Like most locals, I have been following the Judge Mark Thompson case in the Summit Daily. The coverage has missed one critical element that should be investigated.

I have examined the docket in this case and discovered that within the course of two hours, on a Saturday (when the court is traditionally closed), the district attorney’s office not only filed these charges but filed their suppression motion, which was granted that Saturday, all before noon. This is unheard of.

On October 16, at 9:31 am, after a month of sitting on the Colorado Bureau of Investigation’s investigation, the office filed for a summons to be issued. In most felony cases, my clients are simply arrested; they are not given the courtesy of responding to a summons, which does not require a person to go through booking at the jail. The clerk, who apparently was also working that Saturday anticipating these charges, docketed the case five minutes later. At 9:39 a.m., the district attorney filed a one-paragraph motion asking to conceal this case from the community. This is also unheard of: District attorneys do not file to suppress cases to help defendants.

Less than two hours later, Judge Dunkelman granted the motion. He, too, had apparently been advised to be working that Saturday to handle this case outside of normal business hours. Likewise, the Colorado Supreme Court issued a statement that afternoon. Further review also indicates the judge’s defense attorney was notified in advance that this case would be charged then. The district attorney attempted to hide this case from our community, even though many insiders knew in advance it was coming. The district attorney should answer for this highly unusual and improper behavior, either now or at the time of her next campaign. We should know what she knew, when and why it was hidden from us.