In the first hour of today's edition of The Dan Caplis Show, George Brauchler is joined by Danielle Jurinsky to discuss how modern politics have impacted three important legal battles.
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:00):
This is Dan Caples and welcome to today's online podcast
edition of The Dan Caplis Show. Please be sure to
give us a five star rating if you'd be so kind,
and to subscribe, download and listen to the show every
single day on your favorite podcast platform.
Speaker 2 (00:15):
B Wednesday too. It's George Brockler here, not the soul
Tree Sounds of Dan Caplis. No, he's in trial. We
actually shared time in a building together. I just didn't
get a chance to go into a courtroom five there
on the second floor of the Douglas County Justice Center
and poke my head in and see what they're doing.
I intend to do that tomorrow, but because he's in there,
I'm in here talking with you until six pm. I
(00:40):
have to say so much going on in the news.
I regret not being on the radio regularly to talk
about it because so many of these great topics. And
I listen to Ryan crush It and then in the
days before Dan crush It. But if you are a
radio guy or gal and you're on the radio, I
just can't imagine what you have to do to really
(01:00):
come up with a topic unless you're filling in for
Dan Caplis at four o'clock because the topics just come
to you, whether it's the signing of that House Bill
thirteen twelve on Friday, under the cover of the end
of the week, kind of no fanfare, and that's, of
course the bill that mandates a whole bunch of things,
including you can't dead name someone or misgender them, and
(01:23):
all this other stuff. But also all the things going
on in Washington, DC these days, all the struggles going
on with the big Beautiful Bill or the one Big
Bill or I've Got Big Bills or whatever it's called.
I'm not really sure the exact title of it, but
it's something like that. And then, of course, the stuff
I do want to talk about, because it's in my wheelhouse,
(01:46):
is I want to talk to you about some of
the things that have popped up over the last week
or so involving criminal justice, because as it turns out,
I've done a little bit of it over the last
thirty years, and one thing in particular, and I was
on the radio with Ryan and Dan talking about this,
but I want to do a little bit of a
deeper die from my perspective, is this case involving this
fifteen year old killer, this juvenile who stole his mom's car.
(02:11):
That's because that's what mom says. Stole the car and
then got up to ninety miles an hour, which just
happens to be two hundred percent of the legal limit
at the time, and crushes this beautiful, innocent, hard working,
sweet woman and ends her life. And the consequences for
the fifteen year old will be zero. And I'm being
sincere about that. They're being zero because he got a
(02:33):
probationary sentence, gets to walk outside the courtroom and go
on with the rest of his life unencumbered by having
taken one. And what I want you to know is
that's by design. That's how the system is set up now,
not in this particular specific case or for this specific outcome,
but it's set up that way for juveniles. And that's
(02:55):
probably as much of a narrative as it is the
decision by the district attorney there to give that offer,
which was a change from what we understand the offer
to have been under the prior guy. His name was
John Kellner. Know him a little bit. I hired him,
promoted him, and then supported him to be the DA
when I was out of office. So I want to
talk to you about a couple pieces of that. Now
(03:16):
I should say this, I am generally and have been
loath to comment on another District Attorney's offices handling of
a case that I did not have something to do
with or I didn't have some special knowledge of, because
I just presume they've got all the information. I have
none of the information. They've talked to the victims and
(03:36):
the witnesses. I've talked to none of the victims and witnesses,
and so I just don't do that, even if when
I read in the paper like you do or online
you do, and I go, what in the what is
going on? This one's different, And I've got two others
that are different same DA's office, and we're going to
talk about him over the course of the time here,
and I'd love to get your questions and your thoughts.
(03:58):
Nobody ever gets to ask the DA anything. Well, you
can ask this DA just about anything. Three h three
seven one three eighty two fifty five. I really hope
it's a two eighty two to fifty five. Give us
a call and let me know. We also, of course
have the fantastic text line out there. But let me
start with this. We had a change in the state
(04:19):
of Colorado that we hadn't seen in sixty years. It
was the creation of a new judicial district. The creation
of that judicial district really gave me the opportunity to
be the DA of the twenty third, which is Douglas
Elberton Lincoln, a subset of the old eighteenth which was
a rappa Ho. Douglas Elberton Lincoln or the only state
in the country. This term moments for Das I served
two four year terms, I left office, John Kellner took over.
(04:42):
John might have I don't know, he might have actually
been able to serve a second term if they hadn't
cut up this jurisdiction as well. But they carved off
a Rappa Hoe in part because of the politics. Now
people will tell you, oh, the jurisdiction got too big,
I got too But that's nonsense. I had nothing to
do with the side. We were a jurisdiction of one
point one million people and it was running great. But
(05:04):
the problem was a Rapahoe County, which had become very
very blue, was being I guess, administered at the prosecution
level by Republicans, by conservative Republicans, and they couldn't stand it.
While there was also a growing risk that at some
point Red Douglas Albert Lincoln would end up having a
district attorney who was very blue. So they make this decision,
(05:27):
they make this agreement, They changed the law, they changed
the constitution, and we divide up these judicial districts, and
the result is you have a district attorney right now
in a Rapahoe County who has a very very different
view of criminal justice than the guy that succeeded me.
That's John Kellner and me and probably the DA's before,
(05:50):
and it's a very different view that's premised on these
very woke notions of over incarceration, and gosh darn it,
we just got to get to the root of why
people just keep committing crimes, and if we could adjust
address that, then we can move forward. But we just
don't want to see people, especially people of color, ever
held accountable to the level of being incarcerated, because we
(06:12):
feel like historically they have been. They have been. I
don't know if it's a product of racism, whether that's
subconscious or otherwise, but they've been mistreated by the system.
They've gone to prison when other white guys have it. Now,
I don't believe that not in any the time that
I was in the office. But that's okay. So you
have these elections and you have an Arapaho county that
(06:34):
says we want a Democrat DA And I got to
give Amy credit for this. She didn't hide the ball here.
She told everybody what she wanted to do. And in fact,
in her first campaign against John when she lost, she said,
I just don't see why I would ever direct file
that means treated juvenile as an adult. I can't see
(06:54):
why I'd ever do that, which is silly. And so
that gets me to the other part of this conver
station and how this case was handled under Colorado law.
And this is after some significant tweaking and banging on
it by the legislature dominated by the Libs, but not
entirely right like some Republicans who want to be big
(07:14):
hearted have jumped on board this crazy trend as well.
They've changed the juvenile code so that it has become
increasingly difficult, almost impossible, to hold juveniles accountable for their
criminal conduct, almost regardless of age. But it's set up
like this, if you're sixteen or seventeen years old and
(07:36):
you commit a first or second class felony, and those
are the big ones. Those are your first degree murders,
attempt first degree murders, second degree murders, some sexual assault,
kidnapping charges of stuff like that. You do that, the
DA can say, I'm going to treat you like an
adult and file you directly, a direct file into district court.
And then the defense now has thanks to some changes
(07:57):
in the law that were bipartisan at the time. By
the way, the big hearted Republicans allow them to have
a mini trial color reverse transfer hearing, and they send
it back to juvenile court. That's not this kid. This
kid's fifteen. That means if you're going to treat this
kid like an adult, you have to go get permission
from the court to do it. You can't directly file it.
You have to try to file it through a transfer hearing.
(08:18):
And my guess is both John Kilner and Amy Padden
surmised that this case was not one where they were
going to get this fifteen year old transferred into adult court.
