PARKER — It seems everybody wants to talk about George Brauchler’s political future these days except George Brauchler.

As District Attorney for the 18th Judicial District, Brauchler has deferred questions about his plans until after the final sentencing of Aurora theater shooter James Holmes, which starts Aug. 24. But that hasn’t slowed the speculation.

As he wrapped up his remarks at last weekend’s Coffee for Conservatives annual picnic, Brauchler, dressed casually in a T-shirt and baseball cap, was beset with shouts of “Governor!” Others yelled, “No, senator!”

The 45-year-old prosecutor didn’t take the bait, instead grinning and signing off with, “I’m George Brauchler and I love to be your DA.”

Less than three years ago, Brauchler was the little-known, newly sworn-in district attorney for Arapahoe, Douglas, Elbert and Lincoln counties. Since then, he’s catapulted to the top tier of Colorado Republican candidates and onto the short lists of possible contenders for U.S. Senate in 2016 and governor in 2018.

“When you look over at the Republican field here, he is a standout,” said political analyst Floyd Ciruli.

Serving as prosecutor for what has so far been the Colorado trial of the century will do that. Brauchler led the legal team that secured guilty verdicts last month against Holmes in the July 2012 murders of 12 and attempted murders of 70 theater-goers at the Aurora Century 16.

Even before the trial began, however, Brauchler had put himself on the political radar by denouncing Democratic Gov. John Hickenlooper’s May 2013 decision to grant an indefinite stay of execution for Chuck E. Cheese’s killer Nathan Dunlap.

The line that resonated most with Republicans was Brauchler’s comment to the Denver Post’s Lynn Bartels: “[A]t the end of the day, no one elected him to be the state bartender. They elected him to be governor.”

“I think that all eyes are on District Attorney Brauchler at this point,” said Republican strategist Dick Wadhams. “He hasn’t been DA very long, but he had one of those defining moments when he was the lead Republican voice of opposition when Gov. Hickenlooper basically punted on whether to carry out the execution of the Chuck E. Cheese killer.”

“I think across the state, Republicans were so impressed by how he [Brauchler] conducted himself, the way he framed the issue and why it was so irresponsible of the governor to do what he did,” Wadhams said.

Laura Carno, head of the Colorado Springs-based conservative group I Am Created Equal, said Brauchler’s willingness to take on Hickenlooper impressed the grassroots.

“He actually had the ability to show some guts and say what needs to be said. And people are looking for that,” Carno said.

How much clout does Brauchler have? So far no top Republican has entered the race to challenge Democratic Sen. Michael Bennet next year. One reason: The scuttlebutt has it that other Republicans are waiting to see what Brauchler does.

“Throughout the whole [trial], I’ve said that this is going to make Brauchler a real player in statewide politics,” said Robert Loevy, Colorado College political-science professor emeritus.

Brauchler won praise for his handling of the case during the 16-week trial, even though Holmes wound up with a sentence of life in prison without the possibility of parole after one juror refused to sentence him to death, citing Holmes’ history of mental illness.

“Day in and day out, people saw a very prepared prosecutor who was doing the right thing,” Wadhams said. “I know the left immediately jumped on him after the one juror decided they could not support the death penalty, but I think the vast majority of Coloradans appreciate what he did and feel he did the right thing.”

Indeed, the liberal website ColoradoPols took a dig at Brauchler moments after Judge Carlos Samour, Jr., announced that the jury had failed to reach a unanimous decision.

“BREAKING: Aurora shooter gets life, huge loss for politically-minded DA @georgebrauchler,” said the website in an Aug. 7 post on Twitter.

Three days later, the website declared that Brauchler was “damaged goods,” describing the result as a “major defeat.”

“No matter how much you may like Brauchler, feel like he did the ‘best he could,’ or (the one that probably matters most) need him to shore up a dwindling Republican bench in Colorado, this outcome does not set Brauchler up to run for higher office,” said ColoradoPols. “And we all know it.”

Those who disagree with that analysis include Ciruli, who pointed to Colorado voters surveyed support sentencing Holmes to death by 63 to 32 percent, according to a July 27 Quinnipiac University Poll.

“The fact that he wasn’t able to get the death penalty because of one juror who was sympathetic to the mental-illness argument — I just don’t think that hurts him,” Ciruli said. “I think the net benefit is that, number one, he got tremendous visibility. This is one of the nation’s top mass-murder trials, and it was nationally covered. And that accrues to him on both the death penalty and the guilty verdict.”

Another source of criticism centers on Brauchler’s refusal to accept a plea deal that would have resulted in the same sentence — Holmes receiving life in prison without parole — while avoiding the expense and rigors of a trial.

“It is deeply unfortunate that our taxpayer dollars had to pay for one of the most expensive trials in the state’s history only to achieve the same outcome offered by the defense before the trial even began,” said Denise Maes, policy director of the ACLU of Colorado, in an Aug. 7 statement.

At the same time, Loevy said the decision to press on with the death penalty only boosted Brauchler’s stock with Republican voters.

“I’ve heard a little bit of criticism of course from the defense, ‘Why did he bring a death penalty trial when in the end they could have had that deal with a plea bargain?’” said Loevy, adding that he himself opposes the death penalty.

“That’s the one negative I’ve seen, but I think that just makes him [Brauchler] all the more heroic to those who support the death penalty,” said Loevy.

Brauchler has made numerous appearances on radio, television and various gatherings since the jury’s decision, but not to speculate on his own future. He’s up for reelection next year, which means he would have to give up the DA’s post if he were to challenge Bennet.

Brauchler has been eager to discuss the case, answer questions, and explain why he sought the death penalty — and why he would seek it again if presented with the same facts.

“When you start with the premise that a guy who was a first-year grad student in a neuroscience Ph.D. program spends two and a half months plotting the death not of 12, and not of 12 plus 70 attempted murder victims, but of 400 people in that theater, it becomes very difficult to see a path to not try to seek the strongest punishment that our community, our society, has determined to impose,” said Brauchler at the Coffee for Conservatives gathering.

He disagreed with those who called the result a litmus test on the death penalty, saying, “One juror cannot make policy for the state of Colorado.”

Brauchler also has some ideas for reform. He called for more transparency in how much is being spent on trials by the defense, renewing his support for legislation that would require the public defender’s office to disclose its spending on cases. Under current law, the office has an exemption based on attorney-client privilege.

“The public defender’s office spent, if I had to guess, two to three times more defending this guy than we spent, but they keep their books closed to us,” Brauchler said.

If the death penalty were ever struck down in Colorado, he said, “the next thing they’ll work on is life without parole. They’ll say, ‘That’s really ridiculous, that should be reserved for the worst of the worst.’”

Brauchler said the threat of capital punishment actually saves money in some cases by giving the accused an incentive to strike a plea bargain. He cited three recent cases in Colorado in which accused multiple murderers agreed to take life without parole in order to avoid the possibility of a death sentence.

“If there’s no death penalty, those cases all go to trial,” Brauchler said. “They go through all that expense, all those victims are subjected to all that cross examination.”

As for whether he should have avoided the expense of a trial by simply agreeing to a plea bargain, Brauchler has defended his decision, saying that he believes Holmes knew what he was doing.

“At the end of the day, I came away feeling very confident that not only did this guy know right from wrong, not only did he have the ability to form the intent,” Brauchler said, “but that he had the ability to conform his conduct to society’s norms, knew that he was going to engage in evil — and didn’t care.”

“And when you come to that conclusion,” he added, “the only outcome in our law that made any sense to me was to seek the death penalty.”

— valrichardson17@gmail.com