approved of paying Aaron Evans before the OAR could rule on the complaint that there was nothing she could do (paraphrase). In 2009 I wrote a complaint letter to Luain Hensel, Office of the Attorney Regulations regarding John Licht, City and County of Denver appointed attorney of Denver for Alice Delgado who made "racist" remarks and was prejudice and biased in his work for Alice Delgado 08PR1009 and towards me-Vivian Delgado. He remained a paid attorney even after my mother was placed in assisted living and was represented by Frank Baysore PR, Linda Cole Guardian and Spencer Crona, attorney for Frank Baysore. Ms. Hensel determined from John Licht's response to my complaint that no law had been broken and there was nothing she could do. In 2011-2014 I wrote a letter of complaint to Luain Hensel, Office of the Attorney Regulations regarding Spencer Crona's unwavering attempts to make money from alleged sibling rivalry, mal-feasance, and breach of fiduciary duty on my part-Vivian Delgado. His efforts were supported by Tamera Palmer, my former attorney from Arapaho County, and Judge Leopold from JAMS of Denver. Ms. Hensel determined that Spencer Crona (or any attorney) will continue to collect as long as the Court/Judge allows him to.
2
In 2015 I wrote a letter to the U.S. Department of Justice, Washington DC 20503, with all of these complaints in one packet. At that time this probate was still open and I wanted to address the "predatory" intent of the court appointed officials (see attached). The response from the US Department of Justice, Civil Rights Division (letter received Saturday 10-10-15) states: " Dear Ms Delgado: This is in reply to your correspondence to the Department. We apologize for the delay of this response. The matter you mentioned in your letter is one within the jurisdiction of the courts or the state. This Department has no authority to take any action on this matter. Sincerely, Correspondence Unit, Civil Rights Division. I have "all" of the paper work of the courts, etc. beginning with the death of Jimmie Delgado, 05-06-08. Respectfully Submitted, Vivian Delgado 303-907-1267
1
ryan, christopher
Subject: FW: Probate 10PR10, 10PR09 RE: Judicial comments.....deadline
From: scott McDonald [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Thursday, October 15, 2015 4:26 PM To: ryan, christopher <[email protected]> Subject: Probate 10PR10, 10PR09 RE: Judicial comments.....deadline Not in the office? With whom am I speaking? We would like to submit a protest concerning Joyce K. Murray Probate Case, Pitkin county 10PR10: consolidated from 10PR09, Colorado's 9th district Judicial District denied us for four years ICCLES acess. We witnessed a biased self serving manipulating legal community thats purpose was commercial driven. THE BAR and it's Judicial Guild should have this case reviewed before the public. This severely mentally ill 80 year old woman, our mother, under supposed Probate Protection was literally manipulated and kidnapped from family, drugged and under "undue influence" never again excaped being drugged in a locked facility, she had no voice, her family had no voice for her needs! She was shamelessly manipulated by all her "on the spot attorneys" these strangers that turned a DHS pending criminal charge probate court into an adversarial court against her and her only family. The court's attorney then focused on family this by vilifying and removing the son,. The CONCERNED son, friends and family that had asked a year earlier formally, to pitkin county DHS ask to intervene for a "Person at risk to herself and others". If you read the case you will see a manipulated elder, suffering from short term memory loss being manipulated by lawyers (strangers), in their interest to make "rent"into a miserable locked up, drug induce death spiral. The crime ( a filed criminal neglegence case with Pitkin's D.A.)all these lawyers used our mother's HIPAA rights for themselves against her and her family's best interest for needed medical intervention. Family was thrust asside with out recourse to save their mother's rights for prophylactic heart care "GET A LAWYER" was what we heard at every turn. Our mothers estate was abused and depleated, yet in the end after death, as the only heir Scott McDonald now has access to medical records that could have save her life, how duplicitous of Colorado law and it was all for money with no empathy shown for an abused sick mentally ill elder. Sincerely Caroline and Scott McDonald, 4666 McKinney Ct. Park City, Ut 84098 503 705 9736.....please ask us for Pitkin County, P.C. sherriff and P.C. DHS 2009 records on Murray that are directly associated with bring 10PR09 to court. From my Android phone on T-Mobile. The first nationwide 4G network.
