James F. Hartmann – Corrupt, Malicious Weld County District Court Chief Judge Mentally Unfit To Deal With Pro-se Litigants.
Corrupt Weld County Court Judge James Francis James F. Hartmann screwed up a civil wage claim case badly. Real badly.
As is typical of psychopaths, there was no turning back. For Weld County Court Chief Judge James Hartmann there was no remorse, there was no accountability. It was a textbook reading of the actions associated with psychopathic behavior disorder.
Judge James Hartmann violated the Due Process Rights of the Plaintiff; repeatedly, deliberately, and with extreme malice. Then, thanks to (Fmr.) Colorado Dept. of Labor & Employment Director Ellen Golombek, he got caught. Once caught, he began a proactive campaign of harassment and retaliation against Longmont, CO homeowner, Craig Buckley which has raged in excess of 7 years. What in the beginning, could have been interpreted as, “error” quickly spiraled into madness, through James Hartmann’s commission of multiple felonies to conceal his involvement. What was Hartmann, a proven psychopath, to do?
James Hartmann, caught in crime, attacked.
Then he enlisted Congressman (Fmr. weld County DA) Ken Buck to attack.
Who enlisted Weld County Deputy District Attorneys Steve Wrenn & Sarah Bousman to attack.
Then he enlisted Weld County Court Judge John Briggs to attack.
Then he enlisted Weld County Court Judge Thomas Quammen to attack.
Then he enlisted Weld County Court Judge John Briggs to attack.
Then he enlisted Weld County Court Judge Michele Meyer to attack.
Then he enlisted Weld County District Court Judge Daniel Maus to attack.
Then he enlisted Weld County District Court Judge Todd Taylor to attack.
Then he enlisted Boulder County District Attorney Stan Garnett to attack.
Then he enlisted Boulder County District Court Judge Andrew Hartman to attack.
Who enlisted Boulder County Deputy District Attorney Catrina Weigel to attack.
Then he enlisted Weld County Court Judge Charles Unfug to attack.
The cast of characters goes well beyond this, but you get the point.
It’s well documented on the record of numerous Courts, and throughout this website, that the following events occurred:
- The employers, Defendants in Buckley’s civil wage claim, swore before both the Colorado Division of Labor, and the Weld County District Court that neither had jurisdiction over his claim, because the matter was before the other. Buckley asked, “why”?
- The employers, Defendants in Buckley’s civil wage claim, filed a known fraudulent affidavit of attorneys’ fees, causing them to be paid (and file a lien on Buckley’s home) for fees to which they were not entitled. Buckley asked, “why”?
- Judge James Hartmann stripped Buckley of both the right, and all evidence to prosecute his wage claim before the Weld County District Court. Buckley asked, “why”?
- Buckley challenged the jurisdiction of the Court (see:Basso v. Utah Power & Light Co. 495 F 2d 906, 910.) to enter an order which he believed violated his Due Process Rights under the Colorado Wage Claim Act, and specifically, C.R.S. 8-4-110(2). The challenge was ignored. Buckley asked, “why”?
The Law & The Alternate Reality Of Judge James Hartmann.
James Hartmann’s alternate reality is metaphorically compared to the ‘Butterfly Effect‘ , in which a sequence of events at the beginning of a timeline, shape the destiny of all future events. In legal terms, it’s called “but-for causation”. While a dissertation on Chaos Theory is beyond the scope of this article, the elements, as they apply to Hartmann’s sworn oath to comply with the Colorado Code of Judicial Conduct, are relevant.
With James Hartmann refusing to enter a Court Order containing conclusions of law and findings of fact to Buckley’s challenge to Jurisdiction, Buckley refused to further comply with James Hartmann’s so-called “order” dismissing Buckley’s case with prejudice (see: Stuck v. Medical Examiners 94 Ca 2d 751. 211 P2d 389.).
Buckley believes Hartmann’s actions rendered his rulings VOID (see: Fed Rules Civ. Proc., Rule 60(b)(4), 28 U.S.C.A.; U.S.C.A. Const Amend. 5. Klugh v. U.S., 620 F. Supp. 892 (D.S.C. 1985)), not, “voidable”, but simply VOID, AND RELIEF WAS MANDATORY UNDER THE LAW (see: Orner v. Shalala, 30 F.3d 1307, (Colo. 1994)).
The seven year shitstorm of harassment, retaliation, and terrorism initiated by James Hartmann that decimated Buckley’s life for refusing to cooperate with the Court: could it have been avoided? NO. It was malice.
Explain, or Attack: What would you do if you were a Psychopath?
Through numerous post trial Motions, before the Weld County District Court and others, Buckley rightfully sought answers. The issues raised in the Motions, before numerous Judges, were ignored.
Buckley’s thought process was as follows:
- So the Defendants evidently had the right to swear to both the Court, and the DOL, that neither had jurisdiction, because the matter was before the other. I thought that was Class 4 Felony attempt to Influence a Public Servant. Evidently, Buckley is wrong.
