Peters’ defense says Barrett used facts that were never in evidence
By Jen Schumann | Rocky Mountain Voice
The state said Judge Matthew Barrett's sentencing remarks about Tina Peters were harsh words from the bench, not evidence of bias. Peters' legal team answered with a different question: how did the judge know she appeared on podcasts? Where did he get the words "snake oil" and "junk"?
The state's response did not touch that argument. The judge being asked to step aside will decide it.
Three filings hit the Mesa County docket between late Thursday and Friday morning. District Attorney Dan Rubinstein's office opposed Peters' motion to disqualify Barrett. Her attorneys replied by introducing a theory the state never touched—that Barrett's sentencing comments relied on an "extrajudicial source," meaning information the judge obtained from out...










![FD863768-0ACF-495E-9D21-2EF784DFFA6B[1]](https://rockymountainvoice.com/wp-content/uploads/2026/06/FD863768-0ACF-495E-9D21-2EF784DFFA6B1-300x300.png)