-------- Original message -------- From: "ryan, christopher" Date:10/15/2015 10:54 AM (GMT-07:00) To: scott McDonald Subject: Re: Judicial comments.....deadline
There does not appear to be any message or attachment included in your email. Sent from my iPhone On Oct 15, 2015, at 11:57 AM, scott McDonald <[email protected]> wrote:
1
ryan, christopher
From: bigreddawg01 <[email protected]>Sent: Thursday, October 15, 2015 4:53 PMTo: stevens, cheryl; [email protected]: Dissatisfaction
Follow Up Flag: Follow upFlag Status: Flagged
To whom this concerns, I would like to express my dissatisfaction with the attorney regulations. I have attempted to file ethics and possibly criminal violations against attorneys Tamra Palmer, Jennifer Gormely and Carl Gladstein. Every time a call I get voicemail instead of a person. I am very frustrated there is no other option. I did get a call back once but was unable to take it because I was at work. This method is clearly unacceptable. I also would like to participate in any opportunities to speak before any committee or panel regarding attorney regulations. Please get back to me with any dates and times that I can speak or give written complaint in regards to attorney regulations of complaints against the mentioned attorneys in this email. Thank you. Cliff Battista 303 669-9786 or [email protected]. Sent from my T-Mobile 4G LTE Device
Page 1 of 11
The Supreme Court of the State of Colorado
2 East 14th Avenue, Denver, Colorado 80203
Supreme Court Comments &
Hearing (November 4, 2015)
For New Rules for
Professional Conduct
Commenter:
Mr. Peter Coulter
151 Summer Street #654
Morrison, Colorado, 80465
E-mail:
MR. PETER COULTER’S COMMENTS CONCERNING THE
COLORADO SUPREME COURT’S NEW RULES FOR
PROFESSIONAL CONDUCT
Mr. Peter Coulter, a citizen of the State of Colorado,
comes forth before the Colorado Supreme Court to state his comments
concerning the new Rules of Professional Conduct and would state
as follows:
“Leges sine moribus vanae.” Laws without Morals are vain.
Concerning the subject at hand; what purpose does amending and
making new rules do when those in charge of enforcing them are
negligent in their duties, if not outright corrupted.
One personal example shows the incongruity of implementing
these new rules.
Page 2 of 11
In 1992, I purchased the Fan Fair property in Aurora
Colorado from First Federal Savings through Fuller and Company
which was headed at the time by attorney Mr. Donald Kortz. At the
last minute before the closing, First Federal called me and asked
if I minded if William G. Ross, Esq., brother in law of the CEO of
First Federal, if Mr. Ross could handle the closing. I called Mr.
Kortz and he assured me that it was a simple closing and even if
Mr. Ross closed the transaction; Fuller, as closing broker would
be responsible. I said Ok and went to the bank where Mr. Ross
closed the deal. In addition to the contract price; I gave Mr.
Ross a cashiers check for the title policy for which I had earlier
been given a commitment that indicated that the property had no
taxes due, a treasurers deed, and a quiet title action thereafter
by the bank. Mr. Ross indicated that I would receive the
documentation within the month. I had forgotten about it until a
year later when Mr. Kortz asked me if I was interested in
purchasing the old Colorado Mine Co. I assured him I was and
started to arrange financing. My bank wanted the Deed to FanFair
as additional collateral on the loan.
That is when I realized I hadn’t received the paperwork and
called Fuller and Company’s escrow department to have them send it
to me. They returned my call indicating that they didn’t have the
paperwork and I would have to call Mr. Ross for that information.
Page 3 of 11
When I called that afternoon, I found out that his phone had been
disconnected that day. When I called the bank and Fuller they
started giving me the runaround, so I contacted the Office of
Attorney Regulation for the first time in my life. Mr. Gleason
answered the phone and took my complaint which was two part; I
believed William Ross had screwed up the closing somehow and was
nowhere to be found; and Fuller was responsible as the closing
Broker and now they were reneging on that responsibility. Two week
later, Mr. Gleason called me back and made an astonishing
revelation; Mr. Ross had earlier represented a school district and
absconded with funds and had been suspended from practicing law
before he handled my closing. Mr. Ross closed a real estate
transaction without an Attorneys license or real estate license.
Mr. Gleason assured me that they were going after Mr. Ross. A huge
amount of time had passed when I received the next phone call from
Mr. Gleason. He indicated that the Colorado Supreme Court had
suspended Mr. Gleason’s license for 3 years. I was livid. I asked
Mr. Gleason about the funds Mr. Ross had kept for the title policy
and not turned into the title company. He informed me he could do
nothing about that and I would have to go after him civilly. I
then asked for a copy of the Court’s decision and he stated he
would send it to me. It never happened but in the meantime 5 other
attorneys got involved, Mr. Herb Buchwald, Mr. William Powers, Mr.