- So the Defendants evidently had the right to swear that I hadn’t worked for them for a full year, even though I have check stubs indicating 26 months of continuous, uninterrupted employment, and Judge Hartmann would not allow me to subpoena the time cards. Evidently he’s right, and Buckley is wrong.
- So the Defendants obviously had the right to get paid for a Motion that no fees were awarded for by taking the (very expensive) attached exhibit, removing it from the motion no fees were awarded for, and attaching it to , and billing it under another wholly unrelated Motion fees WERE awarded for. Clearly, according to Hartmann, that’s legal.
- Buckley, THOUGHT, he had the right, under C.R.S. 8-4-110(2) to sue, “at any time in a Court having jurisdiction over the parties” for his accrued wages due. Evidently, the “plain language of the law” , was irrelevant as Hartmann stripped Buckley of the right, and all evidence to prosecute his wage claim mere hours before he had been “slapped” with a subpoena duces tecum to appear and produce.
- Buckley THOUGHT he had the right, to challenge the jurisdiction of the Court to enter rulings which did not comply with the law. Evidently not.
What Does Judicial Canon Say About Judge James Hartmann’s Actions?
Colorado Rules of Judicial Conduct stipulate strict guidelines to which Judges must comply. Further, there are guidelines specific to Pro-se litigants.
In Canon 2, the Code of Judicial Conduct requires a judge to “act at all times in a manner that promotes public confidence in the integrity and impartiality of the judiciary” and to avoid conduct that would make an objective, reasonable observer question the judge’s impartiality even if the judge is not actually biased.
Rule 2.6: Ensuring the Right to Be Heard
(A) A judge shall accord to every person who has a legal interest in a proceeding, or
that person’s lawyer, the right to be heard according to law.*
(B) A judge may encourage parties to a proceeding and their lawyers to settle
matters in dispute but shall not act in a manner that coerces any party into settlement.
 The right to be heard is an essential component of a fair and impartial system of
justice. Substantive rights of litigants can be protected only if procedures protecting the right to
be heard are observed.
 The steps that are permissible in ensuring a self-represented litigant’s right to be
heard according to law include but are not limited to liberally construing pleadings; providing
brief information about the proceeding and evidentiary and foundational requirements;
modifying the traditional order of taking evidence; attempting to make legal concepts
understandable; explaining the basis for a ruling; and making referrals to any resources available
to assist the litigant in preparation of the case. Self-represented litigants are still required to
comply with the same substantive law and procedural requirements as represented litigants.
Refusal, Denial, and Years Of Attack.
Hartmann belligerently refused to explain his rulings, which appeared to Buckley to be unsupported by law, particularly the ruling which violated Buckley’s Due Process Rights under the Colorado Wage Claim Act, and specifically C.R.S. 8-4-110(2). Colorado House representative Jonathan Singer, the Legislator responsible for the 2014 revisions to the Colorado Wage Claim Act, would later affirm in a recorded interview that James Hartmann did indeed violate Buckley’s rights under the CWCA.
Judge James Hartmann, refused to include supporting conclusions of law and findings of fact, continually ruling under the doctrine of, “Because I said so”, as did his successor, Weld County District Court Judge Todd Taylor. Hartmann could not produce findings of fact and conclusions of law, because there are no laws supporting Judge James Hartmann’s actions.
Buckley wanted answers, but what was to ensue was 7 years of coverup and conspiracy: of raids on his home, arrests, convictions, liens on his home, wage garnishments, loss of reputation and personal property, and humiliation.
‘But-For’ The Criminal Acts Of “Judge” James F. Hartmann, Craig Buckley’s Life Would Not Have Been Destroyed.
Psychopath James Hartmann, if his actions were in fact supported by law, could have stopped his unrelenting attack at any time. He chose otherwise, perjury, obstruction, and treason, as is well documented in this website.
Buckley contends that if Judge Hartmann had simply explained his rulings in a manner compliant with the law, Buckley would have admitted error, and gladly cooperated with the Court, given the deed to his home to his former employers, accepted the liens on his property, gotten over it, and moved on with his life. Evidently, there are no laws supporting Judge James Hartmann’s criminal actions, and there is no moving on. James Hartmann, a coward and a criminal, has hidden behind his official position, and USED his colleagues.
“A lawsuit is not a game, where the party with the cleverest lawyer prevails regardless of the merits,” Commonwealth v. Sapoznik, 549 N.E.2d 116, 120 n.4 (Massachusetts Appeals Court 1990).
The Government of Colorado, with full knowledge of crime by Judge James Hartmann, Congressman Ken Buck, and Boulder District Attorney Stan Garnett should, rightfully, publicly release all transcripts related to the ongoing crimes of the aforementioned. The Government of Colorado WILL, however, continue to use our socioeconomic status to conceal evidence. We need (very expensive) transcripts. Please Donate!