The juvenile justice system exists to rehabilitate juveniles. In fact,
you can't find the word punishment in Title nineteen, which
is the Juvenile Justice Code, and the procedures. You can't
(08:39):
find the word punishment in there. I disagree with that,
but that's the law, and I'm going to vigorously support
that law. So we have a juvenile, a juvenile set
of prosecutors, I guess a group of juvenile prosecutors. They're
not juveniles themselves who crush it, and they do that
all the time. But where we run into trouble are
things like this guy. And so for this guy, the
(09:00):
maximum sentence I think he could have received for vehicular
homicide for this wanton, I don't give a crap about
life approach to stealing his mom's car ninety miles an
hour crushing this woman is two years in the Division
of Youth Services. That's it. Two years. Can't be more
than that. And in fact, they could parole him earlier
(09:21):
from that in dys which is on the ropes right now, folks,
in terms of personnel retention discipline, they're on the ropes,
and so they're cutting people loose on parole all the time.
Two years is the most he could have gotten. And
that's what John Kellner told the victims. We're gonna go
get you this. So here's the problem with this creating
the eighteenth Judicial District out of a Rappa home. We
(09:42):
have now set up an environment where politics, not the
will of the community, not the interests of justice, not
even the interest of rehabilitation. Politics and an election dictated
how a case was handled. And we know it because
when the Republican DA looked at this case and filed
(10:03):
it back in August of twenty four, they said, dude
has to be incarcerated. There has to be some and
we don't even call it incarceration, but there has to
be some kind of incarceration dys We don't even call
it a conviction, we call it an adjudication. Right, It
wouldn't even help follow this kid for the rest of
his life. There has to be something. This is so
wanton and the only fact that changed, the only fact
(10:26):
that changed was an election, and that election replacing a conservative,
Republican experienced prosecutor with one who was none of those things.
And Amy's appear now, I mean she's been elected, She's
got a big jurisdiction. I see her at meetings and
stuff like that. This isn't to disparage her, but it
is to point out she doesn't have the experience, never
(10:49):
had the experience. I don't know if she's ever handled
a murder. I don't know if she's ever handled a
rape or robbery. I don't know any of these things.
But my guess is the answer is no. So when
her office takes over, they end up giving this sweetheart deal.
And it's a sweetheart deal. By the way, there's nothing
that says that the court couldn't have already imposed this,
even if the DA's office asked for two years of
(11:10):
dys But that's way different, right, because then you're standing
up and saying, on behalf of the community, judge, I
think this kid's got to go away for two years.
But that doesn't happen, and so we end up in
this place where you get this outcome that is so
outrageous that it has garnered national attention. I want to
answer your questions and your calls that are coming in
here at three zo three seven one three eight two
(11:32):
five five and the text line is five seven seven
three nine texts five seven seven three nine. But I
want to talk to you more about this because this
is one of three cases that changed in the way
they were handled from before she took office to when
she took office, and the question has to be one
is this justice? And two what can we do about it?
Stick around? George Brockler filling in for the Mighty Man
(11:54):
Dan Caplis right here on The Dan Caplis Show.
Speaker 3 (12:04):
And now back to the Dankaplas Show podcast.
Speaker 2 (12:07):
I think is what it is out there in Washington,
d C.
Speaker 3 (12:09):
I must have heard you.
Speaker 2 (12:10):
It's I have a lisp. There's a thing that develops there.
It's actually Joe Biden's stutter. It only kicks in when
I'm slipping into dementia. Okay, hey, listen. George Brockler filling
in for Dan Caplis on The Dan Caplas Show. I
left you off when we were talking about some sort
of insider stuff here on what happened with this fifteen
year old Colombian illegal immigrant who's now seeking asylum after
(12:32):
stealing his mother's car and crushing and killing sweet innocent
young woman who was on her way from work, and
the fact that the deal changed and the approach changed
over a short period of time, just a mere matter
of months, and the only difference was there was a
Republican DA when it was going to be two years
(12:52):
of dys and there was a Democrat DA who ran
on hugs for illegal immigrants that took this case over.
Now there's a lot about this to unpack, and it's
become national news like it's New York Post, it's Fox News.
I've seen it all over Twitter and all these other things,
like huge stuff, and it's an indication I think of
(13:16):
what is offensive and wrong to so many. I haven't
seen anybody defend this, this decision, or this fifteen year
old kid. And when I say anybody, I mean including
the DA. Now, now let me say this. These cases
that we're going to talk about, and there's three of them,
and we're going to have Daniel Jorinsky on at four
thirty six to talk about her own experience as the
(13:37):
second case. These are things that are in the news.
They are hope, high profile, they're critical. We're talking about
dead people cases right that are in the news. Every
DA has a different approach to this. My approach is
I want to be proactive. I want to be in
front of the mic and the press and the cameras
(13:58):
and answer all of the hard questions and all the
easy ones too. I want to be out there engaging
because at the end of the day, it doesn't matter
if you have the ability to vote for your chief
prosecutor and your jurisdiction if you don't know what the
hell they do and who they are and why they've
done it. But then you get to this case and
I noticed this. What I noticed was this thing blows
(14:21):
up in the media and it was on this I
can't remember if this was the Sean Boyd one or
if there was, but there was a couple different news
outlets that end up covering this thing. And you never
hear from Amy. I mean, when's the last time you
saw her on camera or on the radio? And in fact,
Kelly just told me, man, she has reached out to
Kellner and I multiple times. We get right back to her.
(14:41):
Of course, we'll do this. Never once has she gotten
a return call from Amy Patten. Now there's no requirement
that she responded to the media. But it's interesting that
the person that comes out and talks about these cases,
all of them that blow up, is the assistant district
attorney who's a friend and I think a great prosecutor.
His name's Ryan Brackley. Dude is a prosecutor's prosecutor, brilliant
(15:04):
in the courtroom, has a good head about him. He
isn't just all one speed. Guy's great right, and he
has been the number two guy in a bunch of
offices Boulder, Denver. I think he spent some time at
the AG's office. He spent a little bit of time
in the eighteenth even down in Douglas. In his career.
Guy knows exactly what he's doing. I get it right.
(15:24):
That's you have a guy like that as your number
two because he can actually run the office. But the
part I don't get is wheeling out an employee to
take the heavy blows or the hard questions from the media.
And you will never, ever, never see me do it.
And that's just a difference. It's not a right or wrong.
I'm just telling you. It's a difference. And that thing's
(15:44):
going to show up in these next two cases that
we talk about as well. Some texts that we have gotten,
and of course we're always thrilled to get your texts.
At five seven, seven thirty nine, here's one that says,
what are you wearing? No, I'm kidding it, says George
Danielle talked about on Friday with Dan and sent to
(16:05):
Ryan what Amy Patton said when she was sworn in.
Amy said she was going to protect the undocumented. I
agree with you, that's what she said. And as much
as I think that there's a role to play for
the DA in protecting the undocumented victim victim, there is
absolutely no interest or effort on my part to want
to protect undocumented or illegal criminals. That just shouldn't be
(16:29):
our goal. Our goal should be to rid society of them.
But in this particular case, Amy told a rapa hoe
about that, and by god, they voted for her. I
don't know how many people sat down and as they
were filling in the little bubble next to Amy's name,
they thought to themselves, She's gonna pick the illegals over me.
I don't know how many people did that. But she
(16:50):
didn't hide the ball. This isn't a surprise, and a
rapa hole voted for her, and guess what they got.
Here's another one, George, who's your favorite sheriff in Douglas County?
Lot to choose from? This makes me feel like this
question it's almost like the old Father Guido Sarducci find
the Pope in the Pizza. I don't know if you've
ever seen that skit on Saturday Night Live. It's brilliant.
(17:11):
I am going to go with the one that can
actually arrest me right now. His name is Darren Weekly.
He is phenomenal. It turns out he's the only sheriff
in Douglas County right now. Here's another one, George, how
about that new DA in the eighteen judicial district, that's
the one we've been talking about. Here's another one, Ken
Tom Homan override the DA and because he is an
illegal alien to port him and his mother if she's
(17:32):
also illegal. Well, my understanding, and this sounds like Johnny
Fabs kind of a question, but my understanding is is
that none of this has anything to do with the
ability of ICE to come in and process these people
for deportation. I think it's telling that back when John
Kellner Republican, said hey, you're going to do two years
(17:55):
of dys their instant response was, you know what, we'd
love to go back to Columbia. And then when the
new DA stepped in and said, we'd like to put
you right back out into our schools and in our
community with nothing else, then they said, you know what,
we're gonna seek asylum. I think we're going to hang out.