Paul Cooper, The County Attorney for Arapahoe County, and later
Page 4 of 11
some other attorneys in my Mother’s probate; Mr. William Powers,
Mr. John Berman, and Ms. JoeAnn Goddard who I had filed complaints
with the Office of Attorney Regulation which were completely
ignored and not responded to. And none of them were for incidental
acts including Fraud on the Court, Forgery, Breach of Fiduciary
Trust, Theft and most egregious, the fleecing of my Mother’s estate
and desecration of a venerated object; my Father, Leland Coulter,
Esq..
I did not find out the reason my pleas were being ignored
by Mr. Gleason and the OAR until 2011; 20 years after I had filed
the Complaint against Mr. Ross to Mr. Gleason.
I had never received the documents from the Supreme Court
that Mr. Gleason had promised me and so I called the OAR. The
following letter to this Court at that time best explains what
happened then:
Following is on the front web page of the Colorado Supreme Court, Attorney Regulation Commission:
Attorneys Must Meet High Professional StandardsBecoming a licensed attorney requires many years of
difficult studies and successful completion of a grueling state-administered bar exam. The Colorado
Supreme Court has established high standards of ethics for attorneys. The standards are contained in the
Court rules and the Colorado Rules of Professional Conduct (Volume 12 Colorado Revised Statutes
Chapter 20) and the Appendix to Chapters 18-20).The Court has also established procedures regarding
the investigation of alleged unethical conduct. The procedures are designed to provide a thorough and
objective review of the attorney's conduct, and to resolve the matter in a way that is fair to the
complainant and to the attorney.To administer the procedures, the Colorado Supreme Court has
appointed an Office of Attorney Regulation Counsel; a nine-member Attorney Regulation Committee,
composed of both attorneys and lay persons; and an Office of the Presiding Disciplinary Judge. (No tax
dollars are used to fund the attorney regulation process.)
Page 5 of 11
Ethics and Discipline When attorneys enter the practice of law, they take an oath to uphold the law
and to follow the standards of ethics established by the Colorado Supreme Court. An attorney who
violates the law and/or those standards is subject to discipline. In cases involving minor misconduct, an
attorney may be admonished, censured, or placed in a diversion program. In serious matters, attorneys
face suspension of their license to practice law or disbarment.
But what happens when "The fox is watching the hen house?" Below, please find a letter that I just wrote
the Colorado Supreme Court about the Attorney Regulation Commission and it's director John Gleason. I
think it becomes quite obvious after reading that the above "Mission statement" of Mr. Gleason is nothing
more than window dressing covering up a corrupt organization filled with cronyism, deceit and most likely
monetary bribes. (See Allison Maynard's investigation into John Gleason which presents the strong
probability that Mr. Gleason is accepting bribes via second mortgages on his residence; one of which
corresponds with the events in this action.)
Colorado Supreme Court
101 West Colfax Avenue, Suite 800
Denver, CO 80202 CERTIFIED MAIL #03071790000012001333
Justice Michael Bender,
Justice Gregory Hobbs,
Justice Nathan Coates,
Justice Alex Martinez,
Justice Nancy Rice,
Justice Alison Eid
Justice Monica Marquez
Re: Supreme Court Office of Attorney Regulation / John Gleason:
June 28, 2011
Dear Sirs / Madams:
I am writing this letter as a last resort to the fraud and corruption that has infiltrated the Office of
Attorney Regulation which, according to your home page, you have oversight and control.
A succinct chain of events is best described in an E-mail to Mr. Kevin Hanks and Mr. John Gleason sent
on May 16, 2011 concerning William G. Ross:
Page 6 of 11
______________
Mr. Hanks,
First thank you for finally sending me this information (even if it is 17 years late) but this is
not the complaint I filed against William G. Ross.
