U.S. Senate See Full Big Line

(D) J. Hickenlooper*

(R) Somebody

80%

20%

Governor See Full Big Line

(D) Joe Neguse

(D) Phil Weiser

(D) Jena Griswold

60%

60%

40%↓

Att. General See Full Big Line

(D) M. Dougherty

(D) Alexis King

(D) Brian Mason

40%

40%

30%

Sec. of State See Full Big Line

(D) George Stern

(D) A. Gonzalez

(R) Sheri Davis

40%

40%

30%

State Treasurer See Full Big Line

(D) Brianna Titone

(R) Kevin Grantham

(D) Jerry DiTullio

60%

30%

20%

CO-01 (Denver) See Full Big Line

(D) Diana DeGette*

(R) Somebody

90%

2%

CO-02 (Boulder-ish) See Full Big Line

(D) Joe Neguse*

(R) Somebody

90%

2%

CO-03 (West & Southern CO) See Full Big Line

(R) Jeff Hurd*

(D) Somebody

80%

40%

CO-04 (Northeast-ish Colorado) See Full Big Line

(R) Lauren Boebert*

(D) Somebody

90%

10%

CO-05 (Colorado Springs) See Full Big Line

(R) Jeff Crank*

(D) Somebody

80%

20%

CO-06 (Aurora) See Full Big Line

(D) Jason Crow*

(R) Somebody

90%

10%

CO-07 (Jefferson County) See Full Big Line

(D) B. Pettersen*

(R) Somebody

90%

10%

CO-08 (Northern Colo.) See Full Big Line

(R) Gabe Evans*

(D) Yadira Caraveo

(D) Joe Salazar

50%

40%

40%

State Senate Majority See Full Big Line

DEMOCRATS

REPUBLICANS

80%

20%

State House Majority See Full Big Line

DEMOCRATS

REPUBLICANS

95%

5%

Generic selectors
Exact matches only
Search in title
Search in content
Post Type Selectors
June 14, 2007 04:08 PM UTC

Alleged Laptop-Thieving Lawyer a Serial Klepto?

  • 33 Comments
  • by: Colorado Pols

As the Rocky Mountain News reports:

When two state court computers were stolen in 2005, a now familiar name popped up: Larry Manzanares.

That is the brief, yet intriguing side story to Wednesday’s 80-page affidavit alleging Manzanares stole a state court laptop earlier this year.

Both of the stolen computers were taken in the month of July – one during the July Fourth weekend.

One was taken out of an unnamed judge’s chambers, and the other was taken out of a locked storage area in Room 39 of the Denver City and County Building, the same area from which the laptop was probably taken this year.

Before becoming Denver city attorney this year, Manzanares was a Denver district judge…

The affidavit says the computers were never issued to Manzanares. It does not mention whether any other people were named in connection with their disappearance.

The computers have never been found…

We found Manzanares’ claim that he had bought the stolen city laptop now the subject of his criminal trial ‘from a guy in a parking lot’ to be laughable when we heard it last February. We still think so, and now there are a lot more questions.

Another Rocky article today talks with former associates of Manzanares who are shocked by the turns this story has taken. Our understanding is city attorneys and district judges make pretty good money–why would this guy who ‘has lectured on ethics his whole life’ (according to Mayor John Hickenlooper) throw away his career over one–or two or three–$1,500 laptop computers? It doesn’t make any sense to us.

For the record, we don’t consider reports that the laptop Manzanares was caught earlier this year with was loaded with porn to be significant, except maybe with regard to whether the laptop should be reissued to someone else. We would counsel against that–you don’t know where it’s been.

Tweet
Share

Comments

33 thoughts on “Alleged Laptop-Thieving Lawyer a Serial Klepto?”

  1. But it makes perfect sense to me. Harvard (pronounced Haaaahhhvaaahhd) Law Grad, early ascent to the Bench, up the ladder to City Attorney, and lectured on Ethics the entire way…this guy was ripe for the hypocrisy than can only come with runaway arrogance and unchecked privilege. I’ve spent the majority of my adult life dealing with miscreants like “Larry The Lifter.” They’re snot-nosed, duplicitous, jerk-offs (pun intended) who truly believe that their contributions to society outweigh their obligation to subscribe to and obey their own preachings. I hope they throw the book at “Masturbatin Manzy” and thereby send a message to all public servants who think they’re above the law… “We’ve got an orange jumpsuit just big enough to fit your ego.”