That tells you a lot too. So do I think
Tom Homan and the other ICE folks can come in
(18:15):
and move on these folks, Sure they can, I think so.
I don't know why they don't. That's up to them,
but I don't think it's overriding the DA. I don't
think that the federal government has any influencer, input or
powers over the DA, and I don't want them to
even in this circumstance. Hey, listen, when we come back
the fantastic Daniel Jorinsky, a Roor City councilwoman and victim, yep, victim.
(18:37):
We're going to talk about what this DA's office did
with a case near and dear to her heart. Stick around.
It's George Brockler filling in for Dan campus.
Speaker 3 (18:55):
You're listening to the Dan Kaplis Show podcast.
Speaker 2 (18:58):
George brocker back with you here. You're on the Dan
Kapla Show. Going right to the VIP line. If you
wonder why Ryan picked that fantastic music. We're going to
our favorite bartender slash punch you in the baby Maker.
Daniel Jarinsky, Roor City council woman, Thanks for joining us, Danielle,
thanks for having me. Now listen, I have I asked
(19:19):
you to come on, because I wanted to sort of
do this analysis here of how politics have impacted three
pretty high profile, important cases. And the first one we
talked about you actually sunk your teeth into and that
was the case of the fifteen year old illegal alien,
illegal immigrant Colombian who killed that sweet Weaver girl by
driving ninety miles an hour and his mom stolen car. Now,
(19:42):
I don't know if you're even at a place yet
to talk about where you're going with this thing, but
that was one that got a lot of attention that
I think you were kind of responsible for, because all
of a sudden, when you started talking about this thing,
it got national New York Post, Fox News, a bunch
of other libs of tip TikTok and all. I mean,
it's just gone crazy. But I thought to myself, well,
(20:05):
wait a minute, wait a minute, there's a reason why
this matters to Danielle. And yes, we're talking about something
that took place in a roar, but there's something more personal.
And it took me a minute to figure out why
is Danielle so pissed off about this? And then I
remembered you're kind of a victim of the same decision making.
Speaker 4 (20:24):
Absolutely. You know, right when she took office. Everybody knows
the horrifying story about what happened to me with Robin Nsetta,
the woman who wrongfully accused me of abusing my son.
You know that there were two separate cases there, George,
And the first case was the false allegations against me,
(20:47):
and I was named as the victim in that case. Well,
John Kellner was still to be at that time. But
obviously that turned into such a charade. They had to
bring in a special prosecutor from Denver. And when she
came forward with the fake medical records, the eighteenth Judicial
District judge had to recuse himself because he then found
(21:09):
himself on the witness list and they had to bring
in a special judge from Denver. So, you know, we
got through the first one. She drugged me through a trial.
Robin Nissetta Bink, she drug me through a trial, and
she received four years in prison. Well then it comes
time for the fake medical record, and if you remember, George,
(21:33):
I had to even fight. I did get anybody to
listen to me.
Speaker 2 (21:37):
I remember when you first started saying this, You're right,
people were dismissing it like this is KOOKI conspiracy stuff.
And then it turned out it was much worse than
you thought it was.
Speaker 4 (21:50):
Right, Absolutely, I couldn't get anybody to listen to me.
You know. Brian Moss with Chianel four mowed me down
and you know, waving these medical records in my face
and told me I was being harsh and heartless and
you know, just all these things, and uh, you know,
I really I couldn't get anybody to listen to me.
(22:10):
And then sure enough, sure enough, you know, it came
to be that I was telling the truth and she
in fact was not dying. And not only was she
not dying, she went to an elaborate extent to uh
cover this up and to appear that she was dying,
(22:33):
and all of this came out. Well, she decided at
first she was going to take that through a trial.
She decided at the last second to just plead guilty.
This was on seven felonies and three misdemeanors, and Amy
Patten at this point had taken office by the time
it came to this sentencing hearing, and it was the
(22:55):
same fate three years probation for seven felonies. Now, let
me tell you on one felony and one misdemeanor on
the original charges of the false allegations against me. Robin
and I said, I received four years in prison and
now here we are faced with seven felonies, three misdemeanors
that she totally pled, straight up guilty to all of
(23:19):
it and walked with three years probation. I was not
allowed to speak at the sentencing hearing because I was
told that I was not considered a victim in this case.
Speaker 2 (23:29):
That it was who told you that, We told you
that you couldn't speak.
Speaker 4 (23:35):
It was the DA that was on that case. It
was the number two who was Kellner's number two. And
I think what had remained her number two for a
little while, but obviously we saw she brought in a
number two from Denver.
Speaker 2 (23:50):
Now, yeah, I don't I don't think it was only
was Tom. But here's the interesting thing. From a technical
reading of the law, the victim of those crimes, that
second set of crimes where she tried to beat the
system is the system, right like it's the people that
are the victims. But on a much more practical, common
sense level, you remain the victim because her goal was
(24:12):
to defeat justice on the charges for which you were
the name victim, and so she engages in all of
this frauds. So it seems to me that the prosecute
and I'd have no idea what took place in court.
It seems to me the prosecution would it could have
should have gone into the judge and said, Judge, we
know that technically mister Insky isn't named as one of
the victims in here, but this case doesn't exist without
(24:34):
the case for which mister Insky was a victim. She
should be heard and let the judge say no, I'm
not going to do it, which I don't think the
judge would do. I think the judge probably would have
let you talk. So that's a little disappointing.
Speaker 4 (24:47):
It was very disappointing, I mean, to think that I
wasn't a victim in this. I mean, George, I remember
the day in court where they really started having serious
talks about dismissing original charges against her, and I lost it.
I stood up and I and I just stood my ground,
and I just I definitely raised my voice and I
(25:09):
just said, Judge, I need you to hear me, I
need you to listen to me, George. To the point
that I was prepared to go to jail that day
if I was going to be held in contempt of court,
but it was going to be over my dead body
or over me sitting in a jail cell, that I
was going to remain silent, and that I was not
not going to be heard on this. What this woman
(25:30):
did to me was hainus. What she what she did
expose a completely flawed and broken system, which remains a
flawed and broken system today. This was just the Kisse
of the Iceberg. And you know how passionate I am
about that issue.
Speaker 2 (25:47):
Separately, Daniel, can I ask you what what did they
What did the prosecutors argue for a sentence? If you
remember back in March when they when she got probation
on this, I don't.
Speaker 4 (25:59):
Remember them arguing. They allowed her to appear virtually. They
didn't force her to appear in court, even though she's
sitting in a Colorado prison for the four years on
the original sentence. They allowed her to appear virtually, so
I was on virtually. They were all kind of technical
difficulties going on.
Speaker 2 (26:19):
You don't know if they ask for prison or probation
or if they just sort of argued. Here's some factors
to consider.
Speaker 4 (26:25):
I think it was just here's some factors to consider.
Speaker 2 (26:27):
Okay. One thing that I don't know that folks appreciate
about this too, were also politics and geography impacted this
is there was a judge from the eighteenth Judicial District,
which means he lives there and he knows the community
presumably and presumably would advance the community's vice. That guy
recused himself and they brought down a judge from Denver
(26:50):
to hear this case. And listening to some of the reporting,
reading some of the reporting about how he approached us
and what he said, he brought Denver with him. Do
you know what I mean? Like, He did not not
sit there and think to himself, well, I'm sitting here
as a judge, not representing what Denver thinks is appropriate here,
but what this community would like. He says some stuff here.