Following is a little bit of history of the situation with Mr. Ross from my notes:
I purchased a property at 333 Havana Street from First Federal Savings through Fuller and Company
in September of 2001. At the last moment; First Federal asked if they could have
the brother in law, William G. Ross of the president of bank, Malcolm Collier, do the closing. I called the
president of Fuller, Don Kortz, Esq. and asked him what he thought. He indicated that Mr. Ross was a
very competent attorney, worked in the bank, and because it was a simple closing that he believed
it would be OK. I went to the bank on South Wadsworth and Alameda and gave Mr. Ross, in addition to
the sales price, a cashiers check for $1,600 for the title policy per the title commitment from Stuart Title
that indicated that there were no past taxes. I walked out of the closing and thought everything was taken
care of. A year later, Don Kortz called me and asked me if I was interested in purchasing the Colorado
Mine Company. I indicated I was and put it under contract. The bank approved my loan but insisted that I
put up the 333 Havana Property as additional collateral. I said OK and they said they needed a copy of
the deed and the title policy. It was then I realized I hadn't received copies and called Fuller who referred
me to their escrow department. They indicated that they couldn't find the documents and would look into it
and call
me back. The next day they called me back and said that they never received the documentation from
William Ross and that I would have to call him to get the information. When I tried to call him, his phone
had been disconnected that day. I couldn't get a hold of him and the bank kept telling me they didn't
know where he was. At that time I just thought he screwed up the closing and filed a
complaint with the Colorado Supreme Court who then transferred it to the Office of Attorney Regulation. It
was then that John Gleason called and informed me that Mr. Ross had been previously suspended from
practicing law and they would investigate the case. Over the next two years I would call Mr. Gleason and
he assured me that Mr. Ross was still being investigated. Then in 1994, Mr. Gleason called me and
indicated that they had suspended Mr. Ross' license for 3 years. I was incensed that they did this
without any dialog with me. Stuart Title refused to issue the title policy unless I signed an addendum that I
had to pay any past taxes due on the property even though the title commitment indicates that there
were no taxes owing. I asked Mr. Gleason about the funds given Mr. Ross for the title commitment and he
indicated that I would have to go after him
civilly for those funds and the damage William Ross did in not getting the title policy which was in excess
of $400,000. Mr. Gleason ended by indicating that he would send me a copy of the Supreme Court
decision in my case. I have had the same mailing address since 1983 and never received it. What you
mailed me can't be the decision that Mr. Gleason was talking about because it doesn't
mention my complaint against William G. Ross even though it was being investigated at the exact same
time.
I would therefore request that you look into this and let me know what happened to my complaint
and the consequences thereof.
Sincerely dated this May 16, 2011,
/s/
Page 7 of 11
Peter Coulter
________________
Attached, please find the complaint and decision of the Supreme Court that the OARC sent me
on May 5, 2011. Of empirical note here is the paragraph where John Gleason has told the Court that Mr.
Ross did not respond to the complaint[1]. That necessarily means that Mr. Ross never responded to my
complaint which was filed at the exact same time, yet Mr. Gleason insists that he did in this E-mail
forwarded to me on June 13, 2011:
_______________
Hello again Mr. Coulter,
I did get a response from Mr. Gleason. He said the matter in which you are requiring into did have a
resolution. Pursuant to the rules of the Colorado Supreme Court, the resolution in this matter is not of
public record, and cannot be disclosed to any party other than Mr. Ross himself. All of the material
previously provided to you is the only public discipline for Mr. Ross and there is no further information we
can provide.
Thank you,
Kevin Hanks
Legal/Trial Assistant
Office of Attorney Regulation Counsel
________________
Mr. Gleason refers to a Supreme Court Rule that provides the resolution in this
matter is not of public record and cannot be disclosed to any party other than Mr. Ross himself.
I have asked Mr. Gleason for a cite of this Supreme Court Rule on 3 separate occasions with no
response as follows:
________________
1.) June 17, 2011
???? Mr. Hanks,
What are you talking about? The reason I contacted the OAR was because I never received any
"material". How could there have been a "resolution" when the OAR told the Supreme Court that William
G. Ross failed to respond at all to a complaint that was filed at the same time as mine? Is it Mr.
Gleason's position now that Mr. Ross failed to respond to one complaint but did respond
to another (mine) that happened contemporaneously?
And you now indicate that Mr. Gleason has stated a rule of the Supreme Court concerning
Page 8 of 11
non-disclosure. I would therefore request a cite of the rule Mr. Gleason is referring to.
Thank you for your time and consideration in these matters.