     

    1. …a brilliant man with a mental health problem. 

      Look at your disdain for arguably our country’s finest educational institution.  What’s with that? 

      I’m not saying that you are wrong, just that your post is loaded with bile and vitriol for reasons I don’t understand.

      I like “Larry the Lifter.”

      1. The guy swiped more than one laptop?  What’s up with that?  Kleptomania is my guess.  Not that he doesn’t have to take his punishment, but it sounds like he needs to do a little therapy too . . .

      2. PR: Look at your disdain for arguably our country’s finest educational institution.  What’s with that?

        Given who they would let in, I can’t agree that it is even close.  Caltech?  M.I.T.?  No “legacies.”  Merit only, thank you very much. 

    2.   Having established –as I think we have– that you’re not a cock-puppet for one or more of the “courties,” I can’t help but notice that you and Castleman have piped up on at least one other ocassion to denounce Hon. Grafton Biddle and Larry Mazanares, Esq..  Do tell, what is your background and expertise to levy such baseless accusations?1

      1In case I’m being a little vague, there’s a little sarcasm going on here.

      1. …paying close attention to what goes on around me. I do not know a “Castleman” nor have I read any of his posts (to the best of my recollection), so I cannot intelligently comment on our similarities. I’m new at this so please enlighten me… “What is a “courty?”

        1. Anyone want to tell GreenArrow what a “courty” is?  I guess I just don’t have enough information, myself, to explain it [not].

          Click on Castleman’s link (above) and it will take you to his comments. One of them is very consonant with a few of your posts.

          1. that anyone here minds criticism of our court system, or operates under the illusion that our courts are perfect,or is bothered by the idea of improving accountability of judges. While we all enjoy watching you knock down your little inflatable clowns, it has no relevance to any discussion taking place beyond the confines of your own little mind.

          2. I guess I’m a courty.

            Anyone care to comment on the relevance of Larry the Lifter’s computer being loaded with porn? Personally, I can’t help but laugh at the irony associated with one of the high and mighty being caught “slappin his laptop.” I wonder how many times “Handy Manz” has presided over a trial regarding sex crimes, or child porn, internet porn, etc…?

            Obviously not all sex crimes are alike. Certainly some are quite serious and should be prosecuted to the highest extent possible. However, others, like prostitution are an unmittigated joke and should be completely legalized. If Manzy is a sex fiend, I wonder how, or if, any of his biases made their way into his rulings.

            Me personally, if the cops came and confiscated my computer, the first thing I’d tell them is, “Hey, help yourself. But when you’re done fishing and you return it to me, make sure all my porn is in tact.”

            That stuff took me “years” to compile, and gets really expensive.

            That’s why I’m not a Judge. I quite enjoy being a commoner, and not being “blessed” with a higher education from insitutions like Harvard or Yale.

            Hell, I can’t even spell, “M.I.T.”

        1. He has never written “about Judge Biddle or Mr. Manzanares.”  That was my mistake.  All of Castleman’s comments are here.  The one that I was recalling from memory was entitled, Judicial Arrogance, which I will take the liberty to past herewith:

          I think any lawyer can tell numerous stories of judges acting arrogantly and, sometimes, unlawfully.

          There were many instances in my career of judges simply disregarding the law because they did not like the result it would lead to. This is a very common problem with state trial court judges, who don’t have to explain the reasons for rulings in writing. I had one case where a judge even told me that, as much as she would have liked to rule in my client’s favor and as much as she thought the law required it, she couldn’t because the lawyer on the other side was a big campaign contributor. I had other cases where the judge simply didn’t read the motions at all. That is really common. Judges have pre-conceived notions (wow, a lawyer with a closed mind, that’s a shocker) and often aren’t willing to read or listen to anything that runs counter to it.

          Judges are also largely unaccountable. It is judges who decide whether judges broke the rules. The public is largely excluded from those deliberations, too. And the whole thing that lets appeals courts issue “unpublished” decisions is just an excuse to let the appeals court, without any public oversight, disregard precedent and avoid having the world know about it. Every appellate decision should be published. In a world with the Internet, one can’t say that paper and publishing costs make that expense prohibitive.

          But part of the problem is the arrogance that infects the whole legal profession. Lawyers spend enormous amounts of energy convincing themselves that they are these idealistic and noble servants of the good society, advancing “equality” and “justice” and “the rule of law.” Of course few, if any, judges (and not many lawyers) take those values seriously and, even when they do, the demands of politics (and their partisan political affiliation) often override them.

