William J. Campbell, Executive Director of the Colorado Judicial Discipline Commission, Conceals Multiple Felonies by Corrupt Weld County Court Chief Judge James Hartmann.
Reposted September 4, 2018 from https://bouldercountycorruption.com
Denver, CO – On January 22, 1016, William J. Campbell, Executive Director of the Colorado Judicial Discipline Commission released his official findings based on a 163 page formal complaint to the Discipline Commission by Longmont, CO homeowner, Craig Buckley regarding proven criminal acts by three Weld County District Court Judges: Chief Judge James F. Hartmann, and subordinate Judges, Judge Todd Taylor, and (Ret.) Judge Daniel Maus. The report focused primarily on perjury, obstruction, and evidence tampering committed by Judge James Hartmann following an illegal July 2013 raid on Buckley’s home, and his subsequent arrest on a civil contempt warrant, by the Weld County District Court.
According to an analysis of the complaint filed by Buckley on December 30, 2015, Colorado Judicial Discipline Commission Executive Director William J. Campbell’s findings wholly circumvented the proven criminal allegations made against the offending Weld County District Court Judges. Buckley, in defense of his family and property, had also previously attempted to seek a restraining Order against Weld County District Court Judge James Hartmann in Federal Court, which was denied within minutes of filing by United States District Court – District of Colorado Judge Philip A. Brimmer.
Although William J. Campbell asserted in his two page response that the Colorado Judicial Discipline Commission, “reviewed the lengthy record in this case”, analysis evidenced the fact that Campbell merely reviewed Judge James Hartmann’s fraudulent final Court Order dismissing Buckley’s wage claim case against his former employers, Dream stone, Inc., and its shareholders, Scott Murphy (CEO), Ron Murphy (VP), and Ida Murphy (Secretary/Treasurer), and defiantly ignored the years-long, fully evidenced aftermath of Judge James Hartmann’s illegal, retaliatory actions.
Dream Stone, Inc. was defended in the civil matter by Broomfield, CO based attorney, Daniel T. Goodwin. Court records, transcripts, and confidential internal memoranda obtained from (former) Colorado Dept. of Labor & Employment Director Ellen Golombek had revealed that Daniel T. Goodwin and his clients had committed multiple felonies in their ill-conceived scheme to defend against Buckley’s accrued wage claim.
Buckley had been forced to sue the employers following his constructive discharge. Daniel T. Goodwin, had falsified statements to the Colorado Division of Labor, swearing that Buckley was ineligible for his award of accrued wages on termination of employment because, according to Daniel T. Goodwin, Buckley had worked for Dream Stone, Inc. for less than a year. According to Buckley’s 26 months of sequential, uninterrupted paycheck stubs, and specifically checks #15678 #15679 #15721, #15722 he had worked for the employers 110.5 hours during the period he is alleged to have, “quit”. The employers, and their criminally complicit attorney Daniel T. Goodwin, had flatly LIED to the Colorado Division of Labor.
The Weld County District Court case, which primarily proceeded through Motions, would result in the Defendants’and their criminally complicit attorney Daniel T. Goodwin‘s commission of Fraud Upon the Court, and Class 4 Felony Attempt to Influence a Public Servant; having sworn simultaneously before BOTH the Weld County District Court, and the Colorado Division of Labor, that NEITHER had jurisdiction over Buckley’s wage claim, because the matter was before the OTHER.
On June 17, 2010, Judge James Hartmann, in defiance of Statutory authority, stripped Buckley of all evidence and the Due Process Right under the Colorado Wage Act, to prosecute his wage claim, when the Defendants made the following unsupported allegation in their Response to Motion for Settlement Conference. This deprivation of rights occurred a mere 16 hours before Buckley had been commanded, in violation of C.R.C.P. Rule 45, by Subpoena Duces Tecum to Appear and Produce:
Further, as to the issue of vacation pay, Plaintiff chose the Colorado Department
of Labor and Employment (“CDLE”) as the forum to decide the issue.
Judge James Hartmann then knowingly and illegally aided, and abetted theft throught the Defendants’ falsified affidavit of attorneys’ fees, causing them to be paid for their response to a Plaintiff’s Motion, for which no fees were awarded. This article is dedicated to that disbarable offense.