Regards, /Peter Coulter
_________________
2.) June 23, 2011
Mr. Hanks, Mr. Gleason:
I am still waiting for the Office of Attorney Regulation and Mr. Gleason's cite of the Supreme Court
Rule of non-disclosure concerning my complaint of William G. Ross in light of the fact that according to
the initial documentation you forwarded me, Mr. Ross never even responded to the OARC. Again, I would
ask for either a copy of the resolution or the Supreme Court rule that prohibits the OARC from disclosure
to me, the complainant.
Thank you for your time and consideration in these matters.
Sincerely,
/Peter Coulter
________________
3.) June 28, 2011
Mr. Hanks / Mr. Gleason:
Peter Coulter here again. I am again writing you to get a cite of the Supreme Court Rule that you are
speaking of that leaves me, the victim, completely in the dark as to what your prosecutions were in
regards to William G. Ross and his actions toward me. I again would request a response please.
Thank you for your time and consideration in these matters.
Dated this June 27, 2011.
/Peter Coulter
________________________
I think that it is quite clear from the documentation and correspondence presented that Mr.
Gleason made a deal with Mr. Ross (or his attorneys) and the OARC buried my
Complaint against Mr. Ross which was much more serious than the case presented by Mr. Gleason with
more devastating consequences.
Page 9 of 11
It is not an isolated incident in regards to two other Complaints that I have filed with OARC
(concerning Magistrate Edward Burns) and the Colorado Commission on Judicial Discipline (concerning
Judge Charles Pratt) concerning the theft and concealment of a jury trial request and fee, counter and
cross-claim that these two conspired on in a concerted effort to violate my due process right and commit
Treason on the Constitution. The response of these two departments of the Supreme Court was silence.
They didnt even have the respect to respond just as Mr. Gleason is doing once again here.
The most ironic thing here is that back in 1997-1998 when the Colorado Supreme Court
had a public hearing asking for comments about new rules for the OARC; I was the only lay person
amongst 50 lawyers to speak. My concern then, which has come to fruition now, is that Mr. Gleason is
the gatekeeper of the OARC and he solely decides which cases make it before the
Court based on a biased and bribed influence that is then kept secret behind closed doors.
In ending, I sadly state that I have no trust in the Supreme Court of Colorado either as you seem to look
the other way to these criminal actions of those under your direction. As such, I really feel helpless
except to reveal it to the world via indelible web sites so that others with more influence and persuasion
may review and make an effort to correct these travesties and the world will be able to view your true
agendas and behavior.
Heres hoping a couple of you still have enough conscience to do something about this.
Sincerely dated this 28th day of June, 2011,
/s/
Peter Coulter
P.O. Box 3094
Vail, Colorado 81657
E-mail [email protected]
cc: Kevin Hanks Office of Attorney Regulation via. Email [email protected]
John Gleason Office of Attorney Regulation via Email [email protected]
_________________
If it is business as usual; I am not expecting any response from the Colorado Supreme Court. Why should
I? As I have stated before, the Colorado Judicial Branch operates as a "country club" where you have to
go along to get along. I am sure that the corruption is so rampant that even the honest attorneys and
judges have a difficult if not impossible effort to stay clean and still survive and put food on the table. But
the Colorado Supreme Court and the justices thereof have no excuse. Everyone else takes their
examples and direction from them. It is so ironic that in Justice Benders acceptance speech in front of
the legislature (as chief justice) he stated that his first order of business would be to visit the various
districts and make sure ethics were being followed. I haven't seen it yet; and it is hypocrisy to believe that
he can profess ethics around Colorado when his own chambers are in complete denial while the
Colorado Supreme Court turns it's head.
Page 10 of 11
I will close this discussion with a quote by one of our founding fathers:
"Nothing destroys the credibility of a government faster than its failure to provide fair and equal justice for
its people."
"When one undertakes to administer justice, it must be with an even hand, and by rule; what is done for
one must be done for everyone in equal degree." (Thomas Jefferson as quoted in W. Cleon
Skousens The Making of America, p 241)
I then understood why all my other complaints had been completely
ignored by the Office of Attorney Regulation; it was corrupted and
had no interest in upholding any rules; including those that are
proposed today. I see no difference in the complexion of the
Colorado Supreme Court Attorney Regulation of today, then in 1992,
or 2011. Pro-se litigants are literally abused by this department
and as a person told me this week; we are treated no better than
Lepers with no chance of justice. And now that the Judicial branch
has self-exmpted out of CORA; I would expect the corruption to
escalate to an even higher level. These proposed rule changes are
nothing more than window dressing by this Court to facilitate the
shameless acts of this department, The Office of Attorney
Regulation. Shame on you.
