Specific to BM's case and the overlapping investigation in the 11th and 12 Judicial Districts, I currently have two concerns for the future prosecution of BM.
I don't think the concern need be focused on the DA's [Ann Kelly and presumably Jeff Lindsey] but on the elected Judges for each of these two districts who are empowered with personal discretion over the sanctions for violations.
IMO, the best thing that could happen to the 11th is for Kaitlin Turner to resign and go coach women's volleyball at Black Hills State University. Turner is a cancer, her tweets during BM's prelim were vulgar, and I fear Jeff Lindsey is being set up for failure even before he's elected and takes the oath for office!
Turner is in tight with IE, and she's currently feeding IE's "PEP" legislative effort to take down prosecutors will her precedent setting cases sanctioned including letting the baby killer couple walk, and reducing the charges of a confessed, first degree killer only weeks after his arrest date. And you know they already started celebrating the fresh kill of Stanley.
I knew long ago that the tally for sanctioned cases attributed to the 11th/Stanley were wrong and included cases that predated her term but when it's open season on LS, nobody will question it. Besides 40 sounds better on KRDO than 18. But just today I realized how Turner is insulating her case sanction decisions from the Appellate: these cases of Turner's gross abuse of discretion resulting in "severe sanctions," typically reserved for willful conduct, are being cited as "Sanctions for Deterrence Purposes." I'm sick over this... and don't doubt Jeff Linsey is being set up to crash for the benefit of "PEP" before he's even elected and/or sworn in.
I'm sure Turner will start a revised tally of sanctions attributed to 11/Lindsey but seriously, it's the equivalent of starting your freshman year behind your graduating bully brother where your will be punished by inheriting his GPA on your first day of school! It's such an IE move that I wonder which of them thought of the unchartered waters... "sanctioned for deterrence purposes." Might as well be handing out scarlet letters.
As for the 12th/Kelly, I learned she too is carry a cross similar to being tagged for deterrence. Her predecessor, Alonzo Payne was being recalled as DA when he resigned. While he didn't have an opposing defense attorney filing complaints against him with OARC, he had bigger problems of prosecutorial misconduct, and it was the Attorney General's Office (Phil Weiser, also tight with IE) that initiated an investigation against him that ultimately got him disbarred.
IMO, it's AG Weiser, IE's buddy, that put a chain on Kelly. Payne signed an agreement with the AG's office agreeing to be monitored, but resigned 3 days later. When Kelly arrived to take over in 2022, the AG imposed the same agreement on Kelly. Although she's been in her role for about 19 months and is running for the DA job again, out of her budget, the AG is having her pay for somebody to look over her shoulder, but Weiser he told her to think of them like a coach, a mentor.
What? Full access to cases which would include BM, by somebody Weiser plants inside her office? Hell no! Last I recall, Kelly proposed the Colorado District Attorney Council (CDAC) serve as the monitor who offered at no cost and Weiser rejected them citing a conflict of interest.
I'll say it first, I'd rather wait another year for BM to be recharged than have some politico tight with Weiser snooping around the 12th Judicial District DA's office. MOO
The agreement contains many requirements. Most notably, a monitor appointed by the AG will spend a minimum of six months overseeing the DA’s office with “full access to cases and personnel.” The monitor will be paid for by the DA’s office.
Kelly argues the agreement does not set any limit on how many cases the monitor will review or limit on how much the DA’s office will be required to spend.