When he's giving her probation, he said, I think you
(27:13):
have the desire to correct course here. That's important. That's
part of the rehabilitation process. I'm convinced that you've been
accorded sufficient punishment with the current punishment, he added, and
it's like, hang on, dog, hang on, and that's your
honor dog. But hang on here, honor dog. This is
a person who didn't just try to kidnap your child
(27:35):
through torturing a process that people already mistrust the hell
out of, right, that we need to have trust in.
She then tried to corrupt the system that was going
to hold her accountable. As you were telling me what
had taken place, and as I read about it, in
my mind, I thought, if I'm a judge, I light
this woman up with enough prison that when people open
(27:56):
up their browsers the next morning, they go, sweet mother
of God, what happened and they think for themselves, I
will never ever, ever do anything to try to beat
the system like this Again. Instead we hear about, well,
I think you've taken some major steps toward rehabilitation. Who cares?
Speaker 3 (28:13):
Who gives a crap?
Speaker 2 (28:15):
If she can be rehabilitated, she should be punished.
Speaker 4 (28:18):
Yeah. And Amy Patten should have been all over this,
you know, she herself, as far as I'm concerned, should
have been in the courtroom that day. Her office should
not have allowed Robin Nisetta to appear virtually. And the
thing of it is is it's the same judge. So
this judge gave Robin kni Setta four years on the
original charges, which was one felony and one misdemeanor. But
(28:42):
that was you know, George, You remember I packed. I
packed the courtroom, right, and so I don't know if
the judge felt the pressure of that or what, but
he issued four years. So I didn't think, George, I
thought this judge understood the severity of this and and uh,
(29:05):
the the level of absurdity and pure evil of Robin
I Setta. So when it came to this next sentencing,
I didn't think I needed to ask everybody in my
life to come to courtigan. I thought this judge got it.
But then I wasn't allowed to speak. I was totally
(29:25):
cut out of the whole process. And that same judge
let her walk with three years probation and the DA's
office now under the helm of Amy Patten. This is
this is how it started, This is how her career started.
I was probably one of the very first cases the
sentencing hearing. But let her walk with three years probation
(29:47):
on seven felonies and three misdemeanors. And to think that
I was not re victimized, and this is absurd. I
was called crazy. I was made fun of I had
the media after me. I couldn't get in anybody to
take me seriously. I lost sleep over this.
Speaker 2 (30:03):
I mean honestly, Daniel, But but for you and Johnny Turnage,
I'm not sure robin Isetta isn't still in the same
position she was in at DHS, ruining lives and taking
kids from families. I mean, but for you too, I
don't think that happens. Hey, can you stick around? And
we got to take a quick break here, pay some bills,
and then I want to ask you a couple of
other things. But the bottom line here is, given what
(30:24):
this judge said, this was a freebie. This conduct to
try to corrupt and get away with it with the
system was treated as a freebie by this judge. I
simply don't understand it. Hey, it's an erosity. Council Woman,
Daniel Jorinsky nice enough to stick around with us. My
name is George Brockler. I'm filling in for the big
man while he's in court crushing it on behalf of justice.
(30:44):
Is George Brockler filling in on the Dankplas Show.
Speaker 3 (30:53):
And now back to the dan Kaplas Show podcast.
Speaker 2 (30:57):
On the line with me foolishly risking remain in credibility
she may have as a Roora City council woman. Daniel Drenski,
Thanks for sticking around, Danielle.
Speaker 4 (31:06):
Yeah, thanks for having me.
Speaker 2 (31:07):
Hey, we were ranting here and it's important for this
because once again we don't hear anything from the DA's
office about this, about any sort of outrage or disappointment.
And I've done that too when judges have gone a
different direction than I thought or appropriate. But itchaps my
hide that this last crime was treated by this Denver
judge who was brought down here. Huge mistake, huge mistake
(31:30):
to say that it's a freebie. Basically, you've been punished
enough on the other crime. What that tells everybody who
hears that is she gets no extra punishment, three years
of probation, which is never going to happen. And you
may not know this, Danielle, but our sentencing structure in
Colorado and our DOC system is so broken. Four years
of doc probably spends like she's going to be parole
(31:54):
eligible in about eighteen months from the sentence, and quite honestly,
she'll be transition to community corrections way before that.
Speaker 4 (32:02):
You go ahead, George, I have to gear up to
go in front of the pearl board this October.
Speaker 2 (32:07):
Are you kidding me?
Speaker 4 (32:09):
This October? I have to appear in front of the
She is parole eligible this October, and I have to
appear in front of the pearl board. She begged them,
do not let her out.
Speaker 2 (32:20):
Well, we got a gen this up too. You got
to call Dan and Ryan and all the rest of
them out there and keep this thing in the public eye,
because this is not justice. And I think the judge
knew it when this happened. But the idea that this
woman who was in this so much about this pisses
me off. She targeted you, an elected official for saying
(32:41):
things about her appointed a chief of police girlfriend at
the time. To what she went through to try, she
didn't just like mess with your taxes, that would be
bad enough. Tried to kidnap your kid from you using
the system, corrupts the system, and then she tries to
beat the system through this fake series of cancer this
and answer that. And at the end of the day,
(33:02):
A judge says, well, and by the way, you had
to go to trial to convict her. She wouldn't take responsibility.
A judge says, well, we're just going to give you
three years of probation on top of the fifteen seconds
you're going to spend in the Department of Corrections. In
no way does this support the rule of law. But
it does support the politics of the people that we're
making the decisions prosecutor's office, the DA's office. And that's
(33:25):
a problem. I don't know where you're at with discussing
the other things that bug the hell out of you
about what's going on in your DA's office or what
you're going to do about it. But I thought I
would just throwing out there.
Speaker 4 (33:37):
You know, George, anybody who knows me at this point
knows that you know. Once I get locked into something,
I don't back down, and I don't back down if
the media comes after me. I don't back down if
the Left comes after me. I don't care if nobody
believes me. I don't care. If I'm standing in a
room alone screaming at the top of my lungs, I
(33:59):
don't care. But this is not This is not the
end of any of this.
Speaker 5 (34:04):
And and Amy Patten. Amy Patten is getting ready to
find out what happens when when you do not uphold
the rule of law, and when you do not take.
Speaker 4 (34:18):
Her duties as a prosecutor seriously. And when I say
I'm going to do something, I'm going to do it.
So so all I will say at this time because
it's not time yet, Uh there's a law. There's a
law surrounding this as to why it's not time yet.
But the time is coming and she's going to have
to figure out how she's going to explain this, How
(34:38):
she's going to explain not once, but twice. A three
year probation sentence, now, by no means the three years
probation that Rob and I said I got in my situation.
I'm not even going to compare that to the three
years probation that the Weaver family received as justice for
their beautiful daughter, Caitlin Weaver. No comparison there, but this
(35:02):
three years probation seems to be a theme for Amy's
patten and probations and probation is.
Speaker 2 (35:10):
A joke here for your case, for the the other case.
But but let's do this. I want to it. I
know you got to get back to the bartending thing
and do cheers. Hopefully you have your own norm inside
the bar there. But I want to keep this on
the public's mind as we move through this, because it's
that important to me. Daniel Jorinski, thank.
Speaker 4 (35:29):
You, thank you so much.
Speaker 2 (35:32):
Hey, listen, folks, that's it for this same. When we're
gonna come back, I want to talk about one more case.
Daniel's aware of it. I don't know if you are
a guy named Homemid now Turkey, I was intimately impacted
by this case and the decision surrounding it.
Speaker 3 (35:44):
Stick around.
Speaker 2 (35:45):
George Brockler filling in for the Great Dan CAPLS text
us at five seven, seven, three nine, give us a
call seven one, three eight two five five Bye
This is Dan Caples and welcome to today's online podcast
edition of The Dan Caplis Show. Please be sure to
give us a five star rating if you'd be so kind,
and to subscribe, download and listen to the show every
single day on your favorite podcast platform.
