Comment #: CO644
Rating:1.0
Comments:
This magistrate is misogynistic and threatening to females in front of him. He interrupts anyone trying to defend themselves, their position and is unfair. Attorneys don't line him and district judges have more work cleaning up his messes. Time for Trujillo to retire. He's a bad magistrate.

Comment #: CO638
Rating:1.0
Comments:
unfair,argumentative,biased.

Comment #: CO637
Rating:Not Rated
Comments:
Magistrate Trujillo's non promotion to a district judge position over two decades suggests legitimate concerns about his judicial performance. Majority of attorneys regard him as lazy and lacking in legal knowledge, while exhibiting obvious biased behavior towards women. His consistent disregard for magistrate rules and failure to adhere to Colorado law and hold men in particularly in contempt prove his unsuitability for judicial responsibilities. Trujillo's continued judiciary abuses pose a significant liability to the integrity of the fourth judicial district, justifying his removal from the bench. Magistrate Trujillo does not deserve the honor to remain on the bench.

Comment #: CO625
Rating:1.0
Comments:
This judge has his mind made up before he enters the court room, and he sides with the petitioner who, more often than not, is male. During my contempt hearing, he completely disregarded all my evidence, and allowed all the petitioner's unsubstantiated claims. He cared nothing about the well-being of the children or how the act of "contempt" may have benefitted them and only bought into the petitioner's side of the story and ignored the obvious facts. He is a biased decision-maker, sexist, and cruel in the courtroom.

Comment #: CO617
Rating:1.0
Comments:
During my contempt trial this judge blatantly disregarded the judicial rules on time. He allowed the petitioners attorney to cross examine the respondent even though the time had expired. He made a ruling that is outside of the norm for contempt and the respondent was wrongfully jailed on a minor issue. This judge favors men and makes statements of "parents like you have to be jailed." My attorney had never seen such a harsh punishment in her 35 years of practicing law. I am not the only one that has faced this kind of wrath and women need to be aware of the difficulties they will face presenting evidence and being seen as competent. This judge rules with his own bias and disinterest in true justice. he is short tempered and rolls his eyes at statements he does not like. This judge needs to be recalled or voted out the next time he is up for reelection. It is a judges job to respect the judicial process and the people that are standing in his court room sadly he is not an honorable judge.

Comment #: CO525
Rating:Not Rated
Comments:
In may case the judge refused to allow defenedent (me) to introduce evidence or call witnesses despite following appropriate procedures. He allowed the Petitioner to introduce evidence that was not properly submitted or provided to the Respondent in advance per the courts own orders. When Respondent informed the Judge of his misstep he became very angry.
When shown actual transcripts of the law for a divorce case the Judge stated he didn't need to follow it because "my room, my rules" and when the Respondent asked the judge to repeatedly speak up so his words could be captured by the clerk and used for follow up investigation the Judge refused and reprimanded the Respondent. These things occurred on at least 2 separate hearings and are now being raised to the Colo Supreme Court OAR to seek help.
The Judge showed no care for a father trying to help his kids as he is the provider or support and medical, dental, etc and instead threatened to incarcerate the dad if he did not pay the Petitioner approx 92% of his take home earnings which is clearly an astronomical sum. Althought the Judge required Sworn Financial Statements to be submitted prior to both hearings, when the Respondent noted the Judges proposed financial award was far beyond the norm that he had yet to review the financial statements to determine both need of the Petitioner and ability to pay of the Respndent the Judge simply refused to take any further evidence or exhibits but this occurred only AFTER he had reviewed exhibits from the Petitioner and the Resondent was not allowed to present his evidence. He was also granted less than 1/3 the time of the Petitioner (a frequent occurrence in this courtroom). He overruled the findings of approximately 20 previous hearings, multiple judges and an arbiter simply "because I don't like this word here" in a previous support order. It was simply amazing being in his court room but in the worst possible way. In over 6 years of court room activities I've never seen anything so shameful.