Chief U.S. District Judge Edward Nottingham Tied to Prostitution Ring In Denver

While New York Governor Eliot Spitzer is dealing with a criminal investigation into his alleged use of a high-priced call girl service, a similar investigation is being conducted by the United States Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit into the alleged use of prostitutes by Chief U.S. District Judge Edward Nottingham. It is not the first alleged misconduct by the jurist.

Nottingham is alleged to have been a customer of a business called Denver Players or Denver Sugar that is alleged to have been a brothel before it was shut down.
The investigation includes records and eye-witnesses. It details how the judge was known as “Naughty” and paid roughly $300 per visit. This is considerably better than Spitzer who used the name of “George Fox” and paid as much as $5400.

Nottingham raised some eyebrows in testimony during his divorce when he admitted that he had spent more than $3,000 at a Denver strip club over two days. He explained that he was “too drunk to remember” how he’d spent the money.

For the full story, click here.

43 thoughts on “Chief U.S. District Judge Edward Nottingham Tied to Prostitution Ring In Denver”

  1. To Mespo

    I don’t understand the problem at all. Many conspiracies complaints have more defendants than mine. The complaint summarized that my family and I were damaged personally as well as financially by conspirators with the president of the city council over a boundary dispute. Real estate is how a big proportion of personal controversies and even wars start. I turned in summary judgment motions for every single defendant. It would have been a lot better for me if we could have had our jury trial back in 2003.

    Right now I am really glad that the 2003 complaint specified “an insurance company” because Lloyds of London is the insurer for two of them and Lloyds sent an affidavit that they have over $250 million in U.S. funds to the Col Division of Insurance. Their lawyer sent an email confirming that Lloyds insured it. So that should make collection a lot easier because Lloyds didn’t apparently didn’t invest in mortgage backed securities.

    I am “absorbed by my cause” partially because my family has a lot riding on it and partially because if insurance companies can win cases by putting people in jail there is a big risk for citizens of the future. When I was younger, I had a boyfriend whose father spent 5 years in Auschwitz and that made an impression on me of the importance of everyone standing up for one’s rights. All of our rights basically rely on other people standing up for their rights. I personally believe that if I hadn’t stood up to the witness intimidation and then pursued it, that hundreds of other people would have been threatened with jail in the last few years in order to stop them from presenting in court. In the past everything I did that was worthwhile took about 5 years to accomplish.

  2. Kay:

    By the way compulsive/obsessive simply means that you are absorbed by your cause. It does not imply mental illness of any kind, nor would I ever make such an assumption. I leave that to the Senator Frist’s of the world who can diagnose without knowing the person.

  3. Kay:

    I stand corrected. It was only one newspaper and one publisher and one town and most of the town council, and two district attorneys, one chief of police, one public works director, and two bar Associations and maybe a partridge in a pear tree. In all the hubbub, I lost count but I did notice that most every defendant had their insurance company sued as well. Here is the caption from one of your appeals of the real estate dispute. Let the readers decide if this the work of oppressed citizens just vindicating their rights or something else:







    COLORADO BAR ASSOCIATION, and their insurance company (true

    name unknown); CITY OF STEAMBOAT SPRINGS, CO, a municipality (hereinafter the CITY); AMERICAN BAR ASSOCIATION, and their insurance company (true name unknown); JANE BENNETT, private citizen acting in conspiracy with CITY policy makers; KEN

    BRENNER, individually and in his capacity as a CITY Council

    Member; JAMES ENGLEKEN, individually and in his capacity as

    CITY Council Member; ART FIEBING, individually and as

    employed as CITY assistant chief of police; SANDY FIEBING,

    individually and as the CITY code enforcement officer; DANIEL FOOTE, Attorney, individually and in his capacity as Assistant CITY attorney; J. D. HAYS, individually and in capacity as CITY director of public safety; JAMES “SANDY” HORNER, individually and as an attorney working for KLAUZER & TREMAINE and his insurance company; CHARLES LANCE,

    Attorney, individually and in capacity as former district attorney and his insurance; ANTHONY LETTUNICH, individually and in capacity as CITY attorney and his insurance; PAUL R.

    MCLIMANS, individually and in capacity as a district attorney and his insurance company; WENDIE SCHULENBURG, also known as Wendie Rooney, individually and in capacity as CITY planning services director; and her insurance; MELINDA SHERMAN, individually and former Assistant CITY attorney,

    and in capacity, and their insurance; KERRY ST. JAMES, individually and in capacity as deputy or assistant district attorney; and his insurance; ARIANTHE STETTNER, individually

    and in capacity as CITY council member; PAUL STRONG,

    individually and in capacity as CITY Council Member; and his insurance company; RICHARD TREMAINE, individually and in capacity as an attorney; and his insurance company; JAMES WEBER, individually and in capacity as CITY public works