Judge James Hartmann next, in violation of Colorado Rules of Civil Procedure Rule 45, slapped Craig Buckley with Subpoena Duces Tecum demanding that he Appear & Produce years of bank statements, tax returns, and other protected documents with no, “good cause” appearing on the record of the Court. Buckley issued a challenge, by Motion, to the Court’s jurisdiction to (a) strip him of the right under C.R.S. 8-4-110(2) of the Colorado wage Act to prosecute his wage claim, (b) conceal the proven criminal acts of the Defendants, (c) force him to pay fees based on a falsified affidavit for the Defendants’ response to a Motion for which no fees were awarded, (d) violate C.R.C.P. Discovery rules by Subpoena Duces Tecum for protected documents without a Court Order showing good cause for issuance of such a subpoena, and (e) refuse to order the Defendants to comply with the MANDATORY requirement, set forth in C.R.C.P. Rule 16, that the parties MUST “meet and confer to discuss the nature and basis of the claims and defenses, and the matters to be disclosed pursuant to C.R.C.P. 26(a)(1). Judge James Hartmann refused.
Judge James Hartmann unlawfully, wholly ignored the challenge to personal, and subject matter jurisdiction, and Buckley subsequently refused to comply with the “sham” orders of Judge James Hartmann’s “corrupt” Court.
“Jurisdiction can be challenged at any time.” and “Jurisdiction, once challenged, cannot be assumed and must be decided.” Basso v. Utah Power & Light Co., 495 F 2d 906, 910.
In a court of limited jurisdiction, whenever a party denies that the court has subject-matter jurisdiction, it becomes the duty and the burden of the party claiming that the court has subject matter jurisdiction to provide evidence from the record of the case that the court holds subject-matter jurisdiction. Bindell v City of Harvey, 212 Ill.App.3d 1042, 571 N.E.2d 1017 (1st Dist. 1991) (“the burden of proving jurisdiction rests upon the party asserting it.”).
James Hartmann dismissed Buckley’s case with prejudice, and awarded the Defendants in excess of $20,000.00 in attorneys’ fees: fees which Judge James Hartmann would appoint his subordinates, Judge Daniel Maus, and Judge Todd Taylor, to collect.
Executive Director of the Colorado Judicial Discipline Commission William J. Campbell stated in his official report:
“Colo. RJD 5(e) provides that disputes about a judge’s decision do not provide grounds for
disciplinary measures. There is no indication of bias, lack of diligence, improper demeanor, or other judicial conduct prohibited by the Canons. Colo. RJD 13 requires the dismissal of a complaint that does not provide sufficient grounds for disciplinary proceedings.”
While James Hartmann’s Rulings and Orders at trial were decidedly beyond the scope of the Colorado Judicial Discipline Commission’s authority, what James Hartmann would do, and cause, in the years to follow, WERE NOT.
Two years after James Hartmann entered his void order dismissing Buckley’s civil case with prejudice, Buckley’s home was illegally raided, and he was incarcerated on a civil contempt warrant, when he refused to give the deed to his house to his former employers. Ten days later, Buckley’s home was again illegally raided, and he was incarcerated on one felony count of ‘Retaliation Against a Judge’ for an alleged “credible threat” statement he was purported to have made against Judge James Hartmann during the first illegal arrest. It took Judge James Hartmann, and his criminal conspirators, Congressman (then Weld County DA) Ken Buck, and former Boulder County District Attorney Stan Garnett TEN DAYS from the execution of the civil arrest warrant to fabricate an innocuous statement made by Buckley into a, “credible threat”.
The problem? According to legal analysts, neither the Weld County District Court, nor Judge James Hartmann, his subordinates, nor agents had any lawful right to be on Buckley’s property during the course of either arrest. Judge Judge James Hartmann’s dismissal of Buckley’s civil case was, on its face: VOID.
Judgment is a void judgment if court that rendered judgment lacked jurisdiction of the subject matter, or of the parties, or acted in a manner inconsistent with due process, 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).