.......Leges sine moribus vanae…….
Respectfully submitted this 15th day of October, 2015
Page 11 of 11
/s/ Mr. Peter Coulter
151 Summer Street #654
Morrison,Colorado, 80465
Email [email protected]
Dear Justices and Attorney Review Board
Thank you for this privilege and honor. Having just been duly informed of the purpose of this
hearing, after much confusion and runaround, I have only one hour remaining to make the necessary
revisions to my speech, so my apologies.
Having hurriedly scanned through the proposed changes during the past 10 minutes, I saw no
glaring reasons to object to any of them, noting again that I merely scanned them due to the one-hour time
constraint. However, I questioned to myself as I was reading them whether they would have been followed
at the time of my experience with the Colorado Probate System from 2012 to 2015, for it appears that most
of them would have directly applied to my (our family's) probate case.
All to say is that from what I have both experienced and have heard, the Colorado probate system
is the wild wild west. Only its not one armed outlaw against another armed outlaw, its approximately ten
armed outlaws against an innocent victim, whether it be an elder in a nursing home or whether it be a
beneficiary of an elder's estate. It seems the legal process, at least in the probate area, is rigged in favor of
the professionals who are employed in the probate system, not in favor of those who need assistance. In
fact, it seems to be a vulture's contest in conquering and torture rather than a professional's contest in
honesty and humanitarianism. Likewise it seems to be a tyrant's contest of power where attorneys are
proving to themselves and to the other side who can get away with the most lies, deceit and cover-up, but it
should be a diplomat's contest of power where attorneys are proving to themselves and to the other side
who can discover and expose the most falsehoods and unconstitutional offences. Thus my main specific
complaint, which I believe addresses the most fundamental flaw of all flaws, at least pertaining to my case
(or rather to our family's case), is the ease at which attorneys can get away with lying--which ultimately
includes non-disclosure of records. Their lies upon lies upon lies upon lies. Surely this evil is addressed in
your original Rules of Professional Conduct, yet those rules apparently have not earned much if any of your
respect. So can you please do something about making your rules respectful, namely by enforcing them,
since they are useless unless they are enforced? (Why aren't unethical lawyers being disciplined by the
attorney review board, especially those who are on the other side of pro-se litigants?) Toward that end, I'm
suggesting that an automatic $5,000 fine be levied against any attorney or court-appointed fiduciary who
posts a lie that can be proven as such, whether it be posted in a motion or whether it be posted during a
hearing. And if it was an intentional lie that can be proven as such, I'm suggesting an automatic $5,000
fine levied in addition to the first $5,000 fine. And if she wants to fight about it, I propose that all court
costs automatically be added to the tab--cachink, cachink, cachink, just like when the attorneys from both
sides (of a probate case) add it to our tabs when we fight the lies that either they have told supposedly in
our behalf or that the other side has either told or propagated on the other side's behalf. Of course some
might be thinking that which one of my attorneys told me, namely, that it will cost more than five or ten
thousand dollars to prove certain lies, especially after the court costs get accessed to the innocent party by a
lower court judge only to yield to the appeals process where exploitation becomes absurd. Therefore, I also
propose that your rules be enforced in favor of pro-se litigants as much as they are enforced in favor of the
attorneys with whom they are in opposition. This will keep unethical attorneys from licking their chops
every time they see a little bit of tension that can be made into utter chaos for more profit--with the help of
somebody's lies that they know will be overlooked if not sustained by a judge who knows your ethics rules
will not be enforced. Meanwhile, it will keep honest attorneys from getting sucked into the vortex of
corruption until there are no good ones left to defend the defenseless, since their knowing that if they had
bucked the system they would have lost their favor in the estimation of their piers and of the regulation's
board who has the power to either destroy their livelihoods or revoke their license.
It seems to be the time to act, because I have been told that corruption in the justice system of a
society gives way to anarchy, even as I can testify from experience that some if not most attorneys already
act as if they can do just whatever they want--thanks to the non-enforcement of your rules. And when that
happened in the wild wild west, a posse was organized, and in modern times and in the Colorado Probate
system it seems plausible that the posse will be approximately 10 to one against white collar outlaws rather
than 10 to 1 against innocent citizens and or the few good attorneys who remain to defend them.
Thank you.
Steven K. Harvie