    director; and his insurance company; P. ELIZABETH WITTEMYER,

    individually and in capacity as Deputy District attorney; and her insurance; JAMES B.F. OLIPHANT, Bennett’s attorney and purchaser of plaintiff’s home; KEVIN BENNETT,

    individually and in capacity as CITY Council member; DAVID BROUGHAM, individually and in capacity as apparent CITY insurance agent (for CIRSA); CIRSA, insurance for the CITY; INSURANCE AGENT, other than Brougham and decision makers for CIRSA (true name unknown); KATHY CONNELL, individually and as employed as CITY Council Member; DAVIS, GRAHAM & STUBBS, LLC; JAMES GARRECHT, in capacity as district court judge; (for injunctive relief only since he is immune from suit for

    damages); HALL & EVANS, LLC, and their insurance; PAUL HUGHES, individually and in capacity as CITY manager; KLAUZER & TREMAINE, a law firm, and insurance (true name

    unknown); RANDALL KLAUZER, individually and in capacity as

    an attorney and his insurance company; SUZANNE SCHLICHT,

    individually and in capacity as newspaper publisher and her

    insurance; STEAMBOAT PILOT & TODAY NEWSPAPER, (WORLDWEST LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY) and insurance (true name unknown),


  4. To Mespo

    I ended up posting my 2003 complaint so that you can read it before you report on it. See

    I didn’t sue two newspapers. I sued one newspaper The Steamboat Pilot and its owners (AKA The World Company).I didn’t name any reporter, only one publisher who the reporter told me edited his stories. It makes perfect sense to file a conspiracy complaint involving misuse of a city government powers against the members of the city council, key department heads, and the wife and lawyers of the city council president. All the city employees apparently covered by two insurance policies sold by the Colorado Intergovernmental Risk Sharing “Agency”, (not a State of Colorado agency they say). One policy was for loosely defined employee crime the other for “Public officials errors and omissions insurance”. As far as my being “obsessive compulsive”, no one ever called me that before. I did at one point get an evaluation by a court licensed psychologist and his opinion was that I was normal, but not a quitter. It would be really stupid for me to quit when I am winning.
    To anyone that is listening: I do think that the facts in my case show a Hobbs Act Violation and that is by definition “organized crime”. The term organized crime can apply to Conspiracy to Deprive Rights Under Color of Law and does not require actually touching machine guns or knives. The definition of Hobbs Act is
    “Hobbs Act — Extortion By Force, Violence, or Fear. In order to prove a
    violation of Hobbs Act extortion by the wrongful use of actual or threatened
    force, violence, or fear, the following questions must be answered
    affirmatively: 1.) Did the defendant induce or attempt to induce the victim to
    give up property or property rights? 2.) Did the defendant use or attempt to
    use the victim’s reasonable fear of physical injury or economic harm in order
    to induce the victim’s consent to give up property? 3.) Did the defendant’s
    conduct actually or potentially obstruct, delay, or affect interstate or foreign commerce in any (realistic) way or degree? 4.) Was the defendant’s actual or threatened use of force, violence or fear wrongful?”
    U.S. Department of Justice criminal resource manual 2403”
    As you can see, a threat is enough to commit the crime and in this case there were overt threats by parties paid by the insurance companies.

  5. My compliant before Judge Nottingham was a conspiracy complaint and most conspiracy complaints are over 100 pages. A lawyer familiar with the underlying facts, William Hibbard of Steamboat Springs CO, read it and found no problems. The defense counsel wrote to Judge Nottingham and asked him not to hear my summary judgment motion and that resulted in expansion of the pleadings. There was no discovery. The reason that Pete Smith AKA Bouldergeist AKA Sean Harrington keeps trying to sabotage me on various blogs is that he is in law school, has a business marketing to law firms, and was offended by my “failure to protect” claim presented to the bar associations. The bar associations have already acknowledged their potential liability by buying insurance against losing law suits. What is really strange is that almost all of the insurance companies selling errors and omissions insurance in Colorado thru the ABA web site and listed on that web site as “Admitted” have no records with the Colorado Division of Insurance. The Supreme Court of Canada ruled in favor of a pro se on a failure to protect claim and that has all the U.S. bar associations worried. See Finney v. Barreau du Québec
    “Neither the need to adhere to the statutory and procedural discipline framework and act with care and caution nor the complexity inherent in any administrative process can explain the slowness and lack of diligence seen in this case. The nature of the complaints and the lawyer’s professional record in fact made it plain that this was an urgent case that had to be dealt with very diligently to ensure that the Barreau carried out its mission of protecting the public in general and a clearly identified victim in particular.”

  6. Eric:

    Funny thing, George Fox is a real person and a friend and law school classmate of mine. He knows Spitzer and his name was unwittingly used. He had to release a press statement to clear the thing up. So one offense has many victims.