          After all, who can say with a straight face that Bush v. Gore is an example of the judiciary honoring “equality” and the “rule of law”? Who can say that about many decisions that still sanction discrimination against people of different ethnic backgrounds, allow qualified people who are gay to be fired from jobs just because of their sexual orientation, shut the courthouse door to those who have legitimate grounds to object to flagrantly unlawful government activity, and sanction a collective cultural shrug of the shoulders as, literally, millions of children in the womb are killed under the guise of a court decision that does not even pretend to be based on the language of the constitution?

          I have long believed that the self-regulation of lawyers is bad for our democracy and bad for the profession. The same is true of the self-regulation of judges. I believe judges should be term-limited (that’s not intimidating them, as they wouldn’t lose their jobs before the end of their terms because of any decision they make) and I believe there should be clear criteria for the recommendations as to retention imposed. And judicial discipline agencies should have a majority of voting members from outside the legal profession and be elected by the public, not appointed by the courts or other politicians.

          Judges have too much power and too little accountability. At some point, the health of our democracy and the functioning of our political system (which, all too often, punts issues it thinks controversial to the courts) depends on rejecting the advice of apologists like Justice O’Connor and restoring checks and balances to the third branch.

    1. . . . in the grand scheme of things, you’re abosolutely right and I appreciate you grounding us with that.  On the one hand, it may seem like I’m enjoying this (schadenfreud) but, when you put it that way, I’m not.  It’s just like foreclosure market we’re in  –seems like a great opportunity for speculators to take advantage of the situation created by all the folks, who overextended themselves on ARMs and non-traditional (i.e., reverse amortization loans) but, then I think about all the innocent children of those families, who don’t have their room anymore; don’t have a back yard to play in; who are out on the street; or living in cheap apartments; changing schools; and, who in general, have to pay the price for their parent[s]’ poor judgment.

      1. The world isn’t as abstract as we sometimes cast it.

        As to the subprime collapse.  There was poor judgement on the part of many buyers, but there was also predatory behavior by mortgage brokers and others.

        Its too bad that children pay for the poor judgement and crimes of their parents.  If only they could pick their parents.

        1. I was in the mortgage wholesale business for a number of years, so maybe I’m smarter than the average bear in this field, but probably not.  LESSEE, 100% LTV, no qualifiers, interest below prime…..hmmmmmmm….what a recipe for disaster.  People got into homes they shouldn’t have, the brokers and Wall Street turned a blind eye and worked the Ponzi as long as they could.

          Then everyone is shocked when the inevitable happened.

          Anyone remember the S&L fiasco?  The one that we are still paying for?

          And, I recall some snot-nosed “kid” business analyst here in Colorado in the late 90’s proclaiming that Colorado has broke its legendary boom and bust cycle, only fair winds ahead.

          Anyone remember the budget disaster after the economy essentially collapsed? 

          Over my many years watching business and human nature, when there is an opportunity for greed that goes against all economic and moral conventions, excuses are created that justify such behavior.  And always, they find out why those conventions existed, sooner or later. 

          1. It almost never is.  Its just an excuse for irrational behavior.  I was an analyst in the 90’s. The stock market started accelerating in 95′ and by 97′, I was a little worried, but low inflation, high confidence, strong employment, great capital investment, shrinking budget deficits (damn that Clinton and his unfriendly business environment), I thought maybe it was justified. By 1999 I was shouting this is crazy.  The worst thing about being correct when everyone is wrong, everyone thinks you’re crazy(witness Howard Dean).

            Hmmm…maybe I need to rethink Kay.

            1. I was going to title this, “How true.”

              So there, you have both. 

              I think Kay is a different philosophical situation.  What we are talking about are fundamentals that have been true for hundreds or thousands of years. See “Dutch Tulip Craze.”

              Kay sees a wrong – whether it is or not – and wants to change it.

              BTW, have you read Kevin Phillips’ “Wealth and Democracy?”  A long hard slog unless economic data excites you, but overwhelming evidence that the US is in the final phase of being an economic powerhouse. He cites a number of nations that were powerhouses and follows the creation of wealth in its various manifestations.  The end always comes with lots of paper pushing and no real creation of wealth.

