The Californer - Personal Ties to Judges and Officials Raise Serious Concerns in Colorado Custody Case

Trending...

A newly filed motion has unveiled troubling revelations surrounding a custody decision that granted full custody to a father with a documented history of child sexual assault. This decision made in Colorado's 7th Judicial District,

DENVER - Californer -- Denver, Colorado – A newly filed motion has unveiled troubling revelations surrounding a custody decision that granted full custody to a father with a documented history of child sexual assault. This decision made in Colorado's 7th Judicial District, has come under intense scrutiny following allegations of personal relationships between the father and key judicial officials. Despite the father's admission to sexually assaulting a 4-year-old child and over 35 reports from medical professionals expressing grave concerns for the child's safety, the court awarded him full custody in 2022.

The motion, filed by Denver family law attorney, Chelsea Augelli, seeks to transfer the case to Denver's 2nd Judicial District. In the motion, Augelli outlines an extensive network of relationships in the 7th Judicial District that undermines the possibility of a fair trial. Jeff Diamant, an internationally recognized trial attorney in Texas has joined the case pro hac vice. His expertise and experience are expected to bring valuable insights and legal strategy to this important matter.

This case first gained national media attention as the result of an investigation by ProPublica in 2023, which raised significant questions regarding the integrity of the judicial process in the Colorado family court system. Key findings from the ProPublica investigation reveal that the father's prior admission of sexual assault of a child was disregarded in the determination of whether the father had committed other acts of ongoing abuse and whether the minor child was safe in his care. Additionally, officials responsible for investigating the abuse allegations maintained undisclosed personal relationships with the father and most recently, Chief Judge Cory Jackson recused himself, citing an inability to remain impartial due to his knowledge of the parties involved.

More on The Californer

The Motion identifies systemic issues that indicate a troubling pattern within the investigative process, including compromised investigations where officials with personal ties to the father were involved in assessing abuse allegations. Over three dozen mandatory reports from medical and mental health professionals were dismissed without investigation, raising serious concerns about child safety. Additionally, a psychological expert who is married to the district's Chief Judge served as a paid witness for the father without disclosure of this relationship, highlighting potential conflicts of interest. Furthermore, there are allegations that court records were improperly hidden from public access following media coverage, violating constitutional and legal procedures and undermining transparency to the public.

Documentation reveals that medical professionals from prestigious institutions, including Children's Hospital Colorado and National Jewish Hospital, filed mandatory reports expressing concerns for the child's welfare. Additionally, an independent law enforcement in a different county found sufficient evidence for charges against the father, yet the report reportedly and suspiciously, vanished from case files.

The implications of this case extend beyond individual custody decisions, highlighting critical systemic failures within judicial and child protective services. A recent survey of Colorado parents has revealed widespread dissatisfaction with family court judges and magistrates for frequently overlooking signs of child abuse during custody disputes, prompting calls for new domestic violence training mandates. The survey, shared by State Rep. Meg Froelich with Chief Justice Monica Márquez, highlights the detrimental effects of a flawed system where children's disclosures of abuse are often ignored, and protective parents face legal and financial intimidation. An analysis of over 250 statements found that nearly 70% of cases involving children listed as protected parties saw judges allowing contact with abusive parents, while over 90% of cases where a parent faced criminal charges for abuse still resulted in the child being removed from protection orders. Additionally, nearly half of the surveyed cases involved one parent with criminal charges while the other faced restricted parenting time, and more than 20% of these charged parents accused their ex-partners of parental alienation, which protective parents contend is misused to undermine their concerns about abuse.

More on The Californer