June 20, 2013 08:55 AM UTC

Gessler: No Charges, But...

• 2 Comments
• by: Colorado Pols

FOX 31's Eli Stokols reports on the conclusion by a grand jury in Denver that no criminal charges will be filed against Colorado Secretary of State Scott Gessler over his misuse of office funds to attend Republican political events during the 2012 election season. This comes after Gessler was found by the state's Independent Ethics Commission to have "breached the public trust for private gain."

Evidence in the Grand Jury investigation included thousands of pages of emails, expense reports, financial documents, conference brochures and the Secretary of State handbook.

The jury found the money Gessler used came from a discretionary fund that was traditionally used for a variety of purposes. When Gessler put in requests to be reimbursed, he did so without providing receipts, credit card statements or documentation for two reimbursements — one a little over $117 and the other for $1,400.

“The Grand Jury finds that there was no criminal conduct related to the above noted pay-outs from the Discretionary Fund,” the report said. “However, the Grand Jury herein expresses displeasure with the fact that Secretary of State Gessler did not provide any documentation to account for the lump sum pay out.”

Not exactly an exoneration, as the grand jury continues:

The report concludes that while “the Grand Jury finds that there was no criminal conduct related to the use of Discretionary Funds to attend the RNLA conference, in light of the Secretary of State speaking on a panel, the election law training at the conference and the accreditation…the Grand Jury believe that the Secretary of State’s decision regarding the use of Discretionary Funds in order to attend a partisan and political conference like the RNLA was not prudent, [Pols emphasis] especially when it was followed by a trip to the Republican National Convention.”

The grand jury came to a somewhat different conclusion about attending the Republican National Lawyers Association conference on state money than the Independent Ethics Commission did. The Ethics Commission's ruling and assessed fines against Gessler for that are still binding, of course–and in terms of accountability to plain ethical standards (as opposed to the narrower scope of criminal law), the IEC did its job.

In fact, this outcome–ethics accountability from public officials, including in legal gray areas–is what over 70% of Colorado voters wanted from 2006's Amendment 41, which created the IEC. Republicans will now try to disparage the entire IEC process in Gessler's defense, of course. But given Gessler's now-cemented reputation, we think trying to turn "ethics" into a dirty word on his behalf will be very likely to backfire.