Longmont Colorado homeowner Craig Buckley would stand trial, a “sham trial”, and subsequently be convicted on the single Class 4 felony charge of, ‘Retaliation Against a Judge’. Weld County District Court Chief Judge James Hartmann’s sworn testimony during that trial was a primary cause for filing of a formal complaint with the Colorado Commission on Judicial Discipline: James Hartmann’s proven perjured testimony was wholly ignored by Colorado Commission on Judicial Discipline Executive Director William J. Campbell.
Fitness to be a Judge. What Does Colorado Judicial Canon Say?
Colorado Judicial Discipline Commission Director William J. Campbell stated, “Provably, Canons 1 and 2 impose on judges the duty to uphold the integrity of the judiciary and promote public confidence in it. A courtroom is not a ‘duty free zone’ in which serious crimes may be admitted with impunity. A blanket judicial attitude of ‘hear no evil, see no evil, report no evil’ does not inspire public confidence.”
Vengefully, James Hartmann had previously stated in his Order dismissing Buckley’s civil case:
” Plaintiff has shown a pattern of following only those Rules of Civil Procedure that endure to his benefit, while purposely ignoring or disregarding others. He has also repeatedly made serious, unsubstantiated accusations of criminal conduct against Defendants and defense counsel.” – Judge James Francis Hartmann Jr.
Evidence and the record of the Court would indicate, in fact, that it was Judge James Hartmann who belligerently defied Statutory authority and Court rules in Buckley’s civil claim. In April 2011, Judge James Hartmann would receive an evidence pack from former civil Plaintiff, Craig Buckley, irrefutably proving the commission of multiple felonies by the civil Defendants, Buckley’s former employers, and their criminally complicit attorney, Daniel T. Goodwin. That evidence? Pleadings before the Colorado Division of Labor, in which the employers swore the matter of Buckley’s wage claim was before the Weld County District Court, and therefore the DOL lacked jurisdiction to remain involved in the claim.
Prior to Buckley’s trial for ‘Retaliation Against a Judge’, James Hartmann would obstruct justice during the course of an official investigation by the Boulder County District Attorney’s Office:
“After the lien was placed on Buckley’s house, Judge Hartmann received a handwritten note from Buckley. The note was written in Sharpie on a piece of paper and stated, “Hartmann you need to fix this now.”
What was absent (evidence tampering) from Boulder District Attorney’s report, and subsequently concealed by William J. Campbell, Executive Director of the Colorado Commission, was the fact that evidentiary materials which Buckley had obtained from former Colorado Dept. of Labor & Employment Director Ellen Golombek, and immediately forwarded to law enforcement, WERE MISSING.
In sworn testimony at Buckley’s criminal trial, Judge James Hartman testified as follows:
April 21, 2014 Judge James Hartmann- direct examination by DDA Catrina Weigel:
Q Just to kind of summarize, on April 4, 2011, did
you get a handwritten letter from Mr. Buckley on that
A I did. It was on a smaller piece of paper and
written with what appeared to be a Sharpie marker and
written to me and signed by Mr. Buckley.
Q Is what I handed you true and accurate copies of
those documents in that file?
A They appear to be.
April 21, 2014 Judge James Hartmann- cross examination by Defense Attorney Michael Root:
Q Now, Exhibit No. 7 is the note that you got, and
this was not hand delivered to you by the Defendant. You
got this through how?
A It was provided to me by the clerk ‘ s office. So
you’re correct, it was not handed to me by Mr. Buckley.
Q Oh, on this Exhibit 7, was there anything else
attached to this when you got it?
Q There was, like, a big pile of pleadings and
documentation saying why you should fix this based on the following?
A Yes. He filed miscellaneous paperwork with that handwritten note.
The so-called, “miscellaneous paperwork” filed with the “handwritten note”, which was actually neither a “note”, nor a, “letter” as fraudulently stated by Boulder County Chief Deputy District Attorney Catrina Weigel, was in fact a Post-It note LABEL, affixed to EVIDENCE OF FELONY CRIME: CRIME THAT JAMES HARTMANN HAD, IN VIOLATION OF THE RULES OF JUDICIAL CONDUCT, CONCEALED, AIDED, ABETTED, AND COMPOUNDED.
On April 21, 2014 Judge James Hartmann – direct examination by DDA Catrina Weigel:
“I granted the request for attorney’s fees when I
denied Mr. Buckley’s motion to consolidate this case with
another case that was pending in Weld County, another civil
case that was pending in Weld County.”
