Mike Coffman Oarc Complaint

Mike Coffman 14044 East Hampden Place Aurora, CO 80014 Via U.S. Mail September 23, 2009 Colorado Supreme Court Attorney Regulation Counsel 1560 Broadway, Suite 1800 Denver, CO 80202 Re: Ethics Complaint Concerning Ms. Chantell Taylor Dear Attorney Regulation Counsel, I am writing to file an ethics complaint against Chantell Taylor, attorney registration number 33059. Specifically, I am filing a complaint under Colo. RPC 4.1 (a), 8.4(c) and 8.4(d). The facts underlying my complaint are relatively straightforward. Ms. Taylor is the executive director of an organization known as “Colorado Ethics Watch,” (See Exhibit A) and she simultaneously represents the organization in litigation against others. Last year she pursued an ethics complaint against me when I held the elected office of Secretary of State. This complaint does not involve that litigation, but rather Ms. Taylor’s behavior following the litigation. On April 14, 2009, the Colorado Independent Ethics Commission dismissed the Complaint filed by Colorado Ethics Watch. The Commission found “insufficient evidence under either a clear and convincing standard of proof or a preponderance of the evidence standard of proof to find that Coffman violated any standard of ethical conduct.” In the matter of Michael Coffman, Complaint No. 08-01, Decision at 18 (April 14, 2009) (at Exhibit B). In short, the Commission found no evidence that I committed any violation. Nonetheless, that same day on April 14, 2009, Ms. Taylor issued a statement to the press claiming that the Commission “found that Coffman technically violated state law.” (See Exhibit C). This statement was entirely false. As noted above, the Commission found that I did not violate the law. At most, I surmise that Ms. Taylor may rely on the statement that “The IEC finds that although there may have been a technical violation of state law, this was mitigated by the vigorous and immediate remedial action taken by both Coffman and Mr. Hobbs.” Decision at 13. This sentence refers solely to possible illegal activity by Mr. Dan

Kopelman, an employee at the Secretary of State’s office during the relevant time period. Further, the IEC tentatively stated that there “may” have been a violation, and in no way did the IEC attribute that potential violation to my behavior. In short, Ms. Taylor twists the meaning of this statement into the false statement that “Coffman technically violated state law.” Ms. Taylor’s behavior violates several provisions of the Colorado Rules of Professional Conduct. First, Rule 4.1 states that “In the course of representing a client a lawyer shall not knowingly . . . (a) make a false statement of material fact or law to a third person.” Here, Ms. Taylor represented Colorado Ethics Watch (See Decision at 19) and she knowingly issued the public statement containing the false accusation. (See Exhibit C). Further, her statement received widespread publicity, serving as the basis for several news reports. (See Exhibits D and E). More troubling, at least two media outlets quoted her false claim that the Commission found that I violated the law. (See Exhibits F and G.) In addition to violating Rule 4.1, Ms. Taylor violated Rule 8.4(c), which prohibits a lawyer from “engag[ing] in conduct involving dishonesty, fraud, deceit or misrepresentation,” and she violated Rule 8.4(d), which prohibits a lawyer from “engag[ing] in conduct that is prejudicial to the administration of justice.” Again, Ms Taylor’s public comments violated both rules. She deliberately made a false statement about the Commission’s holding, in an effort to deceive the public about the legality of my behavior. Indeed, her statements were not merely an offhand comment about a legal proceeding, but instead went to the Commission’s central holding. This was a deliberate attempt to deceive the public by misrepresenting a legal ruling. These statements also prejudiced the administration of justice. Our justice system exists not only to punish the guilty, but also to clear the innocent of false accusations. Yet Ms. Taylor purposely interfered with this goal, attempting to mislead the public into believing that she had proven her accusations of illegal conduct. She did not merely express an opinion that the Commission erred, but she instead misrepresented the foundation of the Commission’s ruling. I also note that Ms. Taylor is the director of Colorado Ethics Watch, which holds itself out as a charitable organization dedicated to upholding the integrity of state and local government. And to that end her organization receives a governmental subsidy in the form of tax-deductible donations. (See Exhibit H). Because Ms. Taylor publicly claims a position of public trust and receives a tax subsidy based on that assertion, the comments to Rule 8.4 apply with particular force. Specifically, “a lawyer’s abuse of public office [and private trust] can suggest an inability to fulfill the professional role of lawyers.” This applies here. Ms. Taylor sought to mislead the public on the central issue before the Commission – whether I violated the law. Her willingness to mislead the public on such an important issue reveals a deep flaw regarding her honesty and fitness to fairly represent her clients in other matters. Finally, this is not the first time that Ms. Taylor has sought to injure my reputation by making false public accusations. Prior to filing her complaint, she accused me of being

Colorado’s most corrupt through public official, in a report issued by her organization in 2008. (See Exhibit I.) Specifically, that report claimed that I used my public office to benefit my own campaign. These accusations relied upon the same information the Commission rejected. And like her more recent public pronouncements, she falsely accused me of illegal behavior. Indeed, this report should be seen as part of an ongoing attempt to prejudice the administration of justice. As the person harmed by Ms. Taylor’s falsehoods, I strongly urge you to take action to regulate your profession. I recognize the potential for political overtones in this matter, because I served as the former Secretary of State and a currently serve in the United States Congress. Nonetheless, it is important that lawyers understand and respect the important role they play in our society. Lawyers should not use their positions or their legal skills to mislead the public on high-profile public issues or high-profile litigation, such as this matter. I am therefore hopeful that you will approach this issue with the level of seriousness that it deserves. Sincerely,

Mike Coffman 14044 East Hampden Place Aurora, CO 80014