AG candidate Phil Weiser’s role in pedophile’s case overstated

A TV ad in the Colorado attorney general’s race accuses Democrat Phil Weiser of trying to get a convicted pedophile out of prison early for good behavior.

But the ad oversimplifies Weiser’s role in the case and the legal issue at hand.

The attack ad is part of the Republican Attorneys General Association’s efforts in the Colorado race between Weiser and Republican candidate George Brauchler.

Ad basics: The ad, with imagery of Anthony Warnick’s mugshot and Weiser, says that the convict is a “monster” and Weiser asked a judge to release Warnick from prison early for good behavior.

“One of Weiser’s only court cases was representing a twiceconvicted pedophile named Anthony Warnick,” the ad says. “Warnick is a monster. One of his victims, only 6 years old.”

The ad continues: “Weiser asked a judge to release Warnick from prison early, for good behavior.”

The ad concludes by calling Weiser’s judgment “disqualifying” to be attorney general.

Evaluating the claims:

Claim 1: Weiser managed the appeal of a twiceconvicted pedo phile. Verdict: Misleading

Weiser did play a role in arguing for reduced time, but he didn’t manage the appeal in its entirety. His scope was limited in 2005 to a question about how prison sentences were calculated and ended based on “good time credits.” He did the work through his involvement in a volunteer panel of attorneys in the federal 10th Circuit Court of Appeals. Judges pick attorneys from the panel.

Claim 2: Weiser asked a judge to release Warnick from prison early for good behavior. Verdict: Misleading

The ad could give viewers the impression that Weiser argued for the prisoner’s release based simply on how well he behaved in prison.

It’s more complicated than that. The convict in Oklahoma had two consecutive sentences, a sixyear sentence and a 20year sentence. The first sentence ended early based on “good time credits,” but the prison later said there was a miscalculation. The prison attempted to retroactively lengthen the first prison sentence by another 53 days, extending his total time in prison.

For this case, the broader legal question was whether the 10th Circuit can retroactively extend a completed sentence without violating dueprocess rights.

Claim 3: Weiser apparently isn’t bothered by any of it. Verdict: Misleading

This statement is in RAGA’s onlineonly version of the ad. By using the word “it,” the ad is unclear about what he isn’t bothered by. Viewers could infer that he isn’t bothered by the defendant’s crimes, which are mentioned right before.

In his response to the ad, Weiser’s campaign notes he never condoned the behavior. He also put out his own ad Friday saying he didn’t choose the case.