Speaker 2 (00:15):
B Wednesday too. It's George Brockler here, not the soul
Tree Sounds of Dan Caplis. No, he's in trial. We
actually shared time in a building together. I just didn't
get a chance to go into a courtroom five there
on the second floor of the Douglas County Justice Center
and poke my head in and see what they're doing.
I intend to do that tomorrow, but because he's in there,
I'm in here talking with you until six pm. I
(00:40):
have to say so much going on in the news.
I regret not being on the radio regularly to talk
about it because so many of these great topics. And
I listen to Ryan crush It and then in the
days before Dan crush It. But if you are a
radio guy or gal and you're on the radio, I
just can't imagine what you have to do to really
(01:00):
come up with a topic unless you're filling in for
Dan Caplis at four o'clock because the topics just come
to you, whether it's the signing of that House Bill
thirteen twelve on Friday, under the cover of the end
of the week, kind of no fanfare, and that's, of
course the bill that mandates a whole bunch of things,
including you can't dead name someone or misgender them, and
(01:23):
all this other stuff. But also all the things going
on in Washington, DC these days, all the struggles going
on with the big Beautiful Bill or the one Big
Bill or I've Got Big Bills or whatever it's called.
I'm not really sure the exact title of it, but
it's something like that. And then, of course, the stuff
I do want to talk about, because it's in my wheelhouse,
(01:46):
is I want to talk to you about some of
the things that have popped up over the last week
or so involving criminal justice, because as it turns out,
I've done a little bit of it over the last
thirty years, and one thing in particular, and I was
on the radio with Ryan and Dan talking about this,
but I want to do a little bit of a
deeper die from my perspective, is this case involving this
fifteen year old killer, this juvenile who stole his mom's car.
(02:11):
That's because that's what mom says. Stole the car and
then got up to ninety miles an hour, which just
happens to be two hundred percent of the legal limit
at the time, and crushes this beautiful, innocent, hard working,
sweet woman and ends her life. And the consequences for
the fifteen year old will be zero. And I'm being
sincere about that. They're being zero because he got a
(02:33):
probationary sentence, gets to walk outside the courtroom and go
on with the rest of his life unencumbered by having
taken one. And what I want you to know is
that's by design. That's how the system is set up now,
not in this particular specific case or for this specific outcome,
but it's set up that way for juveniles. And that's
(02:55):
probably as much of a narrative as it is the
decision by the district attorney there to give that offer,
which was a change from what we understand the offer
to have been under the prior guy. His name was
John Kellner. Know him a little bit. I hired him,
promoted him, and then supported him to be the DA
when I was out of office. So I want to
talk to you about a couple pieces of that. Now
(03:16):
I should say this, I am generally and have been
loath to comment on another District Attorney's offices handling of
a case that I did not have something to do
with or I didn't have some special knowledge of, because
I just presume they've got all the information. I have
none of the information. They've talked to the victims and
(03:36):
the witnesses. I've talked to none of the victims and witnesses,
and so I just don't do that, even if when
I read in the paper like you do or online
you do, and I go, what in the what is
going on? This one's different, And I've got two others
that are different same DA's office, and we're going to
talk about him over the course of the time here,
and I'd love to get your questions and your thoughts.
(03:58):
Nobody ever gets to ask the DA anything. Well, you
can ask this DA just about anything. Three h three
seven one three eighty two fifty five. I really hope
it's a two eighty two to fifty five. Give us
a call and let me know. We also, of course
have the fantastic text line out there. But let me
start with this. We had a change in the state
(04:19):
of Colorado that we hadn't seen in sixty years. It
was the creation of a new judicial district. The creation
of that judicial district really gave me the opportunity to
be the DA of the twenty third, which is Douglas
Elberton Lincoln, a subset of the old eighteenth which was
a rappa Ho. Douglas Elberton Lincoln or the only state
in the country. This term moments for Das I served
two four year terms, I left office, John Kellner took over.
(04:42):
John might have I don't know, he might have actually
been able to serve a second term if they hadn't
cut up this jurisdiction as well. But they carved off
a Rappa Hoe in part because of the politics. Now
people will tell you, oh, the jurisdiction got too big,
I got too But that's nonsense. I had nothing to
do with the side. We were a jurisdiction of one
point one million people and it was running great. But
(05:04):
the problem was a Rapahoe County, which had become very
very blue, was being I guess, administered at the prosecution
level by Republicans, by conservative Republicans, and they couldn't stand it.
While there was also a growing risk that at some
point Red Douglas Albert Lincoln would end up having a
district attorney who was very blue. So they make this decision,
(05:27):
they make this agreement, They changed the law, they changed
the constitution, and we divide up these judicial districts, and
the result is you have a district attorney right now
in a Rapahoe County who has a very very different
view of criminal justice than the guy that succeeded me.
That's John Kellner and me and probably the DA's before,
(05:50):
and it's a very different view that's premised on these
very woke notions of over incarceration, and gosh darn it,
we just got to get to the root of why
people just keep committing crimes, and if we could adjust
address that, then we can move forward. But we just
don't want to see people, especially people of color, ever
held accountable to the level of being incarcerated, because we
(06:12):
feel like historically they have been. They have been. I
don't know if it's a product of racism, whether that's
subconscious or otherwise, but they've been mistreated by the system.
They've gone to prison when other white guys have it. Now,
I don't believe that not in any the time that
I was in the office. But that's okay. So you
have these elections and you have an Arapaho county that
(06:34):
says we want a Democrat DA And I got to
give Amy credit for this. She didn't hide the ball here.
She told everybody what she wanted to do. And in fact,
in her first campaign against John when she lost, she said,
I just don't see why I would ever direct file
that means treated juvenile as an adult. I can't see
(06:54):
why I'd ever do that, which is silly. And so
that gets me to the other part of this conver
station and how this case was handled under Colorado law.
And this is after some significant tweaking and banging on
it by the legislature dominated by the Libs, but not
entirely right like some Republicans who want to be big
(07:14):
hearted have jumped on board this crazy trend as well.
They've changed the juvenile code so that it has become
increasingly difficult, almost impossible, to hold juveniles accountable for their
criminal conduct, almost regardless of age. But it's set up
like this, if you're sixteen or seventeen years old and
(07:36):
you commit a first or second class felony, and those
are the big ones. Those are your first degree murders,
attempt first degree murders, second degree murders, some sexual assault,
kidnapping charges of stuff like that. You do that, the
DA can say, I'm going to treat you like an
adult and file you directly, a direct file into district court.
And then the defense now has thanks to some changes
(07:57):
in the law that were bipartisan at the time. By
the way, the big hearted Republicans allow them to have
a mini trial color reverse transfer hearing, and they send
it back to juvenile court. That's not this kid. This
kid's fifteen. That means if you're going to treat this
kid like an adult, you have to go get permission
from the court to do it. You can't directly file it.
You have to try to file it through a transfer hearing.
(08:18):
And my guess is both John Kilner and Amy Padden
surmised that this case was not one where they were
going to get this fifteen year old transferred into adult court.
The juvenile justice system exists to rehabilitate juveniles. In fact,
you can't find the word punishment in Title nineteen, which
is the Juvenile Justice Code, and the procedures. You can't
(08:39):
find the word punishment in there. I disagree with that,
but that's the law, and I'm going to vigorously support
that law. So we have a juvenile, a juvenile set
of prosecutors, I guess a group of juvenile prosecutors. They're
not juveniles themselves who crush it, and they do that
all the time. But where we run into trouble are
things like this guy. And so for this guy, the
(09:00):
maximum sentence I think he could have received for vehicular
homicide for this wanton, I don't give a crap about
life approach to stealing his mom's car ninety miles an
hour crushing this woman is two years in the Division
of Youth Services. That's it. Two years. Can't be more
than that. And in fact, they could parole him earlier
(09:21):
from that in dys which is on the ropes right now, folks,
in terms of personnel retention discipline, they're on the ropes,
and so they're cutting people loose on parole all the time.
