Judge Naughty...
The call girl implicated the usual suspects (e.g., professional athletes including Nuggets, Broncos, and Rockies), alleging that orgies involving cocaine occurred at the Denver Club.  She ID'd a "prominent local attorney" -- like attorneys and cocaine don't go together like milk and cookies.  She also claimed that Denver Players had thousands of clients; other sources reportedly claim that Players catered to "judges [NOTE THE PLURAL!], lawyers, businessmen, athletes, and politicians."

Prominent on that list was our own Paulie Walnuts doppelganger

and Bush #41 appointee Chief Judge Edward J. Nottingham of the United States District Court for the District of Colorado, who was reportedly nicknamed "Naughty."

Over the past year or so, let us just say that Judge "Naughty" has been a trifle naughty.  In a divorce proceeding involving his second wife -- Republican family values on display -- he admitted that he drank himself into a stupor at the Diamond Cabaret (a local strip bar) and couldn't even remember how he spent over $ 3,000 (not including tips for the ladies?).  Several months later, the perfectly healthy judge parked in a handicapped parking spot at a local Walgreens (to pick up his Viagra?), identified himself as a federal judge, and threatened a handicapped attorney with arrest by U.S. Marshals if she wouldn't move to let him drive away.

...The Scandal That Probably Won't Get Aired...
That "Naughty," whose divorce records revealed that he had paid $150 to join adultfriendfinder.com (which bills itself as "The World's Largest Sex & Swinger Personals Community"), was almost as much of a surprise to locals as the news (way back in the day) that Sen. Gary Hart (D-CO) was having yet another extramarital affair.  But the most tantalizing -- and most disturbing -- revelation was that he wasn't the only judge implicated.

Although their federal counterparts are grossly overpaid for what they do, in relative terms, Colorado judges don't make an awful lot of money.  Some first-year associates make more than the $ 100,000 or so that our judges get.  You can't really afford a $ 1,000/night hooker on a state judge's salary.  So, why would they appear on the list?        

If this story ever got out, it would be pure Pulitzer.  Think about it: if you gave one of these girls to a judge for the night, wouldn't he be eternally grateful?  What if you slipped a fat wad of Bens under his robe in the bathroom at a seminar, so he could buy one on his own?  Would you think you could get a fair hearing in that judge's courtroom, if opposing counsel had been unusually generous?  The mere thought of "judges" on that client list should freeze the blood of the average citizen.

                       "To distrust the judiciary, marks the beginning of the end of society."
                                                                                   -- Honoré de Balzac

....And the Muted Local Criticism
Prominent Republican lawyer and maven of morality Dan Caplis hosts a local radio show on one of our extremely right-wing Clear Channel outlets, and as was to be expected, he went ballistic on Eliot Spitzer Monday.  But when a caller confronted him regarding Judge "Naughty," his spine collapsed in record time:

First and foremost, I'm a trial lawyer, and my obligation is to my clients.  And that's why there are going to be times when a judge -- a local judge -- deserves criticism and I won't offer it on-air, because I don't want to compromise my clients' interests.

His radio partner, former district attorney and Democrat Craig Silverman, agreed:

[B]ut we're also attorneys, and we don't know when a case bars, or one of our partners is going to be in front of Judge Nottingham, so if you perceive a little hesitancy on my part, that it accurate. ... For me personally, it is sort of dicey for me to be talking about Judge Nottingham -- it's a delicate situation for Denver lawyers.

What their remarks say about our local courts -- and our bar in particular -- is positively damning.  Local attorneys refuse to criticize local judges publicly because they know that local judges only follow the law when it takes them exactly where they want to go.  And thus by implication, the Constitution and Bill of Rights are completely null and void in Colorado because our judges, like Captain Barbossa in Pirates of the Caribbean, see "the [United States] Code" as more like "guidelines."

Good News Travels Fast
While the goss is mostly traveling by whisper, there is a flood of it.  The KYC sysadmin reports record traffic:  

Between Saturday and today, there have been over one-hundred "hits" on our Notting- ham Web page from the federal courts (uscourts.gov) domain, alone.

Visits to the Nottingham page from law firms around the country included, but were not limited to: Hall & Evans, LLC; Moye White LLP; Eley & Eley; Jester & Gibson, LLP; Pier 5 Lawyers; Irwin & Boesen, P.C.; Gibson Dunn Crutcher LLP; Kamlet Shepherd & Reichert, LLP; Holmes, Roberts & Owen, LLP; Perkins & Coie, LLP; Bennington & Johnson, LLC; Fowler, Schimberg & Flanagan; Isaacson Rosenbaum PC; Shearman & Sterling, LLP; Brownstein Hyatt Farber & Schrek; Zuckerman Spaeder, LLP; Hunnicutt & Appelman, PC; Kaye Scholer, LLP; Latham & Watkins, LLP; Kirkland & Ellis, LLP; Hughes Hubbard & Reed, LLP; Baker & Hostetler, LLP, Franklin D Azar & Assoc., P.C. and Quinn Emanuel Urquhart Oliver & Hedges, LLP.