But that was FALSE: First Degree Perjury, in fact. No fees were awarded for the Defendants’ Response to that Motion, however that did not stop the Weld County District Court, and Judge James Hartmann from raiding Buckley’s home to collect those, “fees”. William J. Campbell knew this, and concealed the crime.
William J. Campbell, Executive Director of the Colorado Judicial Discipline Commission, in possession the Court transcript, and the above-linked evidence, and fully aware of Judge James Hartmann’s Perjury, and Obstruction of Justice fraudulently stated:
“The judges have been candid and patient with you despite your resistance to the court’s
orders. There is no indication of bias, lack of diligence, improper demeanor, or other judicial
conduct prohibited by the Canons.” – William J. Campbell
The civil Defendants in Buckley v. Dream Stone, Inc., et. al. had illegally, and feloniously sworn before BOTH the Colorado Division of Labor, and the Weld County District Court, that NEITHER had jurisdiction over Buckley’s wage claim, because the matter was before the OTHER, for the unlawful purpose of theft, and depriving Buckley of his Constitutionally guaranteed Due Process Rights under the Colorado Wage Act, before BOTH the Court, and the administrative agency. Known Felon, Weld County District Court Chief Judge James Hartmann had provably concealed, aided, abetted, and compounded the crime, and in sworn testimony, and during the course of an official investigation, had OBSTRUCTED JUSTICE.
2016 Colorado Revised Statutes
Title 18 – Criminal Code
Article 8 – Offenses – Governmental Operations
Part 1 – Obstruction of Public Justice
§ 18-8-105. Accessory to crime
(1) A person is an accessory to crime if, with intent to hinder, delay, or prevent the discovery, detection, apprehension, prosecution, conviction, or punishment of another for the commission of a crime, he renders assistance to such person.
(2) “Render assistance” means to:
(d) By force, intimidation, or deception, obstruct anyone in the performance of any act which might aid in the discovery, detection, apprehension, prosecution, conviction, or punishment of such person; or
(e) Conceal, destroy, or alter any physical or testimonial evidence that might aid in the discovery, detection, apprehension, prosecution, conviction, or punishment of such person.
(5) Being an accessory to crime is a class 5 felony if the offender knows that the person being assisted has committed, or has been convicted of, or is charged by pending information, indictment, or complaint with a crime, or is suspected of or wanted for a crime, and if that crime is designated by this code as a felony other than a class 1 or class 2 felony; except that being an accessory to a class 6 felony is a class 6 felony.
William J. Campbell, Executive Director of the Colorado Judicial Discipline Commission, Criminally Complicit In The Felony Acts of Judge James Hartmann.
According to the Colorado Code of Judicial Conduct
“Judges should maintain the dignity of judicial office at all times, and avoid both impropriety and the appearance of impropriety in their professional and personal lives. They should aspire at all times to conduct that ensures the greatest possible public confidence in their independence, impartiality, integrity, and competence.”
Rule 1.1: Compliance with the Law
(A) A judge shall comply with the law,* including the Code of Judicial Conduct.
(B) Conduct by a judge that violates a criminal law may, unless the violation is
minor, constitute a violation of the requirement that a judge must comply with the law.
(C) Every judge subject to the Code of Judicial Conduct, upon being convicted of a
crime, except misdemeanor traffic offenses or traffic ordinance violations not including the
use of alcohol or drugs, shall notify the appropriate authority* in writing of such conviction
within ten days after the date of the conviction. In addition, the clerk of any court in this
state in which the conviction was entered shall transmit to the appropriate authority within
ten days after the date of the conviction a certificate thereof. This obligation to self-report
convictions is a parallel but independent obligation of judges admitted to the Colorado bar
to report the same conduct to the Office of Attorney Regulation pursuant to C.R.C.P.
“Impropriety occurs when the conduct compromises the ability of the judge to carry
out judicial responsibilities with integrity, impartiality and competence. Actual improprieties
include violations of law, court rules or provisions of this Code. The test for appearance of
impropriety is whether the conduct would create in reasonable minds a perception that the judge
violated this Code or engaged in other conduct that reflects adversely on the judge’s honesty,
impartiality, temperament, or fitness to serve as a judge.”