Two years is the most he could have gotten. And
that's what John Kellner told the victims. We're gonna go
get you this. So here's the problem with this creating
the eighteenth Judicial District out of a Rappa home. We
(09:42):
have now set up an environment where politics, not the
will of the community, not the interests of justice, not
even the interest of rehabilitation. Politics and an election dictated
how a case was handled. And we know it because
when the Republican DA looked at this case and filed
(10:03):
it back in August of twenty four, they said, dude
has to be incarcerated. There has to be some and
we don't even call it incarceration, but there has to
be some kind of incarceration dys We don't even call
it a conviction, we call it an adjudication. Right, It
wouldn't even help follow this kid for the rest of
his life. There has to be something. This is so
wanton and the only fact that changed, the only fact
(10:26):
that changed was an election, and that election replacing a conservative,
Republican experienced prosecutor with one who was none of those things.
And Amy's appear now, I mean she's been elected, She's
got a big jurisdiction. I see her at meetings and
stuff like that. This isn't to disparage her, but it
is to point out she doesn't have the experience, never
(10:49):
had the experience. I don't know if she's ever handled
a murder. I don't know if she's ever handled a
rape or robbery. I don't know any of these things.
But my guess is the answer is no. So when
her office takes over, they end up giving this sweetheart deal.
And it's a sweetheart deal. By the way, there's nothing
that says that the court couldn't have already imposed this,
even if the DA's office asked for two years of
(11:10):
dys But that's way different, right, because then you're standing
up and saying, on behalf of the community, judge, I
think this kid's got to go away for two years.
But that doesn't happen, and so we end up in
this place where you get this outcome that is so
outrageous that it has garnered national attention. I want to
answer your questions and your calls that are coming in
here at three zo three seven one three eight two
(11:32):
five five and the text line is five seven seven
three nine texts five seven seven three nine. But I
want to talk to you more about this because this
is one of three cases that changed in the way
they were handled from before she took office to when
she took office, and the question has to be one
is this justice? And two what can we do about it?
Stick around? George Brockler filling in for the Mighty Man
(11:54):
Dan Caplis right here on The Dan Caplis Show.
Speaker 3 (12:04):
And now back to the Dankaplas Show podcast.
Speaker 2 (12:07):
I think is what it is out there in Washington,
d C.
Speaker 3 (12:09):
I must have heard you.
Speaker 2 (12:10):
It's I have a lisp. There's a thing that develops there.
It's actually Joe Biden's stutter. It only kicks in when
I'm slipping into dementia. Okay, hey, listen. George Brockler filling
in for Dan Caplis on The Dan Caplas Show. I
left you off when we were talking about some sort
of insider stuff here on what happened with this fifteen
year old Colombian illegal immigrant who's now seeking asylum after
(12:32):
stealing his mother's car and crushing and killing sweet innocent
young woman who was on her way from work, and
the fact that the deal changed and the approach changed
over a short period of time, just a mere matter
of months, and the only difference was there was a
Republican DA when it was going to be two years
(12:52):
of dys and there was a Democrat DA who ran
on hugs for illegal immigrants that took this case over.
Now there's a lot about this to unpack, and it's
become national news like it's New York Post, it's Fox News.
I've seen it all over Twitter and all these other things,
like huge stuff, and it's an indication I think of
(13:16):
what is offensive and wrong to so many. I haven't
seen anybody defend this, this decision, or this fifteen year
old kid. And when I say anybody, I mean including
the DA. Now, now let me say this. These cases
that we're going to talk about, and there's three of them,
and we're going to have Daniel Jorinsky on at four
thirty six to talk about her own experience as the
(13:37):
second case. These are things that are in the news.
They are hope, high profile, they're critical. We're talking about
dead people cases right that are in the news. Every
DA has a different approach to this. My approach is
I want to be proactive. I want to be in
front of the mic and the press and the cameras
(13:58):
and answer all of the hard questions and all the
easy ones too. I want to be out there engaging
because at the end of the day, it doesn't matter
if you have the ability to vote for your chief
prosecutor and your jurisdiction if you don't know what the
hell they do and who they are and why they've
done it. But then you get to this case and
I noticed this. What I noticed was this thing blows
(14:21):
up in the media and it was on this I
can't remember if this was the Sean Boyd one or
if there was, but there was a couple different news
outlets that end up covering this thing. And you never
hear from Amy. I mean, when's the last time you
saw her on camera or on the radio? And in fact,
Kelly just told me, man, she has reached out to
Kellner and I multiple times. We get right back to her.
(14:41):
Of course, we'll do this. Never once has she gotten
a return call from Amy Patten. Now there's no requirement
that she responded to the media. But it's interesting that
the person that comes out and talks about these cases,
all of them that blow up, is the assistant district
attorney who's a friend and I think a great prosecutor.
His name's Ryan Brackley. Dude is a prosecutor's prosecutor, brilliant
(15:04):
in the courtroom, has a good head about him. He
isn't just all one speed. Guy's great right, and he
has been the number two guy in a bunch of
offices Boulder, Denver. I think he spent some time at
the AG's office. He spent a little bit of time
in the eighteenth even down in Douglas. In his career.
Guy knows exactly what he's doing. I get it right.
(15:24):
That's you have a guy like that as your number
two because he can actually run the office. But the
part I don't get is wheeling out an employee to
take the heavy blows or the hard questions from the media.
And you will never, ever, never see me do it.
And that's just a difference. It's not a right or wrong.
I'm just telling you. It's a difference. And that thing's
(15:44):
going to show up in these next two cases that
we talk about as well. Some texts that we have gotten,
and of course we're always thrilled to get your texts.
At five seven, seven thirty nine, here's one that says,
what are you wearing? No, I'm kidding it, says George
Danielle talked about on Friday with Dan and sent to
(16:05):
Ryan what Amy Patton said when she was sworn in.
Amy said she was going to protect the undocumented. I
agree with you, that's what she said. And as much
as I think that there's a role to play for
the DA in protecting the undocumented victim victim, there is
absolutely no interest or effort on my part to want
to protect undocumented or illegal criminals. That just shouldn't be
(16:29):
our goal. Our goal should be to rid society of them.
But in this particular case, Amy told a rapa hoe
about that, and by god, they voted for her. I
don't know how many people sat down and as they
were filling in the little bubble next to Amy's name,
they thought to themselves, She's gonna pick the illegals over me.
I don't know how many people did that. But she
(16:50):
didn't hide the ball. This isn't a surprise, and a
rapa hole voted for her, and guess what they got.
Here's another one, George, who's your favorite sheriff in Douglas County?
Lot to choose from? This makes me feel like this
question it's almost like the old Father Guido Sarducci find
the Pope in the Pizza. I don't know if you've
ever seen that skit on Saturday Night Live. It's brilliant.
(17:11):
I am going to go with the one that can
actually arrest me right now. His name is Darren Weekly.
He is phenomenal. It turns out he's the only sheriff
in Douglas County right now. Here's another one, George, how
about that new DA in the eighteen judicial district, that's
the one we've been talking about. Here's another one, Ken
Tom Homan override the DA and because he is an
illegal alien to port him and his mother if she's
(17:32):
also illegal. Well, my understanding, and this sounds like Johnny
Fabs kind of a question, but my understanding is is
that none of this has anything to do with the
ability of ICE to come in and process these people
for deportation. I think it's telling that back when John
Kellner Republican, said hey, you're going to do two years
(17:55):
of dys their instant response was, you know what, we'd
love to go back to Columbia. And then when the
new DA stepped in and said, we'd like to put
you right back out into our schools and in our
community with nothing else, then they said, you know what,
we're gonna seek asylum. I think we're going to hang out.
That tells you a lot too. So do I think
Tom Homan and the other ICE folks can come in
(18:15):
and move on these folks, Sure they can, I think so.