Other visitors included the Denver Bar Association, City and County of Denver, University of Arkansas, University of Michigan, Pennsylvania State University, Cornell University, Denver Community College, Denver University Sturm College of Law, State of New Mexico, State of Delaware, State of Minnesota, State of Colorado, Colorado Judicial Branch, California Tax Franchise Board, Channel 9 News, The Denver Post, Bank of Oklahoma, the U.S. "Antarctic Program," U.S. Department of Veteran Affairs, U.S. Immigration and Naturalization Service, U.S. Social Security Administration, Internal Revenue Service and the U.S. General Services Administration.  This latter agency is responsible for handling per diem reimbursements, travel arrangements, inter alia, for federal employees.  (We surmise that the agency is taking a very close look at Judge Nottingham's receipts, just now).

There is an added bonus to this story: good oppo research on Caplis, who may actually run against Ken Salazar (not that anyone would actually miss him) in the future.  I'll report the stories without comment:

                                                Chicken a la Dan Caplis

Several weeks ago when Congress was debating so-called tort reform legislation (which really should be called the Corporate Immunity Act), you could tune into KHOW many an afternoon to hear the always self-impressed Dan Caplis decrying "frivolous lawsuits."

True to the hypocrisy inherent in his right-wing ideology, we learn today that Caplis has launched his own frivolous lawsuit against Glenn Spagnuolo for publicly revealing that Caplis assaulted a "pregnant woman of color" during a 1977 mini-riot he participated in as a CU student.

Spagnuolo says the incident is well-documented and other witnesses saw Caplis engage in what his Focus on the Family soul-mates would call child abuse (i.e. attacking an unborn child).  According to Caplis, the lawsuit is filed under seal.  However, Spagnuolo's comments about Caplis were recorded at a pro-Ward Churchill rally and played repeatedly on Peter Boyles' radio show on KHOW.

If Caplis is truly justified in his secretive lawsuit against Spagnuolo, why is he hiding its contents?  Or, is Caplis just trying to intimidate and silence Spagnuolo through "frivolous lawsuit abuse," not unlike his on-the-air bullying of CU for failing to silence Churchill?  Funny how Caplis' CU past is returning to haunt him in his anti-Ward Churchill crusade.  Or, to paraphrase Ward Churchill, Caplis' CU chickens are coming home to roost.  

Posted by Rebel Dem on April 29, 2005 at 12:27 PM | Permalink

http://coloradopoliticalnews.blogs.c...

DAN CAPLIS DROPS LAWSUIT AGAINST ACTIVIST AND R-68 ORGANIZER!

DENVER, May 2, 2007—After more than a year and a half of stalling, 630 am KHOW afternoon talk radio show host Dan Caplis, of the "Caplis and Silverman" show, has dropped his civil lawsuit he had filed against Re-create 68 organizer and community activist, Glenn Spagnuolo. The lawsuit stemmed from remarks Spagnuolo made at a speech he gave on the University of Colorado’s Boulder Campus in support of Ward Churchill. During the speech, Spagnuolo stated that, "It is no surprise that Dan Caplis and the three stooges of Clear Channel, Boyles, Silverman, and Caplis, would attack the Ethnic Studies Department". He than went on to reference a racial incident that occurred when Dan Caplis was a student at CU that resulted in Caplis engaging in a fist fight with students of color. The comment was replayed on KHOW radio the next day, at which time, Caplis vowed, "not to let these slanderous lies and attacks on him go unanswered" and promised to sue Spagnuolo. As promised, Caplis filed what was nothing more than a S.L.A.A.P.P. suit against Spagnuolo, which prevented him from appearing on any Clear Channel owned stations, due to its policy of protecting employees during litigation.

After numerous settlement offers from Dan Caplis to Spagnuolo, Caplis finally dropped the suit without any concessions offered by either party. Spagnuolo was not only willing to have his day in court in order to clear his name that was besmirched by Dan Caplis and his cronies on KHOW radio, he was also willing to prove the facts of the statement in question.

http://wardchurchill.net/...

It seems that, to a Republican lawyer, the only non-frivolous lawsuit is the one that you or your client files.  Ask Robert Bork.