              1. Ahh economics…I actually dropped out of my Ph.D program to go into the money management.  I found discipline in the market.  There is nothing like losing money to tell you that your theory is wrong.  It may take a while, but it will happen if the fundamentals are wrong.

                Speaking of fundamentals.  I am actually quite opptomistic about this country.  we just need to renew our social contract.

                Our demographics are better than any developed country, and demographically China is in big trouble.

                I could go through a laundry list of things we should do to maintain our power and a laundry list of things we should do to deserve our power. But I like to keep these short.

                I’ll ask my best read friend if she read it.  She’s always assigning me reading (wink), I’ll see what she thinks and maybe it will end up on my list.

            2. In the winter/spring of 97, just before I moved away, I temped at a certain local financial company that was the darling of the personal finance magazines then. They were growing and growing and provided me my investment lessons. Then I moved to Seattle which was one of the epicenters of the dot com boom and it was crazy. While Amazon.com stock went up 800% all these little startups did their IPOs, made instant paper millionaires of their 20-something founders and hemorrhaged money on pool tables for the employees. It was no shock at all when they collapsed, but at least it didn’t sound like many innocent people were taken for a ride there.

  3. that trip so many people up. I was talking once to a guy who writes some of the programs to find fraud among employees at the credit card processors. Mostly his code looked for weirdness in other programs that were siphoning off money.

    He said what was amazing is that people would be caught and fired from very good paying programming jobs and the money was several hundred to maybe 2 thousand dollars.

    Amazingly small amounts compared to their salaries.

  4. Isn’t it a shame that Larry Manzanares is a white guy.  If he was black or Hispanic, he’d still be in the DA’s office wearing his “victim” badge.

        1. Just cuz you have a woodie for lawyers and the courts doesn’t mean that anyone connected with the same deserve death for a felony.

          Despite all the problems in our justice system, you should be, instead, impressed that he obviously isn’t being swept under the rug.  He is being treated just like any other citizen. 

          1. That’s what my high school ass’t wrestling coach told us, and I never had any respect for the slimeball since that day (actually, I knew he was as slimeball before that day; the exhortation to us was totally in character).

            My concern, Paul, is that the decision to mete out equitable treatment, apparently, occurred only after this became a story. The Denver Post reported on Wednesday –long after we’ve had an opportunity to clarify details in this case– that, “The court administrator’s office reviewed the police report and asked ‘that no prosecution take place.'”1  In other words, the only reason this case is now being handled fairly is because everyone’s watching.

            Hope you don’t mind the analogy but this is a similar point that I was making about the ridiculous outcome of the Harrington v. Wilson case  –the courts can deviate from the established, well-settled law and apply so-called “designer law” against one person (Harrington, or whoever) and get away with it through non-precedential (unpublished) opinions —i.e., when they think no one’s watching, except for the partys.

            I should take this opportunity to make another point.  It continues to amaze me how stupid people –including lawyers– continue to be when it comes to basic computer sciences.  Anyone, who’s ever had an opportunity to be involved in electronic discovery or deal with ESI in the course of an investigation or litigation (such as a former judge or city attorney) would know that you don’t just “delete” your porn files a few hours after he was interviewed by police, like Laptop Larry did (according to this RMN article). Even if he had performed a sector-by-sector forensic wipe of the drive or that portion of the drive, that act would be discovered by a forensic examiner, like myself, and could result in an adverse jury instruction.  Even a PGP archive, where the password is never discovered, can result in an adverse jury instruction, leading to a criminal conviction. See People v. Levy, (Minn. App. 2005).

            By the way, I do not agree with Rio that he should be hanged or treated any worse than anyone else.  If I did, then all my ranting about equal treatment, equal protection and equal application of the law would be hollow.

            1 We’ve also learned that the State Court Administrator’s Office has withheld reports concerning the other missing laptops in response to a Rocky Mountain News open records request for reports of thefts of court-owned property, according to this RMN story.

        2. coupled with your ready endorsement of draconian conduct -except when it (or something actually far milder than it) affects you personally- that makes you so revered, here and elsewhere.

Leave a Comment

Recent Comments


Posts about

Donald Trump
SEE MORE

Posts about

Rep. Lauren Boebert
SEE MORE

Posts about

Rep. Yadira Caraveo
SEE MORE

Posts about

Colorado House
SEE MORE

Posts about

Colorado Senate
SEE MORE

288 readers online now

Newsletter

Subscribe to our monthly newsletter to stay in the loop with regular updates!