I don't know why they don't. That's up to them,
but I don't think it's overriding the DA. I don't
think that the federal government has any influencer, input or
powers over the DA, and I don't want them to
even in this circumstance. Hey, listen, when we come back
the fantastic Daniel Jorinsky, a Roor City councilwoman and victim, yep, victim.
(18:37):
We're going to talk about what this DA's office did
with a case near and dear to her heart. Stick around.
It's George Brockler filling in for Dan campus.
Speaker 3 (18:55):
You're listening to the Dan Kaplis Show podcast.
Speaker 2 (18:58):
George brocker back with you here. You're on the Dan
Kapla Show. Going right to the VIP line. If you
wonder why Ryan picked that fantastic music. We're going to
our favorite bartender slash punch you in the baby Maker.
Daniel Jarinsky, Roor City council woman, Thanks for joining us, Danielle,
thanks for having me. Now listen, I have I asked
(19:19):
you to come on, because I wanted to sort of
do this analysis here of how politics have impacted three
pretty high profile, important cases. And the first one we
talked about you actually sunk your teeth into and that
was the case of the fifteen year old illegal alien,
illegal immigrant Colombian who killed that sweet Weaver girl by
driving ninety miles an hour and his mom stolen car. Now,
(19:42):
I don't know if you're even at a place yet
to talk about where you're going with this thing, but
that was one that got a lot of attention that
I think you were kind of responsible for, because all
of a sudden, when you started talking about this thing,
it got national New York Post, Fox News, a bunch
of other libs of tip TikTok and all. I mean,
it's just gone crazy. But I thought to myself, well,
(20:05):
wait a minute, wait a minute, there's a reason why
this matters to Danielle. And yes, we're talking about something
that took place in a roar, but there's something more personal.
And it took me a minute to figure out why
is Danielle so pissed off about this? And then I
remembered you're kind of a victim of the same decision making.
Speaker 4 (20:24):
Absolutely. You know, right when she took office. Everybody knows
the horrifying story about what happened to me with Robin Nsetta,
the woman who wrongfully accused me of abusing my son.
You know that there were two separate cases there, George,
And the first case was the false allegations against me,
(20:47):
and I was named as the victim in that case. Well,
John Kellner was still to be at that time. But
obviously that turned into such a charade. They had to
bring in a special prosecutor from Denver. And when she
came forward with the fake medical records, the eighteenth Judicial
District judge had to recuse himself because he then found
(21:09):
himself on the witness list and they had to bring
in a special judge from Denver. So, you know, we
got through the first one. She drugged me through a trial.
Robin Nissetta Bink, she drug me through a trial, and
she received four years in prison. Well then it comes
time for the fake medical record, and if you remember, George,
(21:33):
I had to even fight. I did get anybody to
listen to me.
Speaker 2 (21:37):
I remember when you first started saying this, You're right,
people were dismissing it like this is KOOKI conspiracy stuff.
And then it turned out it was much worse than
you thought it was.
Speaker 4 (21:50):
Right, Absolutely, I couldn't get anybody to listen to me.
You know. Brian Moss with Chianel four mowed me down
and you know, waving these medical records in my face
and told me I was being harsh and heartless and
you know, just all these things, and uh, you know,
I really I couldn't get anybody to listen to me.
(22:10):
And then sure enough, sure enough, you know, it came
to be that I was telling the truth and she
in fact was not dying. And not only was she
not dying, she went to an elaborate extent to uh
cover this up and to appear that she was dying,
(22:33):
and all of this came out. Well, she decided at
first she was going to take that through a trial.
She decided at the last second to just plead guilty.
This was on seven felonies and three misdemeanors, and Amy
Patten at this point had taken office by the time
it came to this sentencing hearing, and it was the
(22:55):
same fate three years probation for seven felonies. Now, let
me tell you on one felony and one misdemeanor on
the original charges of the false allegations against me. Robin
and I said, I received four years in prison and
now here we are faced with seven felonies, three misdemeanors
that she totally pled, straight up guilty to all of
(23:19):
it and walked with three years probation. I was not
allowed to speak at the sentencing hearing because I was
told that I was not considered a victim in this case.
Speaker 2 (23:29):
That it was who told you that, We told you
that you couldn't speak.
Speaker 4 (23:35):
It was the DA that was on that case. It
was the number two who was Kellner's number two. And
I think what had remained her number two for a
little while, but obviously we saw she brought in a
number two from Denver.
Speaker 2 (23:50):
Now, yeah, I don't I don't think it was only
was Tom. But here's the interesting thing. From a technical
reading of the law, the victim of those crimes, that
second set of crimes where she tried to beat the
system is the system, right like it's the people that
are the victims. But on a much more practical, common
sense level, you remain the victim because her goal was
(24:12):
to defeat justice on the charges for which you were
the name victim, and so she engages in all of
this frauds. So it seems to me that the prosecute
and I'd have no idea what took place in court.
It seems to me the prosecution would it could have
should have gone into the judge and said, Judge, we
know that technically mister Insky isn't named as one of
the victims in here, but this case doesn't exist without
(24:34):
the case for which mister Insky was a victim. She
should be heard and let the judge say no, I'm
not going to do it, which I don't think the
judge would do. I think the judge probably would have
let you talk. So that's a little disappointing.
Speaker 4 (24:47):
It was very disappointing, I mean, to think that I
wasn't a victim in this. I mean, George, I remember
the day in court where they really started having serious
talks about dismissing original charges against her, and I lost it.
I stood up and I and I just stood my ground,
and I just I definitely raised my voice and I
(25:09):
just said, Judge, I need you to hear me, I
need you to listen to me, George. To the point
that I was prepared to go to jail that day
if I was going to be held in contempt of court,
but it was going to be over my dead body
or over me sitting in a jail cell, that I
was going to remain silent, and that I was not
not going to be heard on this. What this woman
(25:30):
did to me was hainus. What she what she did
expose a completely flawed and broken system, which remains a
flawed and broken system today. This was just the Kisse
of the Iceberg. And you know how passionate I am
about that issue.
Speaker 2 (25:47):
Separately, Daniel, can I ask you what what did they
What did the prosecutors argue for a sentence? If you
remember back in March when they when she got probation
on this, I don't.
Speaker 4 (25:59):
Remember them arguing. They allowed her to appear virtually. They
didn't force her to appear in court, even though she's
sitting in a Colorado prison for the four years on
the original sentence. They allowed her to appear virtually, so
I was on virtually. They were all kind of technical
difficulties going on.
Speaker 2 (26:19):
You don't know if they ask for prison or probation
or if they just sort of argued. Here's some factors
to consider.
Speaker 4 (26:25):
I think it was just here's some factors to consider.
Speaker 2 (26:27):
Okay. One thing that I don't know that folks appreciate
about this too, were also politics and geography impacted this
is there was a judge from the eighteenth Judicial District,
which means he lives there and he knows the community
presumably and presumably would advance the community's vice. That guy
recused himself and they brought down a judge from Denver
(26:50):
to hear this case. And listening to some of the reporting,
reading some of the reporting about how he approached us
and what he said, he brought Denver with him. Do
you know what I mean? Like, He did not not
sit there and think to himself, well, I'm sitting here
as a judge, not representing what Denver thinks is appropriate here,
but what this community would like. He says some stuff here.
When he's giving her probation, he said, I think you
(27:13):
have the desire to correct course here. That's important. That's
part of the rehabilitation process. I'm convinced that you've been
accorded sufficient punishment with the current punishment, he added, and
it's like, hang on, dog, hang on, and that's your
honor dog. But hang on here, honor dog. This is
a person who didn't just try to kidnap your child
(27:35):
through torturing a process that people already mistrust the hell
out of, right, that we need to have trust in.
She then tried to corrupt the system that was going
to hold her accountable. As you were telling me what
had taken place, and as I read about it, in
my mind, I thought, if I'm a judge, I light
this woman up with enough prison that when people open
(27:56):
up their browsers the next morning, they go, sweet mother
of God, what happened and they think for themselves, I
will never ever, ever do anything to try to beat
the system like this Again. Instead we hear about, well,
I think you've taken some major steps toward rehabilitation. Who cares?
