Following her public censure by a three-judge panel in December, Republican Arapahoe County District Attorney Carol Chambers defended herself against charges of misconduct in a January 5 Rocky Mountain News “Speakout” guest editorial in which she claimed that she “felt completely justified in my efforts to help a constituent who was being unfairly persecuted just because she was a victim of identity theft.” Chambers, however, failed to note that both she and the “constituent” she referred to were reportedly acquainted because of their GOP affiliation. Chambers also omitted the role her husband, Nathan Chambers, who is chairman of the Arapahoe County Republican Party, played in the case that led to her censure.

As Colorado Media Matters previously noted, Carol Chambers was elected to a four-year term as district attorney for Colorado's 18th Judicial District in November 2004. According to an October 6, 2006, Denver Post article, Chambers became the focus of “a state investigation into whether she used her position to intimidate a lawyer hired to collect a debt from an Englewood councilwoman.” The councilwoman, Laurett Barrentine -- who is a member of the Arapahoe Republican Party's central committee -- allegedly approached Chambers at what the Post reported was a “political event” to complain about the tactics of an attorney, Jonathan Steiner, who works for Central Credit Corp. Central Credit Corp. reportedly sought payment on two bad checks written on Barrentine's account. According to the Post, Barrentine claimed -- but did not prove to Central Credit Corp.'s satisfaction -- that she was a victim of identify theft after her purse was stolen in 1998.

According to the Post, Chambers then allegedly “referred her [Barrentine] to her husband, attorney Nathan Chambers, for legal advice.” The Post reported that although "[Carol] Chambers said her husband was just giving Barrentine guidance," according to the complaint against Carol Chambers, “Nathan Chambers made a call to Steiner to talk about a potential civil trial over the checks and questioned him about jury instructions that he had submitted.”

On October 24, 2006, the Post reported that Chambers faced an appearance “before a disciplinary judge on allegations that she knowingly made a false or misleading statement to a third party, threatened a criminal charge to gain advantage in a civil action, engaged in conduct involving dishonesty and used her office to intimidate.”

At the completion of the disciplinary hearing, a three-judge panel of the Colorado Supreme Court Attorney Regulation Counsel censured Chambers in late December, noting, " ... She effectively placed her finger on the scales of justice," according to a December 27 Post article. As the Post reported:

District Attorney Carol Chambers violated rules of professional conduct by using her office to help an acquaintance, a three- member panel ruled Tuesday.

[...]

Chambers was accused of threatening to convene a grand jury to investigate [Jonathan] Steiner, a lawyer for Central Credit Corp., about tactics used in dealing with Barrentine, who was a victim of identify theft. Authorities found that someone had written bad checks to Wal-Mart on a closed account of Barrentine's. Steiner dropped the case against Barrentine.

In a message left with Steiner on Jan. 23., Chambers said she had received “a lot of complaints from the victims of identity theft that you are pressuring them, shall I say, to pay on checks that they did not write.”

However, Chambers testified that she had received only one complaint about Steiner, from Barrentine. Chambers knew Barrentine through functions for the Republican Party.

Asserting that Barrentine “is not my friend,” Chambers wrote in the News guest editorial that Barrentine was only her “constituent and a victim of identity theft.” However, Chambers failed to note that three of the principals in the case -- herself, Barrentine, and Nathan Chambers -- all are members of the Arapahoe County Republican Party hierarchy.

As the opinion issued by the three-judge panel hearing Chambers' case noted, Barrentine and Chambers were “acquainted from various political functions.”

After the censure ruling, a December 27 editorial in the Post noted that Chambers remained “unrepentant” for her actions and that "[i]t should come as no surprise that Chambers and the friend whose interests she was protecting, Laurett Barrentine, are prominent Arapahoe County Republicans." The Post commented, “If Carol Chambers doesn't recognize the ethical boundaries she has breached, that is a deep-seated problem.”

In the News guest editorial, Chambers claimed victims of identity theft are now “on their own to face collections attorneys” because "[t]he opinion by the hearing board censuring me for potentially interfering with a pending civil case ensures that other district attorneys will never act to intervene in any case in which a collections attorney may be inappropriately coercing victims of identity theft to pay on checks they did not write."

However, as the December 27 Post editorial noted, it was the use of Chambers' “official power to meddle in a friend's civil lawsuit,” and not her investigative work on the issue of identity theft, that resulted in her censure.

This is not the first time the News has omitted the GOP affiliation of Chambers and the other principals in the case. Following a Colorado Media Matters item, the News published an article on October 7, 2006, that included information about Carol and Nathan Chambers' Republican Party affiliations.

From the January 5 Rocky Mountain News guest editorial by Republican Arapahoe County District Attorney Carol Chambers, “DA did her best to aid a constituent”:

Identity theft is rampant in the state of Colorado. We rank fifth in the nation for identity theft-related crime. District attorneys, along with law enforcement, must promptly and aggressively investigate this crime and assist victims whenever they can.

So I felt completely justified in my efforts to help a constituent who was being unfairly persecuted just because she was a victim of identity theft. And I am heartened that, with one exception, an independent panel investigating those efforts found there was no breach of integrity on my part (“DA used office to intimidate/Arapahoe County's Chambers cleared by panel on other counts,” Dec. 27). I am still considering whether to appeal that lone exception.

Englewood Councilwoman Laurett Barrentine is my constituent and a victim of identity theft -- she is not my friend. We have both testified to that under oath. When Barrentine came to me in November 2005 about the case attorney Jonathan R. Steiner had filed against her for allegedly writing two bad checks, she was not concerned about herself -- we both knew that she would prevail. She did not write the checks in question and Steiner could not prove that she did. In fact, Steiner testified that he offered to dismiss the case against her long before I ever got involved in the matter.

Barrentine's concern was for other victims of identity theft who might not have the time, money or confidence to stand alone against a collections attorney trying to coerce them to pay on checks they did not write. Indeed, Steiner testified that this was the first time anyone had ever taken him to trial or insisted that he pay the court costs associated with defending a case that should never have been filed.

[...]

The Attorney Regulation Counsel, which investigates lawyer misconduct and which investigated me, appears completely unconcerned about Steiner's conduct. The grievance brought against me by Steiner impeded my ability to investigate his conduct and intervene to protect other victims of identity theft from the same practices Steiner used against Barrentine.

The opinion by the hearing board censuring me for potentially interfering with a pending civil case ensures that other district attorneys will never act to intervene in any case in which a collections attorney may be inappropriately coercing victims of identity theft to pay on checks they did not write. These victims are on their own to face collections attorneys.

Needless to say, I am frustrated by this outcome, an outcome that does not seem in any way to advance the administration of justice.

Carol Chambers is the district attorney for the 18th Judicial District (Arapahoe County).