  7. DTV:

    “Mespo, let me guess you are a lawyer and you are offended that Ms. Sieverding would dare tarnish your “profession”. Guess what, no attorneys will take on a case against the Neo-Mafia…”


    Well it appears you have bought into the conspiracy theories that abound. There is no evidence of a concerted effort by the federal judiciary to confound or corrupt the law. This is pure fantasy by someone predisposed to the notion. Sorry but quoting “see no evil” Ashcroft won’t cut it especially since he along with Tom Delay wanted to impeach Judges for holding contrary views. Bottom line is that you have not read the drivel this lady filed against every member of her town council, two newspapers and their reporters, and just about anyone else who she and her husband could think of. Read it for yourself and then come back to me and argue that this claim is valid and that somehow the buggaboo lawyers got together to deprive this woman of her rights. In my opinion, she is another compulsive/obsessive litigant trying to use the law to punish those who oppose her. By the way, lawyers have been taking on tougher crowds than the “neo-mafia” you describe for centuries, and fear of the judiciary or politicians just doesn’t matter. May I remind you that the persons who brought down Nixon, Spitzer, and who now complain about Judge Nottingham all have an Esq. after their name. What corruption have you opposed today?

  8. There is absolutely no coincidence that Judge Nottingham was dealing with organized crime, and Kay Sieverding got abused by Nottinghams powers. Nottingham could not rule against organized crime, even if he wanted to they had dirt on him. Mespo, let me guess you are a lawyer and you are offended that Ms. Sieverding would dare tarnish your “profession”. Guess what, no attorneys will take on a case against the Neo-Mafia, especially in front of a Judiciary which is corrupt. But don’t take my word for it:

    Our own U.S. Attorney General John D. Ashcroft said: “We can only detect, investigate and prosecute a small percentage of those officials who are corrupt. The challenge for us within the law enforcement and justice sectors to keep our own houses clean.” Organized Crime, the Neo-Mafia of law firms and hedge funds, knows when Judges and Prosecutors use their illegal services and use that leverage to continue their criminal endeavors such as in Bankruptcy Rings, the Asbestos Rings. Prostitution Rings are merely a small component of the Neo-Mafia. Unfortunately, the corruption of our officials in the Judiciary and Law Enforcement is deep and wide, as there exists a de facto immunity for their involvement in organized crime. There is no particular law, it is just that brethren of the bar protect each other, they are all above the law. What was different about Spitzer that (some of?) his dealings with organized crime were exposed? Who are the brave and just U.S. Attorneys who would not allow Spitzers’ criminal family go undisturbed?

  9. Kay:

    With all due respect, I have read the Court’s opinion in your avalanche of pro se lawsuits (and 3 appeals therefrom) brought against your neighbors, the Colorado and American Bar Associations, numerous City Councilmen, various insurance companies, and countless other entities and individuals whom you and your husband allege conspired to thwart your rights. One (of many)complaint was 106 pages of rambling,obtuse, and dense prose that was, to put it kindly, incomprehensible. You filed over 100 motions and wasted countless hours of judicial and legal time on cases that were basically frivolous or barred by res juicata. On balance you appear to have fallen into the trap so eloquently stated as “he who is his own lawyer has a fool for a client.” The cases you brought were found to be harassment and after looking at them most would probably agree. I am sorry you got a poor judge who was ethically challenged but next time hire a lawyer.

  10. Judge Nottingham was “my” judge. He would not rule on our motion for summary judgment, there was no jury trial, although we stated ‘hornbook’ torts, he dismissed our case without stating reasons in fact and law as required by federal rule of civil procedure rule 52a and he adopted the report of a magistrate who had ex parte. He also ordered us to pay the insurance companies $102,000 without stating why.

    My family and I filed for relief from judgment in another court. Judge Nottingham put me in jail for seeking a decision on the merits from another judge. Judge Nottingham said: “The Court has asked her whether she will voluntarily dismiss these lawsuits and she has said that she would not. Accordingly, upon finding that Kay Sieverding is in contempt of court, the Court will remand her to the custody of the United States Marshal for the District of Colorado to be incarcerated until she purges herself of the contempt of court by agreeing to voluntarily dismiss the lawsuits”.

    I think either part of the $102,000 went to pay for strip clubs and prostitutes or Judge Nottingham was blackmailed because of the prostitutes and strip clubs. He knows there were foreign insurance companies that were not authorized in the State of Colorado and that they didn’t comply with C.R.S. 10-3-1004 Defense of Action by Unauthorized Insurer but he thinks that is OK– maybe Lloyds London and Mutual Insurance Limited of Bermuda pick up the tab at the brothel.

  11. From the article: “When Judge Nottingham presided over the insider-trading trial of Qwest CEO Joe Nacchio last summer, he lectured Nacchio about morality. ‘If it is perceived that there is one law for the rich and one law for everyone else, the law ultimately falls into disrespect,” said Judge Edward Nottingham to Nacchio. “The law does not care about your station in life.'”

    Seems a fitting epitaph.

Comments are closed.