Speaker 3 (28:13):
Who gives a crap?
Speaker 2 (28:15):
If she can be rehabilitated, she should be punished.
Speaker 4 (28:18):
Yeah. And Amy Patten should have been all over this,
you know, she herself, as far as I'm concerned, should
have been in the courtroom that day. Her office should
not have allowed Robin Nisetta to appear virtually. And the
thing of it is is it's the same judge. So
this judge gave Robin kni Setta four years on the
original charges, which was one felony and one misdemeanor. But
(28:42):
that was you know, George, You remember I packed. I
packed the courtroom, right, and so I don't know if
the judge felt the pressure of that or what, but
he issued four years. So I didn't think, George, I
thought this judge understood the severity of this and and uh,
(29:05):
the the level of absurdity and pure evil of Robin
I Setta. So when it came to this next sentencing,
I didn't think I needed to ask everybody in my
life to come to courtigan. I thought this judge got it.
But then I wasn't allowed to speak. I was totally
(29:25):
cut out of the whole process. And that same judge
let her walk with three years probation and the DA's
office now under the helm of Amy Patten. This is
this is how it started, This is how her career started.
I was probably one of the very first cases the
sentencing hearing. But let her walk with three years probation
(29:47):
on seven felonies and three misdemeanors. And to think that
I was not re victimized, and this is absurd. I
was called crazy. I was made fun of I had
the media after me. I couldn't get in anybody to
take me seriously. I lost sleep over this.
Speaker 2 (30:03):
I mean honestly, Daniel, But but for you and Johnny Turnage,
I'm not sure robin Isetta isn't still in the same
position she was in at DHS, ruining lives and taking
kids from families. I mean, but for you too, I
don't think that happens. Hey, can you stick around? And
we got to take a quick break here, pay some bills,
and then I want to ask you a couple of
other things. But the bottom line here is, given what
(30:24):
this judge said, this was a freebie. This conduct to
try to corrupt and get away with it with the
system was treated as a freebie by this judge. I
simply don't understand it. Hey, it's an erosity. Council Woman,
Daniel Jorinsky nice enough to stick around with us. My
name is George Brockler. I'm filling in for the big
man while he's in court crushing it on behalf of justice.
(30:44):
Is George Brockler filling in on the Dankplas Show.
Speaker 3 (30:53):
And now back to the dan Kaplas Show podcast.
Speaker 2 (30:57):
On the line with me foolishly risking remain in credibility
she may have as a Roora City council woman. Daniel Drenski,
Thanks for sticking around, Danielle.
Speaker 4 (31:06):
Yeah, thanks for having me.
Speaker 2 (31:07):
Hey, we were ranting here and it's important for this
because once again we don't hear anything from the DA's
office about this, about any sort of outrage or disappointment.
And I've done that too when judges have gone a
different direction than I thought or appropriate. But itchaps my
hide that this last crime was treated by this Denver
judge who was brought down here. Huge mistake, huge mistake
(31:30):
to say that it's a freebie. Basically, you've been punished
enough on the other crime. What that tells everybody who
hears that is she gets no extra punishment, three years
of probation, which is never going to happen. And you
may not know this, Danielle, but our sentencing structure in
Colorado and our DOC system is so broken. Four years
of doc probably spends like she's going to be parole
(31:54):
eligible in about eighteen months from the sentence, and quite honestly,
she'll be transition to community corrections way before that.
Speaker 4 (32:02):
You go ahead, George, I have to gear up to
go in front of the pearl board this October.
Speaker 2 (32:07):
Are you kidding me?
Speaker 4 (32:09):
This October? I have to appear in front of the
She is parole eligible this October, and I have to
appear in front of the pearl board. She begged them,
do not let her out.
Speaker 2 (32:20):
Well, we got a gen this up too. You got
to call Dan and Ryan and all the rest of
them out there and keep this thing in the public eye,
because this is not justice. And I think the judge
knew it when this happened. But the idea that this
woman who was in this so much about this pisses
me off. She targeted you, an elected official for saying
(32:41):
things about her appointed a chief of police girlfriend at
the time. To what she went through to try, she
didn't just like mess with your taxes, that would be
bad enough. Tried to kidnap your kid from you using
the system, corrupts the system, and then she tries to
beat the system through this fake series of cancer this
and answer that. And at the end of the day,
(33:02):
A judge says, well, and by the way, you had
to go to trial to convict her. She wouldn't take responsibility.
A judge says, well, we're just going to give you
three years of probation on top of the fifteen seconds
you're going to spend in the Department of Corrections. In
no way does this support the rule of law. But
it does support the politics of the people that we're
making the decisions prosecutor's office, the DA's office. And that's
(33:25):
a problem. I don't know where you're at with discussing
the other things that bug the hell out of you
about what's going on in your DA's office or what
you're going to do about it. But I thought I
would just throwing out there.
Speaker 4 (33:37):
You know, George, anybody who knows me at this point
knows that you know. Once I get locked into something,
I don't back down, and I don't back down if
the media comes after me. I don't back down if
the Left comes after me. I don't care if nobody
believes me. I don't care. If I'm standing in a
room alone screaming at the top of my lungs, I
(33:59):
don't care. But this is not This is not the
end of any of this.
Speaker 5 (34:04):
And and Amy Patten. Amy Patten is getting ready to
find out what happens when when you do not uphold
the rule of law, and when you do not take.
Speaker 4 (34:18):
Her duties as a prosecutor seriously. And when I say
I'm going to do something, I'm going to do it.
So so all I will say at this time because
it's not time yet, Uh there's a law. There's a
law surrounding this as to why it's not time yet.
But the time is coming and she's going to have
to figure out how she's going to explain this, How
(34:38):
she's going to explain not once, but twice. A three
year probation sentence, now, by no means the three years
probation that Rob and I said I got in my situation.
I'm not even going to compare that to the three
years probation that the Weaver family received as justice for
their beautiful daughter, Caitlin Weaver. No comparison there, but this
(35:02):
three years probation seems to be a theme for Amy's
patten and probations and probation is.
Speaker 2 (35:10):
A joke here for your case, for the the other case.
But but let's do this. I want to it. I
know you got to get back to the bartending thing
and do cheers. Hopefully you have your own norm inside
the bar there. But I want to keep this on
the public's mind as we move through this, because it's
that important to me. Daniel Jorinski, thank.
Speaker 4 (35:29):
You, thank you so much.
Speaker 2 (35:32):
Hey, listen, folks, that's it for this same. When we're
gonna come back, I want to talk about one more case.
Daniel's aware of it. I don't know if you are
a guy named Homemid now Turkey, I was intimately impacted
by this case and the decision surrounding it.
Speaker 3 (35:44):
Stick around.
Speaker 2 (35:45):
George Brockler filling in for the Great Dan CAPLS text
us at five seven, seven, three nine, give us a
call seven one, three eight two five five Bye
Popular Podcasts
Stuff You Should Know
If you've ever wanted to know about champagne, satanism, the Stonewall Uprising, chaos theory, LSD, El Nino, true crime and Rosa Parks, then look no further. Josh and Chuck have you covered.
Las Culturistas with Matt Rogers and Bowen Yang
Ding dong! Join your culture consultants, Matt Rogers and Bowen Yang, on an unforgettable journey into the beating heart of CULTURE. Alongside sizzling special guests, they GET INTO the hottest pop-culture moments of the day and the formative cultural experiences that turned them into Culturistas. Produced by the Big Money Players Network and iHeartRadio.
Dateline NBC
Current and classic episodes, featuring compelling true-crime mysteries, powerful documentaries and in-depth investigations. Follow now to get the latest episodes of Dateline NBC completely free, or subscribe to Dateline Premium for ad-free listening and exclusive bonus content: DatelinePremium.com